One of the most disingenuous arguments that Members of Congress trot out in defense of earmarks is that such pork really reflects each Member’s unique knowledge of the special needs of his or her constituents. My and Karol’s good friend Frayda Levin sees through this silly argument, as explained here by Paul Jacobs . Here’s the heart:
Like all sensible taxpayers, Frayda opposes Congress’s corrupt earmark culture, whereby congressmen use our tax dollars to fund their personal favor factories. Recently, she wrote to New Jersey Senator Robert Menendez asking him to support a legislative moratorium on earmarks.
Instead, Senator Menendez wrote back defending his support for earmarked pork. “While our federal agencies implement programs from Washington,” he countered, “they often do not understand the unique needs of the communities and the states.”
When Frayda responded to Senator Menendez, she pointed out how completely ludicrous it was to “send money to D.C.” and “then have to spend resources finding a sympathetic ear, who can, as you note, understand local needs.”