a different view

I happened upon this article today, defending one earmark contained in the Omnibus bill to help Utah out with it's Mormon Cricket problem.

Having grown up on pioneer stories, I am of course familiar with the miracle in which seagulls descended upon the menacing crickets and saved the Utah settlers from starvation and, no doubt, insanity.

Which brings me to wonder more about the earmark process--what is it, and why is it such a bad word that no one dares say, but will usually gladly accept.

Having apparently given up on another miracle to save the day, or living by the adage, "the Lord helps those who help themselves," ranchers are relying on politicians to help them out. I can see why this would be so--they likely can't afford the expansive yearly project, and they can't afford to do without it. That they are living in Utah is in large part due to the extermination order given by Missouri Governor Boggs and the failure of the federal government to defend the Mormons as they were driven away from their homes in Nauvoo, across the plains to the ugly and desolate Salt Lake Valley.

I'm sure that most Senators have a well thought-out defense for their earmark requests--though I can't say I agree with the Idaho Senator who secured money for some historical museum that I've never heard of.

Maybe the money could come from another more palatable source--maybe Utah could be declared a natural disaster every Summer and get Federal Emergency funding. Maybe they could secure another earmark for the research and support of seagulls.