Earmarks at top of Congress’ list
Friday, November 19, 2010 at 9:33AM There is a great deal of focus upon earmarks. Earmarks are controversial and greatly misunderstood. There is no doubt about it. Many criticize the practice of earmarking and say it should stop. They call it “pork-barrel spending” and cite projects like the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” as examples of waste that must be stopped.
But it’s not quite that simple. These comments will address earmarks in the transportation reauthorization bill.
A number of years ago the Washington Post printed an article harshly criticizing all of the earmarks, i.e., "pork," in a surface transportation bill. Ironically, on the facing page, there was an article praising the money in the bill for the Woodrow Wilson Bridge--which just happened to be one of the earmarks being criticized in the previous article. One organization--two views on the same earmark.
Earmarks were initially included in the transportation reauthorization bill because it was felt that state DOTs have too much authority in determining where federal funding was going to be expended. Earmarks provided the opportunity for others to have some voice in how federal funding was expended.
Eliminating earmarks in the surface transportation programs will not save money. Some argue that the nation can cut spending if earmarks are eliminated; but in the surface transportation programs that is not true. Since the program is funded from the Highway Trust Fund, the total amount of funding is guaranteed in order to ensure that the taxes you pay at the pump are used for their intended purpose--improving the nation’s transportation systems. If earmarks were eliminated, the funding would still be provided; the decision-making would simply be shifted to state and federal officials.
One interesting criticism of the stimulus program was that we had no idea where the funds were going to be expended; that is, the stimulus funds were not “earmarked”. The criticism was that no projects were identified. Federal dollars were given to states without any federal vision for that investment.
The Ports-to-Plains Alliance continues to advocate the importance of maintaining the integrity of the Highway Trust Fund. One can only wish the discussion was about how to maintain that integrity while inflation, growing needs, more fuel efficient vehicles, and alternative transportation modes all challenge the integrity of the Highway Trust Fund … instead of making earmarks the focus.
Udall says he'll support total ban on earmarks
November 16, 2010
Democratic Sen. Mark Udall said Monday he would support a total ban on earmarking, the process whereby members of Congress can hand-pick items — usually ones in their own districts — to receive funding.
"Out-of-control spending has caused us to rack up huge deficits, which now threaten our future economic prosperity and our national security," Udall said in a statement. "The American people want us to show them that we're serious about taking action to solve this problem." …
Earmarks issue places Hutchison in an uncomfortable spot
November 16, 2010
Now, Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison - long a major purveyor of earmarks - faces an uncomfortable choice as Senate Republicans vote today on a two-year moratorium.
She lost much of her political cover Monday when Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, also a staunch defender of earmarks, embraced the proposal to avoid getting trampled by tea partiers.
"The people have spoken. They have said as clearly as they can that this is what they want us to do," McConnell said, calling it a "small but important symbolic step" to assure the public that Republicans are serious about fiscal restraint...
Bachmann Wants Earmarks Redefined To Exclude Transportation Projects
November 16, 2010
WASHINGTON -- The Republican Party in recent days has rallied around the idea, pushed prominently by Tea Party activists, that Congress should resist earmarks, those pork-barrel projects that help filter money back to home districts.
But even as they publicly push a moratorium on the practice, some in the caucus are looking for a way out. On Tuesday morning, Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) told the Minneapolis Star Tribune that she wants to redefine exactly what an earmark is. Specifically, she said, transportation projects should not be placed under the umbrella.
"Advocating for transportation projects for ones district in my mind does not equate to an earmark," said the Minnesota Republican. "I don't believe that building roads and bridges and interchanges should be considered an earmark... There's a big difference between funding a tea pot museum and a bridge over a vital waterway."...
Reader Comments