The issue of political “pig” or, as it is more formally known, earmarking has been a prominent conflict in political discussions for many part of the most contemporary legislative issues. Earmarking is the allocation of government funds and resources provided by congress for grants, projects, or programs for specific districts within states (Earmarks, 2011). Special funds can be set aside for different projects in a given district, such as building new bridges or highways, grants for small businesses, or some sort of locally run government office. Many in Congress have different opinions about the necessity and benefits these pork expenditures actually have on the economy. While some would say earmarks are a useful tool used to get additional funding for small districts, other, more liberal members of Congress would disagree, saying it is corruption that must be stopped. One senator even went so far as to say that “funding allocated for special projects promotes waste, large expenditures and corruption in the system” (Friel, 2010). Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay While there are many differing opinions on earmarking, the numbers don't seem to lie. Proponents of pork spending argue that “nothing is saved by cutting appropriations,” claiming that unelected bureaucrats are the ones who actually make decisions about big spending (Friel, 2010). Other advocates might say that earmarks can help spread government spending across more local projects nationwide, rather than a few larger, centralized initiatives. But in all the opinions of supporters, the voices of opponents still have a prevailing influence on the feelings of the public. Senator George LeMieux of Florida offered a different perspective on earmarks when he stated that “…earmarks are, unfortunately, the engine that drives the train that gets us into these enormous spending problems…so earmarks are what get you to spend more (Friel, 2010).” What he is saying here is that by using earmarks, government spending begins to slide down a slippery slope, where the spending will gradually get bigger and bigger until there is a massive deficit on our hands. Spending becomes less accountable and it is harder to hold perpetrators accountable. In this politically complicated issue, the negative effects seem to outweigh the positive ones. The incredible increase in pork projects, from less than two thousand in the 1990s, to over fourteen thousand in 2005 alone (Cato, 2014), shows that Congress obviously found something it could use to its advantage, and it did. carried out at surprising rates. The main issue discussed in the earmarking talks is that of the federal government's involvement in state and private matters. Many of the proposed allocations tend to be cash grants to the private sectors, then taxpayer money goes to help that area. But when the payment comes back from that private company or group, the profits remain in the corporate chain and are not reinvested in taxpayers or the government. Therefore it makes no sense that citizens who regularly pay taxes are paying for something that does not concern them (Cato, 2014). Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get custom essay Pork appropriation or spending should be stopped in our.