The Good, the Bad, and the Earmarks

Senators pledge to eliminate the technique, but some small cities say they'll miss them.

Wednesday, November 17, 2010

Senate Republicans recently followed their colleagues in the House, voting behind closed doors to approve a moratorium on all Congressional earmarks for two years. President Obama supports a ban on earmarks, but many Senate Democrats don't agree: So far, only two Democrats in the Senate have publicly come out in favor of the ban. Can the new Congress find any common ground on the issue? And how would an outright ban on earmarks affect small cities and towns?

Jay Newton-Small, Time Magazine's Congressional correspondent, joins us to look at the issue. So does Ed Pawlowski, mayor of Allentown, PA, who says earmarks have been getting a bad rap. He says they're actually good for communities and should be viewed as community-wide funds. The earmarks Allentown has recieved have mostly gone towards public safety, and without that money, he says, the only people he sees benefiting are criminals.


Jay Newton-Small and Mayor Ed Pawlowski

Produced by:

David J Fazekas

Comments [1]

HEJNYC from Corona, Queens NY

Earmarks only account for maybe about 1/2% of the whole budget. Obviously, all the noise about them is just NOISE to drown more serious issues.

Nov. 17 2010 06:34 AM

Leave a Comment

Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more. Learn more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the Comment Guidelines before posting. By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use.