"Hawke" wrote in message
...

"Ed Huntress" wrote in message
...

"Wes" wrote in message
...
Too_Many_Tools wrote:

I have a real problem with this....it shows where our real priorities
are.

And there are those that want National Health Care. If the goverment
can't
maintain priceless curios do you really want the government to maintain
your
body?

The government can't maintain them because they won't pay for it. As for
national health care, we already have it -- for military vets and
Congress.


The Smithsonian is a real treasure, I've been there once and hope to go
there again.

Whose treasure? Who is supposed to pay for it? Is it a treasure for the
whole country, or only for those people who visit it? If the former, why
won't Congress pay for it? If the latter, why not turn it over to
commercial
interests? If somebody is going to charge admission, they'd be glad to
take
it over.

The Smithsonian has grown 'way beyond anything that could have been
anticipated under its original charter, which was established in 1846
through the generosity of a British scientist, who contributed the
original
trust fund. Congress got into the act mostly by means of government
agencies
who used it either as a center for scientific research or as a museum.
Now
it's a monster. Do we want this monster? Personally, I think it's a good
thing to have, and that it ought to be government funded but also that
its
scope should be more sharply defined and limited. If the Smithsonian
wants
to grow beyond that, it should be in cooperation with outside interests,
who
should figure out how to fund their part of it.


The school system up the road complained that they didn't have money
for
building maintenance and the buildings were in disrepair. On closer
examination it turned out that voted funds for maintenance were used
for
operations. Of course no one went to jail or lost their job over this.

Did your district vote for the original budget request, or did you reduce
it? That's what usually happens, time after time. Or legislated caps on
year-to-year growth force school boards to do it. That's another chronic
problem.


I wonder if part of the problem is the attitude of the Smithsonian
Board
of
Regents not recognizing the reality of the times. Funding is going to
get
even tighter in the future everywhere as the boomers retire.

The "reality of the times" is that people want to keep this "real
treasure"
but they don't want to pay for it, like a million other things. Enter
politics, stage right...

--
Ed Huntress

It's all about the priorities of the administration in power. The current
pro business/wealth gang doesn't want to spend money on things like the
Smithsonian or the Consumer Product Safety Institute so they let them fall
into decay and disrepair. They do this so they have money for wars and tax
cuts for the investor class. By now everyone can see the outcome of
letting
people who think like this run things.
People complained that government couldn't do things efficiently or at
all.
The republicans have proven this to be true. But it would be a mistake to
think this would be the case if the people in charge of the government
were
competent, capable, and believed in using government to provide what the
people want from it. Putting people in charge with anti government
attitudes
only guarantees one thing. Government won't do anything very well. As we
have abundantly seen over the course of the Bush administration. Whether
it
be the mismanagement of the war, the blundering of intelligence in the run
up to the war, Katrina, adding an additional three trillion to the
national
debt, or any number of other examples of misfeasance the proof is
undeniable. Bush is the worst president in modern history and the
republicans in congress have proven to be perfect partners for him. The
question now is will the public have had enough with them and their ways
and
send them packing.

Hawke


Washingtons priorities revolve around passing legislation that was written
by
campain contributors. Failing to introduce legistation written by a
corporate
sponsor will result in termination of campain funding. Yes its true we have
the best laws money can buy.

Best Regards
Tom.