First thing that pops into mind after I read this story is, really?
Not about the proposal that lobbyists and earmarks have restrictions, but that they exist for the aid package that was passed in February.
Oh, sure, I'm positive the words are on paper, putting all sorts of onerous restrictions on what people currently deem to be "bad" politics. But what about the Obama administration banning former lobbyists from certain government positions and then handing out waivers? What about one purpose of the stimulus package being to improve transportation? If your community wasn't getting any of that cash, wouldn't you consider it an earmark for the guy who did?
Just seems like more doublespeak coming from the White House. But, then again, as long as I get my street repaved, I'm not going to be too despondent.
Because, like most Americans, I tend to vote for the guy who keeps on bringing home the bacon.