Tom,(Please note that this is intended to be a sincere, non-sarcastic response.)Earmarks will not "die under the next administration". I would be happy to bet you dinner on it. I think Americans pretty much already knew how distasteful and wasteful our political process is. How will the Internet or anything else give us a good shot at forcing change? Take the "bailout":You thought it was necessary (I'm more ambivalent, but here we are.) If you were Senator or Representative and you needed a few more votes to get it passed, would you (a) "buy" a few votes with some "sweeteners" or (b) let the much-needed bailout die for want of a spare $20 million here or there? It's cost/benefit, right? I would be interested to hear how you think this dynamic will/can change.FWIW, I think earmarks are a small portion of our budget/deficit/debt. I think we will get much more mileage forcing politicians to tackle the larger items/issues in a fiscally-responsible manner than trying to fight an uphill battle against vote-buying.Sincerely,Dennis
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra