Logged-in users can hide comments and words in comments they do not
want to see. Click here to register for
your free account. If you already have an account,
log in here.
You are about to report the following comment as abusive:
This Bill requests very substantial sums for the maintenance of programs for which there exists scant evidence of effectiveness and, indeed, recent Studies indicate few of them work effectively at all.
I also note that the Bill offers no justifications nor references any justifying information. Yet even the 'parent' Adam Walsh Act of 2006 ordered a rather thorough-going effectiveness Report to be submitted to both Congress "and through the Internet to the public" (Sec. 634, if I recall correctly) by the Attorney-General NLT July, 2011.
One suspects that this omission is not unintentional.
Thus, while this Bill requests substantial monies (and its primary sponsor sits on the Judiciary Committee to which it has been referred), and while numerous governmental and "private" entities will benefit from the requested monies, yet the omission of justifying assertions or claims suggests strongly a great deal of 'pork'.
I would require justification before approval.
Please state (in 200 characters or less) why you think this comment is abusive (required):
email newsletter |
tell a friend |
home | privacy |
© 2006–2013 WashingtonWatch.com