sws4420
02-16-2008, 06:39 AM
Only a dozen House members and half as many senators declined to play in Congress' pork barrel playground last year by refusing to ask for home state projects, a Washington-based watchdog group disclosed Wednesday.
Their more than 500 colleagues easily filled the gap, obtaining more than $18 billion worth of these so-called earmarks, according to a database assembled by Taxpayers for Common Sense, a budget watchdog group that advocates sharply curbing the practice.
A familiar club of old-school lawmakers on the pork-dispensing appropriations committees send home the lion's share of the loot, with the most adroit earmarkers obtaining well more than $100 per resident in projects and grants for their states.
The champion is Republican Ted Stevens, who has represented Alaska in the Senate for 40 years and is a former Appropriations Committee chairman who obtained the lion's share of the $345 million in earmarks his state is getting this year. Alaska's earmarks in 2008 amount to $506 for every resident of the state.
A close second is current Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., whose efforts for his state are legendary. Byrd got $330 million this year for West Virginia, which ranks third in terms of pork dollar per resident at $198.
Hawaii, represented by Democrat Daniel Inouye, another "old bull" appropriator, will get $226 dollars per resident in earmarked dollars.
States with larger populations get far less in earmarked money per capita. Massachusetts, for instance, will get just $34 per resident.
Most of the data is gleaned from reports issued by Congress listing the names of lawmakers obtaining earmarks. In many cases, more than one member of a state delegation requested the same earmark. That makes it difficult to measure exactly who the most aggressive earmarkers are since several lawmakers can claim credit.
Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., is another top practitioner, obtaining $290 million in solo earmarks and a whopping $837 million in earmarks requested along with others.
In the House, John Murtha, D-Pa., who chairs the appropriations panel that funds the Defense Department, obtained $160 million in solo earmarks, followed by Jerry Lewis of California, top Republican on the full Appropriations Committee, with $110 million in solo earmarks.
"The earmarking process in Congress has become a symbol of a broken Washington," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, one of the few lawmakers who doesn't seek them.
The practice of earmarking money for pet projects back home has exploded in recent years, though the number and cost of earmarks this year is down from the record when Republicans most recently controlled Congress.
New reforms require lawmakers who obtain earmarks to identify themselves and attest that they don't get any financial reward from them. However, the role of lobbyists in obtaining earmarks and the influence of campaign contributions in the process has reform groups still crying foul.
Opinions vary, but the most commonly accepted definition of an earmark is a line-item project not requested by the president but inserted into spending legislation.
They come in countless varieties. Job training programs, grants to police departments and nonprofit groups that help the poor, improvements to military bases, renovations to historic buildings and research grants for home-district colleges are just a few.
Most lawmakers avidly defend their own earmarks, even as they acknowledge that their cost and number — as well as the lobbying efforts to obtain them — are out of control.
A few, like Boehner, simply don't participate in the game.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a heavy favorite to win his party's presidential nomination, doesn't ask for pet projects and promises to wage war on them if voters put him in the White House.
Three Democratic senators, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia and Claire McCaskill of Missouri, were the only members of their party to eschew the practice last year.
"Earmarks are an unfortunate way to spend money," Feingold said. "So I've never done it."
House Republicans have launched an election-year assault on earmarks, calling for an immediate moratorium on the practice and the appointment of a panel to recommend further reforms.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has rebuffed calls for a moratorium, but promises further reforms.
In the interim, more lawmakers are promising to give up earmarks. Twenty-two House members have said they won't ask for them, according to Club for Growth, which seeks to elect lawmakers opposed to tax and spending increases. They include prominent Democrat Henry Waxman of California, chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
"We have a problem in Congress," Waxman said. "Congressional spending through earmarks is out of control."
Others giving up their pork include: Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Jim DeMint, R-S.C.; and Reps. Paul Ryan, R-Wis.; Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas; Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Eric Cantor, R-Va.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/mochila/Only_18_lawmakers_shunned_pet_proje_02132008.html
Their more than 500 colleagues easily filled the gap, obtaining more than $18 billion worth of these so-called earmarks, according to a database assembled by Taxpayers for Common Sense, a budget watchdog group that advocates sharply curbing the practice.
A familiar club of old-school lawmakers on the pork-dispensing appropriations committees send home the lion's share of the loot, with the most adroit earmarkers obtaining well more than $100 per resident in projects and grants for their states.
The champion is Republican Ted Stevens, who has represented Alaska in the Senate for 40 years and is a former Appropriations Committee chairman who obtained the lion's share of the $345 million in earmarks his state is getting this year. Alaska's earmarks in 2008 amount to $506 for every resident of the state.
A close second is current Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., whose efforts for his state are legendary. Byrd got $330 million this year for West Virginia, which ranks third in terms of pork dollar per resident at $198.
Hawaii, represented by Democrat Daniel Inouye, another "old bull" appropriator, will get $226 dollars per resident in earmarked dollars.
States with larger populations get far less in earmarked money per capita. Massachusetts, for instance, will get just $34 per resident.
Most of the data is gleaned from reports issued by Congress listing the names of lawmakers obtaining earmarks. In many cases, more than one member of a state delegation requested the same earmark. That makes it difficult to measure exactly who the most aggressive earmarkers are since several lawmakers can claim credit.
Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., is another top practitioner, obtaining $290 million in solo earmarks and a whopping $837 million in earmarks requested along with others.
In the House, John Murtha, D-Pa., who chairs the appropriations panel that funds the Defense Department, obtained $160 million in solo earmarks, followed by Jerry Lewis of California, top Republican on the full Appropriations Committee, with $110 million in solo earmarks.
"The earmarking process in Congress has become a symbol of a broken Washington," said House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, one of the few lawmakers who doesn't seek them.
The practice of earmarking money for pet projects back home has exploded in recent years, though the number and cost of earmarks this year is down from the record when Republicans most recently controlled Congress.
New reforms require lawmakers who obtain earmarks to identify themselves and attest that they don't get any financial reward from them. However, the role of lobbyists in obtaining earmarks and the influence of campaign contributions in the process has reform groups still crying foul.
Opinions vary, but the most commonly accepted definition of an earmark is a line-item project not requested by the president but inserted into spending legislation.
They come in countless varieties. Job training programs, grants to police departments and nonprofit groups that help the poor, improvements to military bases, renovations to historic buildings and research grants for home-district colleges are just a few.
Most lawmakers avidly defend their own earmarks, even as they acknowledge that their cost and number — as well as the lobbying efforts to obtain them — are out of control.
A few, like Boehner, simply don't participate in the game.
Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., a heavy favorite to win his party's presidential nomination, doesn't ask for pet projects and promises to wage war on them if voters put him in the White House.
Three Democratic senators, Russ Feingold of Wisconsin, Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia and Claire McCaskill of Missouri, were the only members of their party to eschew the practice last year.
"Earmarks are an unfortunate way to spend money," Feingold said. "So I've never done it."
House Republicans have launched an election-year assault on earmarks, calling for an immediate moratorium on the practice and the appointment of a panel to recommend further reforms.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has rebuffed calls for a moratorium, but promises further reforms.
In the interim, more lawmakers are promising to give up earmarks. Twenty-two House members have said they won't ask for them, according to Club for Growth, which seeks to elect lawmakers opposed to tax and spending increases. They include prominent Democrat Henry Waxman of California, chairman of the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
"We have a problem in Congress," Waxman said. "Congressional spending through earmarks is out of control."
Others giving up their pork include: Sens. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., and Jim DeMint, R-S.C.; and Reps. Paul Ryan, R-Wis.; Jeb Hensarling, R-Texas; Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., and Eric Cantor, R-Va.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/mochila/Only_18_lawmakers_shunned_pet_proje_02132008.html