Earmark Spending Makes a Comeback
Congress Pledged Curbs in 2007
By Robert O'Harrow Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 13, 2008
More than a year after Congress pledged to curb pork barrel funding known as earmarks, lawmakers are gearing up for another spending binge, directing billions toward organizations and companies in their home districts.
Earmark spending in the House's defense authorization bill alone soared 29 percent last month, from $7.7 billion last year to $9.9 billion now, according to data compiled by Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog group in the District. The Senate bill has not been approved, but the proposal includes an increased number of earmarks, although for a slightly lesser total cost.
Lawmakers had promised to cut back on earmarks and mandated better disclosure of them after steady criticism that they were funding programs with little debate or oversight. The promises led to an initial decline in earmarks last year that was trumpeted on Capitol Hill. But the new data show that they are surging again, at least in the proposed Pentagon authorization budget, which sets out priorities to be funded in a later appropriations bill.
"Both parties talk a good game on cutting earmarks, but at first opportunity, the House larded up," said Stephen Ellis, vice president of the watchdog group. "This is just another broken promise."
(Continued here.)
By Robert O'Harrow Jr.
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, June 13, 2008
More than a year after Congress pledged to curb pork barrel funding known as earmarks, lawmakers are gearing up for another spending binge, directing billions toward organizations and companies in their home districts.
Earmark spending in the House's defense authorization bill alone soared 29 percent last month, from $7.7 billion last year to $9.9 billion now, according to data compiled by Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan watchdog group in the District. The Senate bill has not been approved, but the proposal includes an increased number of earmarks, although for a slightly lesser total cost.
Lawmakers had promised to cut back on earmarks and mandated better disclosure of them after steady criticism that they were funding programs with little debate or oversight. The promises led to an initial decline in earmarks last year that was trumpeted on Capitol Hill. But the new data show that they are surging again, at least in the proposed Pentagon authorization budget, which sets out priorities to be funded in a later appropriations bill.
"Both parties talk a good game on cutting earmarks, but at first opportunity, the House larded up," said Stephen Ellis, vice president of the watchdog group. "This is just another broken promise."
(Continued here.)
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
The article does not mention any Minnesotans. Last month, I looked at the House proposal and only noted three requests by Minnesotans.
From Jim Oberstar – Replace a fuel cell hanger for the Duluth 148th Air Wing
From Betty McCollum – Arden Hills Army Training Site Infrastructure Development.
From Keith Ellison – De-icing pad and Underground tank for the MSP airport
NOTE : Michele Bachmann and John Kline have taken the pledge – No Earmarks.
Why doesn’t Minnesota generate many requests? John Kline’s pledge is a whole lot easier since Minnesota’s economy is not driven by the military industrial complex – we have no Boeing, etc. Kline went belly-up on the Farm Bill because he knew it would rankle his voters in rural counties.
Kline’s message really confuses the issue of “earmarks” versus “wasteful pork barrel spending”. Earmarks can be a good investment and those that fail to utilize the system, fail our state’s infrastructure needs. For example, consider Kline and the Hastings bridge. Listen to the words of Kline’s challenger, Steve Sarvi. "We've got a bridge in Hastings over the Mississippi that's in danger of falling down and now is when we need a Representative in Congress who will deliver the district an earmark and get this bridge rebuilt. Our infrastructure is crumbling all over the district and Kline has done nothing. This wouldn't be some kind of bridge to nowhere, it's desperately needed. Look, I'm not scared of spending money," Steve stated. "There are many things we need to spend money on like that bridge in Hastings. I'm more concerned with wasting money."
The Republicans really don’t want to eliminate earmarks, they just want to use it as a campaign issue … after all, who is the earmark leader in the Minnesota delegation … Norm Coleman.
Post a Comment
<< Home