OPINION:
“Earmarks,” small, large and enormous pots of taxpayers’ money that congressmen give themselves to fund pet projects in their districts, usually in return for votes, are a lot like Count Dracula. They won’t stay dead. But last week the Republicans in the House put down an attempt by one of their own to resurrect them.
The parliamentary device to attach an amendment, or earmark, to unrelated legislation was eliminated by agreements in 2008 and 2012.
Rep. Mike Rogers, Alabama Republican and a member of the House since 2002, is a relentless and clever defender of earmarks, and he introduced an amendment to House rules last week to enable earmarks in large numbers. Mr. Rogers’ legislation would have created an exception to the moratorium to allow earmarks for “state, locality (including county and city governments), or a public utility or other public entity.” This would have included everything but a cash handout to a private company.
Fortunately, an overwhelming majority of House Republicans were having none of it, and his attempt to grease the congressional skids with pork fat was soundly defeated, by a margin of more than 2-to-1. This was good and encouraging news, preventing the vote-buying and wasteful spending enabled by earmarks, but earmarks are not yet graveyard dead. They’re just not called “earmarks.”
Since Congress has banned earmarks that direct money only “to a specific state, locality or congressional district,” lawmakers quickly figured out that they can fund specific defense projects that just happen to be in a particular state, locality or congressional district represented by a member of Congress whose vote might be for sale or rent.
This loophole, big enough to drive an Abrams main battle tank through it, is a perfectly legal way for members to bribe other members with promises to award multimillion-dollar defense projects to their districts, many unnecessary but all 100 percent pork.
The Taxpayers Protection Alliance, a government watchdog group, discovered nearly 200 earmarks in the most recent defense spending bill — including $800 million for amphibious warships that the Pentagon did not want, a $10 million handout to a historically black college and an award of $7.5 million for epilepsy research. The college and epilepsy research are no doubt worthy causes, but what do these causes have to do with military spending? Such deceptions cost American taxpayers $7 billion this year.
The defense spending bill is hard evidence that Congress should take further steps to prevent earmarks, and relaxing earmark rules is not the way to do it. Members of Congress are always susceptible to temptations to spend other people’s money, and until measures are taken that end the practice of earmarking once and for all, the taxpayers’ money won’t be safe from earmarks. Members of Congress are always eager to “bring home the bacon,” even if it’s stolen bacon.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.