Bookmark & share: 
Welcome to reader comments forum, which is offered as
a "public square" for our audience. We view this space as our readers'
section of the Web site, separate from our journalistic offerings.
We hope you will use the forum to advance public dialogue and community
discourse. As such, we ask that participants refrain from personal
attacks and offensive comments. If you believe a comment is inappropriate or
offensive, you can bring it to our attention by clicking on the 'report
abuse' link by the comment. It will be reviewed by online staff.
Please understand that 1) a comment is not "inappropriate" solely
because you disagree with its author; and 2) there may be a delay while
the comment is being reviewed.
Please review our Reader Comment Guidelines.
Sort by: Oldest first | Newest First
Disillusioned Voter
of Millinocket, ME
You’re Right & Your Wrong!
Your right in that earmarks are being abused by General Dynamics and other big companies that should be funding these themselves!
Your also correct in that politicians like Michaud are being investigated for earmark abuse.
The only point I would disagree is in that these earmarks are very beneficial to small companies that can not make it through the regular process, and that offer many technologies that benefit out troops very much. In many instances the completive process does not allow for countless parameters that the “standing request” is posted for, and that the proposed technology is of great benefit.
The shortest answer is that earmarks themselves are not-pork, but rather it is the individual that spins it to become one that makes it pork!
.report abuse
Sep 29, 2008 6:14 PM
Chris,
You’re Right & Your Wrong!
Your right in that earmarks are being abused by General Dynamics and other big companies that should be funding these themselves!
Your also correct in that politicians like Michaud are being investigated for earmark abuse.
The only point I would disagree is in that these earmarks are very beneficial to small companies that can not make it through the regular process, and that offer many technologies that benefit out troops very much. In many instances the completive process does not allow for countless parameters that the “standing request” is posted for, and that the proposed technology is of great benefit.
The shortest answer is that earmarks themselves are not-pork, but rather it is the individual that spins it to become one that makes it pork!
.report abuse
Bobof42
of Fall River, MA
Sep 27, 2008 9:06 PM
Bring home the Bacon.report abuseChris
of Brunswick, ME
Saco Defense has long depended on earmarks, and probably the total of defense earmark appropriations in Maine is hundreds of $millions annually. John McCain has for nearly the last decade fought hard against earmarks, with no success, and Obama apparently became a convert after he started his presidential bid.
The biggest problem has been public corruption resulting from those vendors who lobby for earmarks. That's proven a fruitful area for the FBI public corruption unit, as well as on those members of Congress - like Michael Michaud - who are highly defensive about publicly revealing their earmarks.report abuse
Sep 27, 2008 4:35 PM
A number of contracts on that list appear to be earmarks or "pork-barrel" spending. These are appropriations intended to bypass the Defense Dept.'s competitive bidding procedure and allow members of Congress to source Defense contracts to favored vendors.
Saco Defense has long depended on earmarks, and probably the total of defense earmark appropriations in Maine is hundreds of $millions annually. John McCain has for nearly the last decade fought hard against earmarks, with no success, and Obama apparently became a convert after he started his presidential bid.
The biggest problem has been public corruption resulting from those vendors who lobby for earmarks. That's proven a fruitful area for the FBI public corruption unit, as well as on those members of Congress - like Michael Michaud - who are highly defensive about publicly revealing their earmarks.report abuse
You must be a registered user of MaineToday.com to post a comment. Register or log in.
