WASHINGTON—Key House Democrats are moving forward with plans to bring back earmarks—taxpayer-funded special interest projects once dubbed “the gateway drug to federal spending addiction”—although Senate Republicans show no signs of easing their opposition to the practice.
House Appropriations Committee Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) met Jan. 28 with her panel’s subcommittee leaders and a number of members facing tough reelection battles in November to discuss restoring earmarks—rechristened as “community projects”—that were banned by congressional Republicans in 2011.
“Chairwoman Lowey and Appropriations subcommittee chairs had a constructive discussion with a large group of freshmen and other members yesterday afternoon,” a knowledgeable House Democratic aide who spoke on background told The Epoch Times on Jan. 29.
“There is general support for increased congressional involvement in funding community projects and for reforms to ensure public trust in such a process. Conversations on moving forward with community project funding in the fiscal year 2021 appropriations bills will continue in the coming days,” the aide said.
Appropriations Committee Benefits
Earmarks were often obscure spending measures buried in congressional appropriations sought by individual senators or representatives for projects in their state or district.Earmarks have been around for decades but were banned due to multiple scandals in which members of Congress used the measures illegally to benefit campaign donors, friends, and family members. Several House members went to jail for crimes linked to earmarks in the early 2000s.
Earmarks were for many years anonymous, but, when names of the sponsors were made public from 2008 to 2011, “the 81 members of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, representing 15 percent of Congress, got 51 percent of the earmarks and 61 percent of the money,” Schatz told The Epoch Times.
Avoiding Chaos
Democratic campaign strategists interviewed by The Epoch Times were circumspect about the prospect of earmarks returning.“As a rule of thumb, I am in favor of re-installing earmarks. I would much prefer the elected members of Congress making the spending decisions instead of the unelected bureaucrats of the Trump administration,” said Jim Manley, former communications director for then-Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
“However, I think it would be better to put this aside until next year, as Democrats don’t need any unnecessary distractions as we work toward keeping the House and defeating Trump.”
The problem, Critchley said, is that “the system may be cleaner without them, but it’s also broken. Since members can afford to be unbending purists, it’s harder to get anything done.”
‘Lipstick on a Pig’
Republicans remain adamantly opposed to bringing back earmarks for any reason.“You can put lipstick on a pig, but it’s still just a pig,” Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa), the Senate’s most prominent foe of wasteful spending, told The Epoch Times on Jan. 29.
Republican strategists and anti-waste advocates interviewed by The Epoch Times were aghast at the prospect of earmarks being revived.
“Republicans tried this when they were in power in the House. Fortunately, they were quickly criticized for the effort and subsequently dropped the plan. Now, Democrats are trying to bring them back.”
“This shows that earmarks went away ... because it was the will of the people and politicians were no longer rewarded for bringing home the bacon. This is becoming like a game of whack-a-mole.”
“Earmarks are the broken windows of corruption and overspending. If we don’t stop earmarks, we will never reform the big spending challenges,” he said.
“Earmarks—tax dollars given to a congressman to shower on his political supporters—buy his or her vote for a bill they would otherwise oppose. They are bribes.”
That earmarks may now be returning “reaffirms that Congress has no will to balance the budget, tackle the debt, or cut any aspects of federal spending,” Darling said.
