In a bigger shift from his campaign pledge to end earmarks, he tells me that they are a bad “symbol” of easy spending but that he will fight for Kentucky’s share of earmarks and federal pork, as long as it’s doled out transparently at the committee level and not parachuted in in the dead of night. “I will advocate for Kentucky’s interests,” he says.For more, see here.
Should we applaud Senator Paul for realizing that his pledge was relatively stupid, and honestly indicating that he will renege? Earmarks do not add to spending, they just substitute legislator for administrator decisions on how to spend. Or should we castigate him for taking so little time to renege?
Hat tip to Marginal Revolution.