|
Congress and its Pork Fat
December 18, 2006
In his weekend radio address, President Bush praised the 109th Congress for “eliminating virtually all earmarks for three major Cabinet departments” and called on the incoming Congress “to reform the earmark process and dramatically reduce the number of earmarks.” Bush is right that earmarks are out of control. But the 109th Congress deserves more criticism than praise. In 2005, Congress inserted 15,877 earmarks into spending bills, up from 6,073 in 2000. The House and the Senate both approved ethics bills that were, unfortunately, “feeble” and “inadequate” in truly reforming the earmarking process. While Bush is now rolling out strong rhetoric on fiscal discipline, in reality his administration has overseen an explosion of government spending.
- Congress wasn’t alone in its love of “pork”?President Bush was a fan as well. In Saturday's radio address, Bush promised to lay out a series of reforms “that will help make earmarks more transparent, that will hold the members who propose earmarks more accountable, and that will help reduce the number of earmarks inserted into large spending bills.” But Bush should first look to reform his own administration. In his six years as president, Bush has never once vetoed any of Congress's pork-laden spending bills. Like Congress does, Bush pushes for funding for his pet projects. His earmarks often “appear only in closely held supplements separate from the public budget books.”
- Congress did its earmarking work behind closed doors. The 109th Congress left no spending bill un-earmarked. In 2006, Congress allocated a record $71.77 billion “to 15,832 special projects, more than double the $29.11 billion spent on 4,155 pork-barrel projects in 1994.” “The fact is that there were members of Congress who would have opposed it,” said Rep. Frank Wolf (R-VA). “Should I have allowed that to stop me from doing what was in the best interest of the country?” Wolf is right that earmarks are not always wasteful. But the real problem is that they are inserted behind closed doors, without public debate. As Newsday notes, “Lawmakers who know their districts' needs best should be able to direct some small amounts of money as they see fit. But that flexibility shouldn't free members to dole out large sums of public money, without meaningful oversight, to favored recipients. Transparency and accountability are the right buzzwords.”
- 110th Congress looks to cut the fat. House and Senate reform bills in the 109th Congress were weak, at best. While the bills would require lawmakers to attach their names to their pet projects, little else would be done to increase transparency and cut wasteful spending. The 110th Congress has already promised to take a stronger stand against pork. Rep. David Obey (D-WI) and Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV), incoming chairmen of the House and Senate Appropriations committees, have promised to wipe out all earmarks in the continuing resolutions that will fund the federal government until Congress passes new spending bills. While some lawmakers have balked at losing funding for their pet projects, several conservatives have embraced the move, such as Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC), who has called the time-out “refreshing.”
|
