Earmark spending is one of those idiotic subjects that no one really understands because it’s largely a manufactured outrage. But there are consequences to earmarks. Senators and congresspeople that are successful in securing federal dollars for their home constituencies can really improve the lives of their communities. Here’s an example from a Patrick Murphy (D-PA) press release:
Today, at a press conference in Levittown, Pennsylvania Congressman Patrick Murphy (D-8th District) announced $97,000 in federal funding for the Lower Bucks Red Cross and urged more donations before the holidays. Joining Rep. Murphy at the Lower Bucks Red Cross for the press conference were Kristi Dennis, Director of the Lower Bucks Red Cross Shelter, Kathleen Marsh, CEO of the Lower Bucks Red Cross and shelter residents. With the local Red Cross facing recent budget cuts and uncertainty, federal money and more donations will be put to excellent use.
The Red Cross runs a homeless shelter in Bristol that helps hundreds of people every year – more than 40% of whom are children. The Red Cross shelter is full and there is a waiting list to get in. The money Rep. Murphy fought for will come from the spending bill passed this week by Congress and awaits President Bush’s signature. The money will enable mental health counseling and case management services to the residents of the homeless shelter, along with other services such as the Homeless Hotline, which operates from inside the shelter.
That is an earmark. You got a problem with that?
If you want to get money earmarked to projects in your state or district, it helps immensely to have a seat on one of the Appropriations committees. Best of all is to be the chairman or ranking member of one on the Appropriations committees. Sen. Ted Stevens served as chairman of Appropriations for twelve years. It’s no wonder that Alaska leads the nation in per capita federal outlays. What should be controversial is that Arizona ranks last. It’s true that John McCain opposes earmarks and does not request them. And he’s not alone in his state. The controversy should be about whether or not this is a good thing for Arizona.
The state of Alaska receives about three times as much as Arizona receives in actual dollars, $346 million to $119 million.
“When you have reformers and purists, you end up not getting a reasonable share of money coming out, which hurts the state,” said James Thurber, director of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University. “When you’re holier than thou, you don’t get much of the money.”
…That’s mostly because three of the state’s 10 lawmakers in Washington — McCain and House Republicans Jeff Flake and John Shadegg — refuse to ask for any federal money for local projects. Another Arizona Republican, Sen. Jon Kyl, strictly limits his earmark requests.
If I lived in Arizona I would have mixed feelings about this. On the one hand, I would appreciate a principled stand against wasteful federal spending. But, on the other hand, I’d be upset that Alaska is getting almost three times more money in absolute dollars than my home state. That’s partly why John McCain’s selection of Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is puzzling and steps all over McCain’s anti-earmark message. Gov. Palin is a champion of earmarks, as CBS News notes:
As a candidate for governor, she defended every dollar for roads and bridges the state could wrangle from Washington, according to the Congressional Record and the Alaska Department of Transportation.
“I’m not going to stand in the way of progress that our Congressional delegation in the position of strength that they have right now, they are making those efforts for the state of Alaska,” Palin said.
She won absurd amounts of federally-earmarked money for Wasilla when she served as mayor there and she is lying about her opposition to the Bridge to Nowhere.
By repeating the claim she said no thanks to the bridge, the implication is that she confronted a spendthrift Congress recklessly wasting money.
The record shows she wanted that bridge until the end and kept the money.
There is a big difference between a $398 $223 million earmark to build a bridge to an island with 50 residents and a $97,000 outlay for a homeless shelter run by the Red Cross. The key to reform is not to eliminate all earmarks, but to make sure there is transparency in the process. And that is what the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act achieved. The co-sponsors of that bill? Sens. Tom Coburn (R-OK) and Barack Obama (D-IL).
U.S. Senators Barack Obama (D-IL) and Tom Coburn (R-OK) today hailed the Senate’s passage of the “Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act,” a bill that will create a Google-like search engine and database to track approximately $1 trillion in federal grants, contracts, earmarks and loans.
“By helping to lift the veil of secrecy in Washington, this database will help make us better legislators, reporters better journalists, and voters more active citizens,” Obama said. “It’s both unusual and encouraging to see interest groups and bloggers on the left and the right come together to achieve results. This powerful grassroots alliance shows that at the end of the day, Americans want to see Congress work together to get something done and not continue to engage in the partisan gridlock that so often brings Capitol Hill to a grinding halt.”
“Every American has the right to know how their government spends their money, and then to hold elected officials accountable for those decisions. I applaud my colleagues for unanimously supporting a bill that will aid the American people in that effort,” Dr. Coburn said. “This bill is a small but significant step toward changing the culture in Washington. Only by fostering a culture of openness, transparency and accountability will Congress come together to address the mounting fiscal challenges that threaten our future prosperity.”
“The group that deserves credit for passing this bill, however, is not Congress, but the army of bloggers and concerned citizens who told Congress that transparency is a just demand for all citizens, not a special privilege for political insiders. Their remarkable effort demonstrates that our system of government does work when the people take the reins of government and demand change,” Dr. Coburn said.
To be fair, John McCain also joined in co-sponsoring the bill. It passed by unanimous consent once Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) and Robert Byrd (D-WV) dropped their ‘secret holds’ on the bill. But, for John McCain, this legislation was dangerous because it took one of his main selling points off the table. The people can now see how federal earmarks are spent and watchdog organizations can expose examples of quid pro quo legislating. The people can make up their minds about whether to support Bridges to Nowhere or money for homeless shelters.
What’s truly odd, is that McCain chose someone from the state most famous for dubious earmarks and crony corruption. Hell, they call themselves the Corrupt Bastards Club up there. Sarah Palin wants to pretend that she isn’t part of that Club and that she didn’t participate in their dubious earmarks and crony corruption. It’s a lie. She may not be under federal indictment, but she is under investigation for abusing her power. And she is a Hall-of-Fame earmarker who supported the Bridge to Nowhere and happily took the money.
