...but mostly off topic. Brought to life by seeing far too many words and pictures dedicated to the upcoming election.
The tipping point was watching an interview with a candidate for the U. S. Senate in which she put frequent emphasis on her ability as an incumbent to use her clout to bring home the bacon to her state. Obviously, in most cases, the "bacon" is that "free" federal money which is so popular.
We couldn’t help thinking of the local situation on which we commented in our last post. We’re going to spend $13.5 million, courtesy of Congressman Carson’s "clout," to build a bus station downtown.
That a local transit system which will use the new local bus station is still in the dream stage, seems to concern no one. We’re going to get our slice of the pie.
A couple of years ago, we used a few million of those "free" federal dollars to turn Georgia Street into a local part time playground. The fact that federal "transportation" funds were intentionally used to inhibit traffic flow, again, is a "no worries" deal.
Our point is this. We see no possibility of reduction, or even slowing the growth, of a $17,000,000,000 (that's trillion, with a T) national debt while we elect individuals based on their promise to bring home the bacon.
We have a philosophy in too many governmental offices that reducing an outrageous request for more money actually represents a cut in spending. Have we reached the point that a stand for a real limit on actual spending would be political suicide for a candidate?
Not at all sure we want to know the answer to that one!