The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Reader Mail
Print Email
Text Size

Reader Mail

Cruising for a Bruising

Driving, albeit recklessly, to a conclusion about speeding. Also: Steady Teddy. Catholic conundrum. Pork-cutting plans. And more!
p> WASTE FORMULA br> Re: Paul Chesser’s It’s Not Just Pork : /p> p>I find it ironic that Congress so mistrusted the bureaucrats with federal money that they forced them to craft policies that conformed to OMB Circular 94 (circa 1992). This document requires a cost-benefit analysis so that the possibility of public policy providing the greatest good for the greatest number might survive in spite of human creativity tending to craft projects that cater to small and specific groups. Earmarking bypasses OMB Circular 94 provisions. Most programs, especially transportation projects, could not withstand the requirements of the cost-benefit analysis. Part of the reason is that economic multipliers for secondary spending and jobs are not allowed. If all agencies complied with these guidelines, the era of big government would be over. br> — Danny L. Newton br> Cookeville, Tennessee /p> p> SPEED HACKING br> Re: Eric Peters’s Make Speeding Impossible?
Page: 1 2 3   Last ›

topics:
Transportation, Education, Business, Books, Law, NATO, Energy

Letter to the Editor

Related Articles

More Articles From Reader Mail

http://spectator.org/archives/2006/01/27/cruising-for-a-bruising

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Time to Go for the Kill

Peter Ferrara | 5.22.13

Obama and the IRS: The Smoking Gun?

Jeffrey Lord | 5.20.13

Damage Control for Dummies

Matt Purple | 5.22.13

Obama’s Assault on the First Amendment

George Neumayr | 5.22.13

Undoing the Brainwashing

Thomas Sowell | 5.22.13

The Inoperative Jay Carney

Jeffrey Lord | 5.23.13

Wimps Versus Barbarians

Thomas Sowell | 5.21.13

ADVERTISEMENT