The chairman of the Appropriations Committee
has enormous power to bring home special projects
(sometimes referred to as "pork barrel spending") for his or her "state"...
Wikipedia
has enormous power to bring home special projects
(sometimes referred to as "pork barrel spending") for his or her "state"...
Wikipedia
...Adams, 64, a Bennett College art professor, has been a consistent advocate for the poor and the powerless. She worked for more than 10 years to raise the minimum wage in North Carolina. She is the sitting chairwoman of the House Appropriations Committee, which plays a significant role in determining state spending.
Alma can "appropriate" bacon?
She faces Republican Darin Thomas, 48, a consultant who specializes in public water and sewer utilities. ...He believes state government is trying to do too much. "We got to this size with the folks in power now," he says.
...He supports start-from-scratch, zero-based budgeting as a way to end bloated "legacy budgets in state government."
Didn't the News & Record Editorial Board think "zero-based budgeting"
was a good idea in John Blust's endorsement?
was a good idea in John Blust's endorsement?
...Adams prefers revising the state's tax code and ending some tax breaks, though she won't be more specific about which ones.
So the Editorial Board doesn't really care about cutting or lower taxes,
but does care about Alma being on the "appropriations" committee?
but does care about Alma being on the "appropriations" committee?
She points to the $2.4 billion she and fellow lawmakers cut in the current state budget.
How could they cut $2.4 billion if this year's state budget is bigger than last year's?
Is the Editorial regurgitating an untruth?
How could the Editorial Board say that Don Vaughan said he cut $3 billion
and then say the cuts Alma Adams "points to" $2.4 billion,
without informing their readers of whatever the truth is?
What were the cuts, and if so, how did the state end up with a bigger budget?
If disingenuous, should the News & Record run a clarifying statement before the election?
Is the Editorial regurgitating an untruth?
How could the Editorial Board say that Don Vaughan said he cut $3 billion
and then say the cuts Alma Adams "points to" $2.4 billion,
without informing their readers of whatever the truth is?
What were the cuts, and if so, how did the state end up with a bigger budget?
If disingenuous, should the News & Record run a clarifying statement before the election?
...Adams has done well by Guilford County's voters by successfully advocating for such local needs the High Point Market and the Joint School of Nanoscience and Nanoengineering.
She knows Raleigh well and serves her constituents effectively...
The Greensboro News & Record Editorial Board
No comments:
Post a Comment