Earmarks: a necessary evil

Apparently these congressmen and women of the grand 'ol party are against the pork spending of earmarks, even if they put the earmarks in themselves. Here's a clearer way to put out your message: don't propose them in the first place.

I understand the purpose of earmarks. If congress passed a separate bill for each bit of spending it is their job to dispense, everything would be too bogged down and menial to get anything accomplished. Congress works slow enough as it is, let it multi-task. Earmarks also serve an integral part in the negotiating process of getting votes required for passage. Sometimes these concessions go too far and they should be pointed-out and criticized, but often times they help in the consensus building process. Earmarks, like the filibuster, are integral to the proper functioning of a democratic legislature. But fair warning: you can have too much of a good thing.

GOP senators will vote against own earmarks: "Two prominent Republicans vowed Wednesday to vote against the $1.1 trillion spending bill, citing concerns over pork-laden pet projects, although millions of dollars of earmarks in the bill were requested by the two senators.

"