Earmark reform less than meets the eye

North County Times ^ | 9/21/06 | Editorial

[NormsRevenge]

Our view: House bill to clean up pork practices not nearly enough to stem budgeting abuses

The earmark reform bill passed by the House last week is too little, way too late.

Hailed by its supporters ---- including local U.S. Rep. Brian Bilbray, R-Carlsbad ---- the bill will require the House's powerful Appropriations Committee to disclose which earmarks it approves and which congressmen asked for them through the end of this year.

Transparency is a worthy goal, and can only help keep our representatives accountable for their earmarks ---- the practice of placing special projects on spending bills unanimously and without much review.

But this reform, if we can call it that, is a paper tiger designed to create the appearance that our lawmakers are serious about clamping down on earmarks.

The bill only applies to spending bills coming out of the House Appropriations Committee ---- excluding the rest of the House and the complete Senate ---- and it expires at the end of this year.

Of the 11 major spending bills passed by the committee each year, only one remains in the House, and the committee has already marked it up. That bill, the Labor/Health and Human Services/Education Appropriation, already has 1,867 secret spending earmarks in it worth more than $500 million.

Those earmarks will not be subject to the new rules. The only earmarks to which this reform will apply are those added when the Senate and House conference committee meets to resolve difference between the two houses.

Singling out Appropriations is problematic, too. Earmarking occurs in other committees ---- the last highway bill to come out of the transportation committee included 6,373 earmarks at a total cost of $24.2 billion ---- but they are given a free ride.

The earmarking practice came to the forefront after the Randy "Duke" Cunningham and Jack Abramoff scandals of the last two years. Transparency would give curious citizens the ability to find out what projects a congressman might be steering toward contributors, influential lobbyists or in Cunningham's case, the men who are bribing them ---- and it should apply across the board.

It's doubtful any attempt to bring earmarks into the public eye would have caught Cunningham; most of his special projects were attached to secret defense spending.

But earmarking is a problem beyond ethical lapses and bribery. Representatives use the system to direct federal dollars toward pork projects within their districts. Citizens Against Government Waste, a watchdog group, says the number of earmarks approved each year grew from 1,439 in 1995, when Republicans took control, to 13,997 in 2005. This year, earmarks will cost taxpayers more than $60 billion ---- more than triple the $29 billion spent in 1995.

That kind of spending without accountability leads to a federal budget that outpaces growth. Similar to California's so-called budget crisis earlier this decade, Washington's budget problems do not stem from a lack of income. Federal revenues are up 11.5 percent this year and are on track to set a record.

Spending, though, is, and has been, growing at a record pace, up 7.6 percent this year. The White House projects the country will have a deficit of $295.8 billion when it closes the 2006 books on Sept. 30.

And though they are in control, Republicans aren't the only ones sending pork back to their districts. Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., is commonly known as the "King of Pork." U.S. Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., joked to an audience last month that if the Democrats win the House in November and he becomes chairman of the appropriations committee, "I'm going to earmark the s--t out of it."

There are some earmark-fighting champions. U.S. Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., commonly attempts to amend spending measures to remove specific earmarks and force a vote of the full House. U.S. Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., is proposing a one-year ban on all earmarks. Then there's Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who brought the now-infamous Alaskan "Bridge to Nowhere" to light. These folks should be listened to.

The entire San Diego County delegation voted for this phony reform ---- it should be noted the region stands to gain $2.1 million in earmarks in the last appropriations bill ---- and none of our representatives should be applauding themselves.

While the bill passed last week might make for a nice headline in an election year, we need real earmark reforms and not a show.

[NormsRevenge]

..this reform, if we can call it that, is a paper tiger designed to create the appearance that our lawmakers are serious about clamping down on earmarks.

The bill only applies to spending bills coming out of the House Appropriations Committee ---- excluding the rest of the House and the complete Senate ---- and it expires at the end of this year.

[DustyMoment]

Earmark reform less than meets the eye

And, this is a surprise to whom???

[fireforeffect]

One step at a time.

Fabian Conservatism.