I can't imagine what life must be in the political realm of power brokering and bi-partisan get-along-ing. It must be hard to go against the tides and say, "Hey, enough is enough, we don't need more pork, period." No one wants to walk around with a big bulls eye and "kick me" sign on their back. After all, you'll be spoiling other folks "scratch my back"party and earmark parade!
Well, I am sure there is more than meets the eye. I am trying to understand the balance between diplomacy and principle. The ideals of a government for the people and a government over the people. How do you reconcile the two without selling out the latter for the former?
For example, a hypothetical bill is on the table to fund the scientific study of fruit flies. The one-million dollar price tag is presented as a scientific opportunity to advance our human understanding of why fruit flies are attracted to fruits and its implications on current scientific theories and models, which will inevitably advance scientific discoveries and human comfort.
As a conservative servant of the public, faced with this dilemma, what is the right thing to do?
Do I say, "What a minute, one-million dollars, can we bring it down to only half-million?"
Who and what is this study for; and why is it necessary?
Why are tax-payers funding studies they did not signed up for? What is the government's role in funding earmarks and pet projects with hard earned tax dollars?
Why do we continue to spend money that is not ours and cash we do not have in the first place?
Are we out of our minds? We are spending our way out of debt by deepening us further into debt. Does it matter how much we spend when we should be evaluating the "WHY?"
What's your conservative approach to earmark spending?