<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Cramer secures funding for another project that should be local concern</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/</link>
	<description>The Unpredictable Union of Pragmatism, Idealism, and Cynicism</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 21 Nov 2008 23:10:23 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Flashpoint &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Alabama pork report</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/#comment-16733</link>
		<dc:creator>Flashpoint &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Alabama pork report</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2007 12:53:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/#comment-16733</guid>
		<description>[...] to renovate a theater just to name a few - and that is just in Alabama. The list also includes the recently announced project to tear up a perfectly good road in Huntsville and replace it with a [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] to renovate a theater just to name a few - and that is just in Alabama. The list also includes the recently announced project to tear up a perfectly good road in Huntsville and replace it with a [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: wayne</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/#comment-14020</link>
		<dc:creator>wayne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2007 17:28:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/#comment-14020</guid>
		<description>The Bud Cramer Patriot Bridge.  I need to go out and get some thank  you notes....What a magnamimous guy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Bud Cramer Patriot Bridge.  I need to go out and get some thank  you notes&#8230;.What a magnamimous guy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee P</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/#comment-13973</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee P</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2007 07:47:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/#comment-13973</guid>
		<description>I read the same story in the Times today, and had exactly the same reaction as you.  Huntsville is a wealthy city and can afford to build its own stinking bridge.

This whole debate over "internal improvements" funded by the federal government goes back practically to the Founding.  It was a huge issue throughout the 19th Century, when many so-called strict constructionists (most of them Democrats) fought against these kinds of projects on constitutional grounds.  The constitutional argument is long lost, but surely Congress can come up with some method of determining which projects are sufficiently "national" in character that they warrant an outlay of federal funds.  As it stands, the only method going is "You fund my bridge and I'll fund yours."  That's not a good recipe for fiscal sanity or accountable government.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read the same story in the Times today, and had exactly the same reaction as you.  Huntsville is a wealthy city and can afford to build its own stinking bridge.</p>
<p>This whole debate over &#8220;internal improvements&#8221; funded by the federal government goes back practically to the Founding.  It was a huge issue throughout the 19th Century, when many so-called strict constructionists (most of them Democrats) fought against these kinds of projects on constitutional grounds.  The constitutional argument is long lost, but surely Congress can come up with some method of determining which projects are sufficiently &#8220;national&#8221; in character that they warrant an outlay of federal funds.  As it stands, the only method going is &#8220;You fund my bridge and I&#8217;ll fund yours.&#8221;  That&#8217;s not a good recipe for fiscal sanity or accountable government.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reactionary</title>
		<link>http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/#comment-13927</link>
		<dc:creator>Reactionary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Nov 2007 23:54:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.flashpointblog.com/2007/11/18/cramer-secures-funding-for-another-project-that-should-be-local-concern/#comment-13927</guid>
		<description>I don't like the Monroe Street bridge - I think it's dangerous because the rise obstructs your sight at the intersection - can't see what's coming.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t like the Monroe Street bridge - I think it&#8217;s dangerous because the rise obstructs your sight at the intersection - can&#8217;t see what&#8217;s coming.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
