Earmark Nonsense
One thing you're hearing a lot of in conservative precincts nowadays is the need to move past Jack Abramoff and embrace the spirit of reform by . . . reforming the congressional "earmark" process. The only problem is that the scandals envoloping the GOP at the moment have nothing to do with earmarking. I've got a column about this up at the Center for American Progress.
Advertisement
Agreed, it’s not just earmarks, which are just one small blemish on a hideously disfigured body. But it’s also not just contracting. It’s also tax breaks, subsidies, tariff barriers, trademark rules, and so on – i.e., anything the government does.
January 19, 2006 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
If Matthew is correct, and he probably is, that earmarks only account for about 1% of the federal budget, then they are worth "only" about $20 billion. But the discretionary part of the federal budget is only about $800 billion, and half of that is defense. So that would mean $20 billion out of the $400 billion (5%) for discretionary non-defense spending goes to mostly wasteful projects. That doesn't sound good, and $20 billion, while a small portion of the federal budget, can still do an awful lot. (I think it's about 2/3 of a New Orleans levee upgrade, for example.)
True, getting rid of earmarks is not an essential part of ridding Washington of the corporate-lobbyist corruption that has infested it. But that does not mean that earmarks are not a problem.
January 19, 2006 3:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
There are a lot of problems that can be addressed by anyone in the government actually interested in making improvements. But, what we have revealed to us today is a Republican Bribery Scandal. Any discussion of the Abramoff aspect of this Republican Bribery Scandal that does not deal directly with the corruption of the Republicans in Congress is counter productive. So, while earmarks are certainly a subject worthy of discussion, that discussion in the context of the Republican Bribery Scandal tends to dilute the effort to bring to justice those involved in this Republican Bribery Scandal.
January 19, 2006 4:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lets see, earmarks often look like the Congressional equivalent of a no bid contract? But, they are not central to corruption?
I am perfectly willing to go with the view that a lot more than quasing earmarks is needed. But, I cannot imagine objecting to quashing earmarks, unless you suspect the real objective is to make a new and more partisan version of earmarks.
January 19, 2006 4:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hoppy,
I fullly agree with you on your main point. But, you if you think the Democrats weren't there because they are innocent angels, you are kidding no one but yourself. As I posted on my diary page awhile back:
For the Democrats, its like being a nerd and waking up the day after the "real" prom party to find out the cops arrested all the cool kids for alcohol and drugs. What I mean, is the Democrats would have been there too, but the in-crowd wouldn't let them play.
Sure we need to get as much electoral advantage of this as we can by emphasizing the GOP players involved. But, the cleanup should be as thorough as possible and focused on Congressional behavior (not lobbyist behavior or corporate behavior, etc.). In the future, no trips, no gifts, no earmarks, everything is paid for 100% or the value of the gift is DEDUCTED from the congressman's salary at the same time it is taxed at 100% on the gift giver's taxes.... 100% transparency. No shady charities or spousal jobs. Criminal penalties for all evasions. Independent enforcement.
January 19, 2006 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course the response to the Republican bribery scandal is reforming earmaring. After all, the response to record deficits was cutting taxes for the wealthy. The response to al Qaeda was attacking Saddam. It's the Golden Age of the Non-Sequitur in Republican Washington.
January 19, 2006 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Of course
January 19, 2006 9:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
You are arguing that earmarks are good? Am I on alter-earth?
January 20, 2006 9:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
Billion here, billion there, pretty soon you are talking about real money. Earmarks are so scandalous I find it impossible to believe that Republicans would do anything about them.
January 20, 2006 12:49 PM | Reply | Permalink