David Weigel | May 2, 2007
I am completely puzzled. Why in the world should the American taxpayer be asked to help pay for the rebuilding of a local market that has no connection to the federal government, except that several members of Congress live nearby?
I would submit that if Del. Holmes-Norton and other members are so concerned about rebuilding Eastern Market than they should dip into their own pockets to help out -- not just unassumingly take from the taxpayers. It sure is a lot easier to spend money when it is not yours, than when it is.
Help Reason celebrate its next 40 years. Donate Now!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
Ten bucks says Campbell supports "the federal government"
dictating DC's gun ownership laws.
Another ten says he supported the law forbidding the District from
counting ballots on the medicinal marijuana bill.
John Campbell says, "It sure is a lot easier to spend money when
it is not yours, than when it is."
True.
What is his record? Is he a typical pol here, or does his voting
behavior reflect his assessment?
It'd be cool if a spending buster jumps up. It'd be lame if he were
just another spender...
This comes from a legacy in recent years where the congress gladly
has "take[n] from the taxpayers".
hrumph. (and I can't remember where those scorecards/ grades for
Reps are. sorry)
Chris Monnier,
You beat me to it. Good show!
OT: Texicans keep calling Colonel Crockett day by the wrong
name.
He hasn't been around long enough to have much of a record (he replaced Chris Cox) but he talks a good game on budget issues.
Is Campbell a wannabe Davy Crockett?
I wouldn't be mentioning no coon-skin caps with Eleanor Holmes
Norton around,
if'n y'all get my drift.
I lived a couple of blocks from Eastern Market back in the eighties. I loved the place but every time I went inside I thought "when is this place going to burn down?" It was rehabbed (with air conditioning, yet) a decade ago, and they were going to put in sprinklers, but somehow they never got around to it. It's so hard to do two things at once!
Chris, Guy,
You both beat me. Saves me from doing a google search, so
Thanks!
Another ten says he supported the law forbidding the
District from counting ballots on the medicinal marijuana
bill.
This guy is my congressman. I sent him an email encouraging him to
oppose funding for the DEA raids of California MM distributors. He
sent me a nice reply explaining that teh drugz was such a threat to
the nation that it required the federal government to override his
own state's voters.
I don't doubt that he's a hardcore drug warrior, Gimme Back My
Dog.
My point was that his sudden antipathy for the federal government
being in charge of matters typically handled by localities, as long
at the locality is DC, doesn't come across as genuine.
Why should the federal government pay for it? Why not? DC is not, and was never intended to be a real city in the sense that New York, Atlanta, or Las Vegas are. It's a federal district with limited self government.
Ten bucks says Campbell supports "the federal government"
dictating DC's gun ownership laws.
The last time I checked, there was no Constitutional garantee of
federally funded farmers markets, in the same way there is of the
right to bear arms.
The federal government interviening in gun control, is like the
federal government interviening if a local government were to
outlaw athiesm, or if the federal government began enslaving
Africans again. It is a protection of the bill of rights.
brains | May 2, 2007, 11:40am | #
ed - completely irrelevant to the topic at hand
When did that ever stop anyone here?
Perhaps they can pay for it with the new proposal by former
Mayor-for-life and now City Councelman Marion Shepilov Barry,
Jr?
Just heard on the radio he is proposing toll gates at all roads
entering DC.
My bad, that would mean DC would be using their own money for somthing. Move along, nothing to see here.
High#:
THE SAME!
(just had lunch with Mr. Crane. The lake looks amazing today! White
caps and all!)
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245