Have you noticed how willing our state legislators are to spending the tax revenues? Rhetorical question of course. How could one help but notice? The better question to ask is on what? It isn't like our roads and infrastructure are forefront on their 1st page of discretionary spending.
If the funding was for maintaining streets and bridges, that's one thing but since it isn't "sexy", those funds are appropriated for things in districts that hallmark the legislator's image. And what would that look like you might wonder. Well we are all wondering, but we can be sure the funds are going there because they certainly are not going to streets and bridges and other aging and updated infrastructure.
If the state revenue bonds were not enough, the federal system might be considered worse. It's those little things called earmarks that seem to take from the " roads named Peter" and give to the "bridges to nowhere name Paul".
Comments(12)