Senate nixes earmark ban

Well, surprise surprise! The Senate doesn't want to ban earmarks! I can't really say I'm surprised. I'm not even surprised that 15 Republicans broke ranks and voted no with the Democrats. After all, this is a huge scheme for politicians at the national level to vie for re-election. See, everybody hates earmarks (pork) unless they benefit from them. It is the same mentality about government intrusion and entitlements. Everyone loves to hate those things, right up until they benefit from them. The 1-2 billion dollars a year spent on earmarks, while a waste, aren't really the problem with the budget. After all, 2 billion dollars out of 1.2 trillion isn't even the .2. It is .002 percent, at most, of the federal budget. Medicare and Social Security are 50 percent, give or take. The military is 16 percent and the list goes on. Even NASA, one of the smallest agencies in the budget is still 1 percent, still much more significant than earmarks. So, am I surprised they have chosen not to ban earmarks? No, am I upset they've chosen not to ban earmarks? Not really. It is the "non-discretionary" spending that needs to be addressed along with some of the bloated federal agencies if we are ever going to get a handle on the budget. Earmarks bans, while nice, serve only to appear to be acting in a fiscally responsible manner. It is nothing more than a political stunt, not a real act of responsibility. When they start actually cutting things that need to be cut, then an earmark ban wouldn't even be necessary. In the meantime, they think they can appease us by banning .002 percent of the federal budget. Nothing more than an empty political stunt.