Earmarks and Lee Terry

I finally got my long-awaited response from Congressman Terry's office to my questions about NE earmarks, sent in August to ask about the earmark controversy organized by Porkbusters. He apparently helped co-sponsor the earmarking scrutiny bill, but believes "there is place for legitimate earmarks in the legislative process to encourage innovation and help prevent bureuacracy from squelching funding to organziations and entities that can provide government services at lower costs and with more efficiency than federal agencies."

Not sure I agree there. You can legitimize almost anything with that philosophy. I don't really think it should take my/our tax money to expand Creighton's Dental school to "help address a critical shortage of dentists in rural Midwestern states."
I have no issue with the bioterrorism response team, that is something I can agree is pretty important. His office goes on to justify the UNMC grant "due to a tendancy among federal bureaucrats to favor larger medical schools in awarding grnat dollars." This is a matter of keeping up with the Joneses? I'm not terribly impressed with the logic here, and the fact of the matter is that earmarks of all types and sizes have exploded out of proportion - we now have eight times as many earmarks that we did in 1994.