I don't much care either way, but what is the real target? The only reason the Defense Department has anything to do with sponsoring NASCAR as advertisment for recruiting. So is she just opposed to NASCAR or is she opposed to having an advertising budget for recruiting?
I thought we were trying to save money? (btw...the AF, Marines, and CG have already quit sponsoring cars/teams)
It's just 6 mil, but I thought the House wanted to slash spending? We need to drop school lunch programs for poor kids but we feel the need to sponsor NASCAR drivers?
I guess so. So much for getting rid of the waste in government.
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/02/18/report-army-wins-fight-to-keep-spending-money-on-nascar-sponsor/Minnesota Congresswoman Betty McCollum is a Democrat looking at areas where the budget can be cut. Her current target is military spending. More specifically, she is focused on banning the military from spending money advertising in NASCAR. She introduced a measure to this effect, and it was shot down by a vote of 241-148.
The US Army spent $7 million in 2010 to sponsor a car in NASCAR and has a signed contract with Stewart-Haas racing to put its logo on a car for 2011. In contrast, the Marines, Navy and Coast Guard all ended NASCAR sponsorships back in 2006.
