The Beach Boys might like this one: "$6,000,000: Ventura, Calif., Water Surfers Point Improvements." "This project is to protect the beach with natural buried cobble stone, create sand dunes over the buried cobble, relocate, and rebuild the State Owned Omer Rains beach front bike path, and construct parking lot and drainage."

Where in the Constitution is there authorization for such spending?

Government can always find new ways to spend our money. That's because it's not government's money. Does government ever ask if the public approves of such pork barrel spending? Does it ever ask us if we have enough money? No, government tells us how much of our money it intends to let us keep. Instead, shouldn't we be telling government how much of our money we will allow government to spend?

Democrats, especially, used to talk about "mortgaging our future" by irresponsible spending. Now the Congress is behaving like a bank gone wild, handing out money to almost anyone that asks for it with few strings and no sense attached.

The so-called "jobs" the mayors claim will be created will only last for a brief time. Then what? Those who take them are likely to be back where they were when the projects are finished: out of work and waiting for the next government rescue.

Read the entire wish list here.

Congress should say "no" to the mayors. Given the attitude in Washington these days -- and a Democratic president about to take office with a bigger Democratic congressional majority -- that is unlikely to happen.

The question ought not to be how we get prostitutes off the streets in Dayton, but how we retire them in Congress.