Earmark Reform Everyone Can Agree On
By Congressman Jack Kingston Posted in Congress — Comments (6) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Before Congress left town to enjoy some turkey and time with the family, Congressman Zach Wamp, Congressman Frank Wolf and I introduced a resolution calling for a moratorium on earmarks till a Joint Select Committee makes a full study. The bill currently has 86 cosponsors.
Our resolution establishes a Joint Select Committee on earmark reform that will be composed of 16 members, evenly split between the House and Senate majority and minority parties. This JSC will make a full study of earmarks, both congressional and executive branch. The study will not only cover earmarking in appropriation bills, but also authorizing, tax and tariff measures. After all, the famous “Bridge to Nowhere” was part of an authorizing bill not appropriations.
What will this study cover? The intent is for it to be as comprehensive as possible. While not exhaustive, this includes:
- Existing earmark disclosure requirements and the existing definitions of earmarks;
- Earmark transparency at all levels of the legislative process;
- Evaluating requirements that earmarks not be placed in any bill after initial committee consideration;
- Evaluating requirements that Members be permitted to remove earmarks throughout the legislative process;
- Evaluating requirements that earmarks be certified by bill sponsors and committee leadership;
- Evaluating the Administration’s earmark practices in their annual budget submissions;
- Evaluating earmarking in amendments; and
- Considering whether new categories for earmarks should be established, possibly to include projects of national scope, military projects and local/provincial projects.
The three of us have worked hard to come up with an earmark reform proposal that is acceptable to all Members. I think we’ve come up with a good bill that has the support of appropriators, budget hawks and Republican moderates. This is the first earmark reform bill that can claim such a coalition.
I am confident that once this resolution gets to the House floor, we can work in a bipartisan manner to get it passed.
« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for Censorship — Comments (5) | Can we get a real conservative in the #2 spot? — Comments (28) »
Earmark Reform Everyone Can Agree On 6 Comments (0 topical, 6 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
How about a moratorium on earmarks, period? What do you need a study for?
Evaluating requirements?!?!?! Can't you get your fellow Republicans to simply agree on a fundamental principle of just governance: that the government should never take taxpayer funds away from all of the people with the sole intent of repackaging them as prizes/handouts to select private entities that benefit a limited number of citizens?
Considering whether new categories for earmarks should be established, possibly to include projects of national scope, military projects and local/provincial projects.
Good grief! Next time you want to try and impress us, you might want to leave out the part where you're going to figure out how to continue granting earmarks and pursuing pork barrel projects, just under a different name.
You want to make a big splash and make voters turn their heads sharply in your direction? Get every Republican congressperson together, and issue a joint statement that none of you will seek to add another earmark or pork barrel project to legislation, ever again. Commit to it and follow through with a proposal to reduce taxes by a dollar for dollar amount. Let American citizens decide what "local/provincial" projects to spend their money on, stop taking that liberty away from them!
On this issue, it actually is really that simple.
Right on zroxx. This proposal sounds like more of the hurry up and investigate mentality that consumes Washington. No investigation needed...earmarks suck! There I just saved the taxpayers all the headaches of paying the staff to do the investigation.
END EARMARKS NOW!
Earmarks are the method by which not only money is funneled to a pet project, but extensively used by congress to circumvent all those noble statutes requiring agencies to use competitive procurements in their acquisition big-ticket items and construction projects.
Earmarks are a two-fer.
Not only does the good Congressman/woman get to fund a building or bridge for the constituency, but they can also generally write the earmark such that business is directed to a loyal supporter/contributor.
When earmark started getting bad press, the initial work-around was to avoid the earmark stigma by using the back-door; simply do some old fashion arm twisting on the agency an let it be known that hearings and votes will come a LOT easier if the Department includes a few pet projects or purchases into their next budget request. This less obvious route was quickly abandoned when the staffers saw that this bright idea ran directly into prior regulations requiring competitive bidding and that acquisition specifications be drafted to foster same.
The trail leading to congressional earmarks for new government programs almost always starts with a lobbyist or special interest group . . . supported by a well-funded PAC. How many days would it take for the donations to start drying up if the big dollar projects lobbied for went to a competitor?
Doug Van Duker
Zroxx hits the nail on the head.
Any panel that includes earmark hungry appropriators is unlikely to recommend anything other than "earmark transparency."
Budget hawks and reformers are promoting transparency right now, but the real end game is ending the earmarking practice as we know it. Transparency by itself is a step in the right direction, but if it is left there without further reforms we will just have a process where members of Congress trim back the sketchy or corrupt requests they make and tout even louder the ultra-porky requests they secure.
As one of our favorite Senators likes to say, earmarking is "the gateway drug" to congressional overspending. It is precisely because these members have thousands, sometimes millions of dollars worth of pork projects in a bill that they vote for the final product despite its final price tag.
And as for the GOP, this party will never be able to return to fiscal sanity until a majority of our congress critters see the light on this issue and stand up and refuse to be bought off anymore.
Congressman Kingston deserves credit for recognizing the importance of this issue to the base of his party, but he and his colleagues need to take the next step -- indeed the only meaningful step -- and swear off earmarks all together.
I think you're going to need it. I can't see any reform that actually restrains the tendency to spend like drunken sailors passing.