Readers who responded to last week's online poll on congressional earmarks were overwhelmingly opposed to their use for the benefit of specific congressional districts.

A majority of respondents said earmarks are not effective and 78 percent of readers said they should be banned. When asked if their congressional representatives should request earmarks to benefit their district, a vast majority of readers said members of Congress shouldn't request any earmarks.

On the question, "If earmarks were eliminated, how should funds be allocated?" here's what some readers had to say:

? Funds for all federal programs should be requested using the existing appropriation/authorization process. All funding requests should be openly debated and approved.

? All appropriations should be on separate bills. They should not be tied into something that might be good for the people. Sink or swim on their own merit.

? Congress can do what the rest of us do and go without.

? They should be formally included in bills for a up or down vote.

? Pay off the national debt and let the taxpayers pay for these goodies.

? Include items in the budget. Don't budget by anticipating earmarks.

? All appropriations should be voted on.

Congressional earmarks survey results

Are earmarks effective?

Yes 7%

Sometimes 36%

No 56%

Should they be banned?

Yes 78%

No 22%

What do you think of your representatives in Congress requesting earmarks to benefit your district?

They shouldn't request earmarks 74%

They should put in few requests 16%

They should put in many requests 11%

Poll results aren't scientific and reflect only the opinions of those who chose to participate. Results as of noon Friday. Percentages may not add up to 100 percent due to rounding.