More on Earmarks

Ron Paul of Texas is admired by many as a stalwart defender of the constitution and one of the representatives you would least expect to be using earmarks. He uses earmarks extensively. His reasoning is, roughly quoted, "my earmarks are projects meant to return some of my constituents' money that was stolen from them by the federal government." Or more to the point, "The government steals it. I return it." In the current culture of corruption that permeates through Washington, this is a strong argument that earmarking is the right thing to do for constituents.

Our main goals are to educate voters and give advice to challengers to incumbents. So how should the earmark issue be handled? There are choices. One is to take the high road and vow not to earmark at all. Very dangerous politically as many voters are convinced that a representative that brings home the most earmarks is good for them. Another is to take the low road and promise to do everything in your power to bring earmarks to your district. Again politically dangerous as many voters are beginning to realize how corrupt this process is. We suggest the truth. The only way to get rid of earmarks is to get rid of incumbents. Tell voters that it is up to America. If over ninety percent of incumbents are put right back in office, then you will concentrate on issues you can make a difference on. Only voters can stop earmarks. Without turnover, there is no use fighting earmarks. You are only letting stolen money be sent to other districts. Without turnover, the best you can do is hire at least one staff member experienced in earmarks. Do not make false promises. You can not stop earmarks alone. At this point only the voters can stop earmarks. We know who has done this to us. Will we vote them out?



Some common arguments for and against earmarks follow. There is a good reference at the end that has more information.

• Everyone else is doing it so I have to. Hard to argue with that.
  
  
• We (Congress) know what is better for our district than some faceless bureaucrat. See below.
  
  
• Earmarks corrupt academia and scientific research. The "faceless bureaucrats" politicians like to think they know better as to what is best for their district are often professors and scientists and generals. Unlike a grant request, earmarks from politicians are not screened for quality and purpose. They are often the result of a lobbyist with access convincing a politician with no knowledge of a field that the earmark is needed. The university with the best lobbyist wins.
  
  
• It is less than 2% of the total budget so why even bother with it? It grows every year with no end in sight. It is now serious money. Where there is serious money there is usually corruption. See below.
  
  
• There already is serious corruption at less than 2% of the budget. Anyone that watches the news is aware of the frivolous pork barrel projects out there. There are already several Senators and Congressmen that have been caught. To name some names research Randy "Duke" Cunningham, John T. Doolittle, Allan Molloham, and Arlen Specter. There is a good reference after this list for those who want some proof.
  
  
• Earmarks usually go to special interests groups. Groups who can afford access to power have the opportunity to either purchase or persuade representatives.
  
  
• Lawmakers often neglect other duties. Earmarks are very time consuming. For an earmark to come into existence either a constituent such as a corporation, university, town, or a lobbyist must approach the representative or visa-versa. The representative and staff members must then spend time processing each request. This takes more time every passing year as earmarks steadily increase. Ever wonder why representatives can't seem to find the time to even read bills anymore? See below.
  
  
• Lawmakers often care more about earmarks than the bill. If a politician puts a great deal of effort into getting an earmark into a bill, is he or she more likely to vote for that bill? If they have earmarks in it are they less likely to object to other earmarks in it? If they and their staffs are working on their earmarks where are they going to find time to read thousand page bills.
  
  
• Earmarks take away the ability of the President to spend however the President pleases. Now that Congress has seen fit to appropriate stimulus money first directly to President Bush and now directly to President Obama, this does make sense. If it is earmarked at least someone can tell us where it went.
  
  

There is a watchdog group that has compiled a great deal of information on the antics of Congress especially earmarks. They call themselves "Citizens Against Government Waste". They are the source of the "Legistorm" earmark tables. They have quite a few articles throughout their web site. Most are well written and informative. One very informative one is called "All About Pork". You can either print it out or download it as a PDF file. It is long but does an excellent job at explaining the Pork process, it's history, and why Pork is so dangerous. It is well documented as well. The link to it follows:

The CongressOfHope.com plans to better educate voters as to how the earmark process works. In the meantime the following short video (86 seconds) will give you another glimpse.