This week, U.S. Representative Jo Ann Emerson announced that she had slipped an earmark into a larger spending bill, H.R. 3288. Emerson’s earmark is for a third of a million dollars in financial support for a program for the Girl Scouts.
That sounds nice, doesn’t it? Who doesn’t like little girls, after all?
Upon examination, however, there are problems with the Emerson earmark to the Girl Scouts. The federal money directed by that earmark is supposed to be spent on an Improving Girls’ Financial Literacy project that the Girl Scouts have yet to create. That financial literacy project, when completed, however, will be delivered only to little girls who are members of the Girl Scouts. Other girls who don’t pay membership fees to the Girl Scouts won’t have access to the financial literacy program, and American boys certainly won’t.
It doesn’t seem like a responsible way to spend government money to create education programs that are only available to members of certain private organizations. Does Jo Ann Emerson really believe that there isn’t any point in teaching boys financial literacy? What kind of lesson is there for girls that they have to pay Girl Scouts membership fees before they can get access to government-funded financial literacy courses – that the key to financial literacy is in joining an organization that has lobbyists who can get special favors from politicians?
More fundamentally, if the Girl Scouts are really qualified to teach financial literacy to anyone, how come they need the federal government to pay for their costs? It seems to me that the financial literacy lesson from Representative Emerson’s earmark is that the Girl Scouts can’t actually get their own financial house in order. I think I’d prefer for my daughter to learn financial responsibility from someone else.
I’m with you on the procedural point; it looks like pork. But if it has to be an earmark to an organization, I’m actually glad it’s the Girl Scouts and not the Boy Scouts. The Boy Scouts are openly discriminatory on the basis of religion and sexual orientation, while the Girl Scouts (an organization not affiliated with the Boy Scouts) is avowedly non-discriminatory on both counts.
Why is Emerson ear-marking millions of dollars to an organization that openly gives their own money to supporters of abortion??! I don’t get it. I vote a pro-life candidate into office and instead of job creation ear-marking for much needed infrastructure I get wolf in sheep’s clothing is sending money to a program that HOW MANY ONLY GIRLS THAT ARE MEMBERS BENEFIT FROM??? Ridiculous. Get this woman out of here. There are 3 other better candidates that are running for congress in our district.
Hey Kelly, join the club (of dissatisfied voters)! Look how far Obama’s actions are from his campaign rhetoric and the Animal House line “Hey, you fucked up, you trusted us!” rings loud and clear throughout the entire government and voting process.