Earmark bans are not good

I wrote this in response to someone who celebrated the recent Republican earmark ban proposal:

Can I offer the contrarian opinion? ;-)

Certainly bad earmarks should be stopped. Bad earmarks increase spending, are pork, or are stupid. Examples range from Alaska’s bridge to nowhere to a recent $98,440 appropriation to Granbury Historic Opera House Theater by Chet Edwards. (Why does that Democrat represent the heart of Texas???)

But there are good earmarks. “Carve out” earmarks tell agencies how to spend already-allocated funds. They give Congress a check against the same unaccountable Washington bureaucrats Rick Perry is running against. With no earmarks, a 2011-2013 Republican Congress (!!!!!?) would be hamstrung in fighting Obama administration retaliation–where Obama’s minions would likely starve the reddest districts of their fair share of federal funds.

I prefer more nuance, which is why I oppose the 2008 RPT platform’s Earmarks plank (see http://betterplatform.org/plank/earmarks). The earmark debate is among several examples of the 2008 RPT platform’s ineffectiveness. In this case, the platform micromanages details, distracting from the root problem: runaway spending. Additionally, this is among several places where the platform ignores the capitalistic concept of return on investment (ROI), wasting scarce political capital on changes that have little benefit or may make things worse.

Total earmark bans have a bad ROI. In addition to throwing out the baby with the bathwater–i.e., throwing out the good earmarks with the bad ones–they are impermanent: House rule changes just take a simple majority to overturn. So mark my words, any bans will melt within 12 months at most, and in the meantime there will be many ways to get around it.

We must focus on the real problem: out of control spending. Earmark abuse is just a symptom of the problem. If we could get the federal government in austerity (reducing spending and paying more debt), that would eliminate funds for the bad earmarks.

Something that distinguishes conservatives is willingness to roll up our sleeves and attack root problems. Liberals just attack the symptoms. The health care debate is a good example: liberals want to ram through a “quick fix”, statist approach, but conservatives advocate more permanent, longer-term, market-based solutions that are healthier but won’t have the “quick fix” immediacy.

This dichotomy is easy to understand–attacking the root problem is tough. It doesn’t produce quick results. But it has intellectual integrity, and it will produce a better solution. On the other hand, attacking the symptoms–the liberal method–assures continued political relevance because the symptoms will keep manifesting over and over and over.

So to summarize: With you, I celebrate attention to abuses. But I am concerned that this measure is political candy that goes too far and doesn’t meaningfully advance the conservative agenda. I want Republicans instead to focus on runaway spending. With meaningful fiscal reform and austerity, earmarks will take care of themselves.

Texas’s worst speed traps

EDIT: I was interviewed on Dallas’s WFAA channel 8 for this. See the video and article at Small North Texas town tops list in speeding-ticket revenue. Also see my response to the video.

Texas Municipal Wall of Shame: the 40 most prolific speed traps, ordered by total ticket revenue per citizen.

I am not certain, but I think this covers all tickets written from 2000-2008.

Rank City 2008 population Traffic tickets % of all tickets that are traffic tickets Total ticket revenue Total ticket revenue per citizen Total tickets per citizen
1 Westlake 211 71664 81% $8,919,460 $42,272 340
2 Estelline 155 24269 88% $2,873,199 $18,537 157
3 Domino 50 2656 99% $262,660 $5,253 53
4 Montgomery 596 25523 66% $3,116,988 $5,230 43
5 Martindale 1148 44422 98% $5,496,670 $4,788 39
6 Cuney 147 4598 100% $678,847 $4,618 31
7 Palmer 2258 81653 93% $10,144,689 $4,493 36
8 Rio Vista 818 31508 95% $3,239,383 $3,960 39
9 Riesel 1013 25021 92% $3,911,628 $3,861 25
10 Patton Village 1483 52752 98% $5,570,563 $3,756 36
11 Mount Enterprise 543 16379 99% $2,023,814 $3,727 30
12 Pantego 2381 41830 53% $8,763,955 $3,681 18
13 Wilmer 3576 88731 90% $12,610,497 $3,526 25
14 Dalworthington 2412 60167 66% $8,320,636 $3,450 25
15 Lott 675 11454 85% $2,139,228 $3,169 17
16 Lavon 423 8255 85% $1,319,644 $3,120 20
17 Chillicothe 687 14420 94% $2,127,266 $3,096 21
18 Waskom 2137 48647 98% $6,604,962 $3,091 23
19 Shenandoah 2002 67581 97% $6,004,139 $2,999 34
20 Mustang Ridge 933 25329 90% $2,786,746 $2,987 27
21 Ferris 2566 46764 89% $7,591,029 $2,958 18
22 Covington 302 4192 62% $886,511 $2,935 14
23 Arcola 1230 32449 97% $3,589,616 $2,918 26
24 Northlake 2036 40651 93% $5,763,918 $2,831 20
25 Rice 980 18346 64% $2,708,749 $2,764 19
26 Zavalla 665 15499 96% $1,816,084 $2,731 23
27 Magnolia 1249 35035 86% $3,391,091 $2,715 28
28 Alvarado 4188 83348 79% $11,134,344 $2,659 20
29 Brownsboro 837 17763 91% $2,203,938 $2,633 21
30 Driscoll 802 10353 71% $2,092,793 $2,609 13
31 Rhome 1051 21390 82% $2,731,994 $2,599 20
32 Kemah 2498 45532 83% $6,421,907 $2,571 18
33 Corrigan 1872 28235 83% $4,548,346 $2,430 15
34 Coffee City 207 4566 80% $499,477 $2,413 22
35 Itasca 1696 31532 85% $4,040,627 $2,382 19
36 Eustace 925 14406 77% $2,172,573 $2,349 16
37 Rogers 1138 18659 91% $2,653,569 $2,332 16
38 Southside Place 1667 34778 80% $3,782,674 $2,269 21
39 Calvert 1358 27655 97% $3,070,273 $2,261 20
40 Selma 4632 86332 87% $10,352,606 $2,235 19

This was calculated from data from the Texas Office of Court Administration’s Trial Court Judicial Data Management System.