Pork, Earmarks & Backpeddling Weasels: Our Congress In Action

Pork: Good Enough for Jefferson, and You

The frenzied push for legislation to abolish earmarks -- through which lawmakers slip money for local projects into big spending bills -- appears to have subsided. Cooler heads may yet prevail, and Congress may dodge another misguided reform effort.

But if the venerable pork barrel survives, it will be in part thanks to the arguments in a "Dear Colleague" letter circulated a couple of weeks ago by Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), a member of the House Appropriations Committee, urging sensible, modest adjustments.

Repetitive cycles of looking like action against unethical spending, pork barrel projects, earmarks, and other dirty little secrets of congress are underway only to find some excuse, process or way to weasel out of actually reforming the process. Will we ever see a congress that is willing to act in a principled manner?

Sure, "not every single project" funded by earmarks "can withstand robust scrutiny," he said. And yes, "one of our colleagues" -- former representative Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.) -- got caught taking bribes for earmarks, but "he will be going to jail."

The Duke is going to jail because he got caught... and had the last bit of personal dignity to stand up and take his lumps for his own behavior. Other congress critters are choosing to hide, duck, dodge and deny any type of breach of decency... while still running for office and status... and have no shred of decency left (or perhaps never had any ab initio).

Simpson said earmarking is virtually required by "Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7" of the Constitution. The Framers "strongly believed that Congress, not the President, should allocate funding" for federal government functions, he said. "Ending the practice of earmarking would transfer massive funding authority to the president and federal agencies, in defiance of the Constitution."

Bovine excrement in extremis! While the Constitution mandates funding be appropriated by congress, the manner in which it is handled is almost entirely a matter left to congress and the rules each house proposes in regard to appropriations, amendments and "sneaky little bastard ways" of playing games with the budget. If congress had a mind and a will to reform the process, it could... and certainly it SHOULD!

Indeed, this echoes Alexander Hamilton 's long-lost Federalist No. 394(b), in which some assert that he argued: "The national interest is better served when powerful members of congressional appropriations committees spend everyone's tax dollars on pet projects for the folks back home -- bridges, schools, computer labs, roads and so forth -- especially when local taxpayers don't feel like paying for them."

I am going to go back and read that particular section of the Federalist Papers... and review how I could have missed that particular interpretation and understanding of pork.

Earmarking has had a "positive impact," Simpson noted, "in my home state of Idaho. It's allowed the Idaho Congressional delegation to expand educational opportunities, improve the delivery of health care, and bring better drinking water to communities across our state."

But earmarks and pork spending has also allowed tons of money to be diverted from things like making sure levees are built in a proper manner, national disaster planning and civil defense, public health interventions for sanitation and disease prevention, etc., etc.

Precisely. So think about that when some folks talk about corruption. The Framers would thank you.

Bovine excrement in extremis! Somebody is busy urinating on our heads and claiming it is raining. I refer us all to the words of Old Honest Abe: "You can fool some of the people..."