Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock


Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict


Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links


Regional News


News Publications

Earmarks: Talking the talk, but refusing to walk the walk
Posted by: McQ on Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Congress, on both sides of the isle, has been talking a good game against earmarks in public, but they've also been quietly talking to federal agencies urging them to demand those porky projects they favor and have previously earmarked still be funded through those agencies:
Members of Congress quietly have been calling federal agencies demanding their pet projects still be funded weeks after they swore off pork-barrel spending, the Bush administration says.

In response, administration officials have signaled they ignore many of those requests — a move that thrills fiscal conservatives who have called on the president to take that step. But it's likely to irk congressional spending committees because it may threaten 95 percent of pork-spending projects, or "earmarks."

"Some of your offices have begun to receive requests from some congressional offices asking that the department continue to fund programs or activities that received earmarked funds in prior years," the Department of Energy's chief of staff, Jeffrey Kupfer, wrote in a Feb. 2 internal memo. A check by The Washington Times of other agencies turned up similar reports of phone calls — from congressional offices of both parties.
Here's the key point and how most earmarks are surviving the process to "out" them and make them visible:
The administration's recent action is aimed at earmarks slipped into the reports that accompany spending bills, which the Congressional Research Service says account for more than 95 percent of pork projects.

Congress votes on the bills but not the reports. Yet most agencies afforded the reports the force of law — until now.
So essentially, the "reports" went unseen and unexamined. And any Congressman or woman could simply add them to any spending bill. As noted, agencies, because the spending bill and the reports came from Congress, treated the reports as law.

Well, no more:
The administration's case was bolstered by a federal appeals court ruling last month that the reports do not have the force of law.
As Sen. DeMint says:
"We may have totally changed the paradigm on how the federal government spends money," said Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican, who has led the congressional fight on the issue. "For years, the risk has been on the agency side — if they don't comply they're going to lose their budget. Now the risks shift to the member."
Or said another way, members can no longer use loss of budget as leverage to force spending on earmarks attached to agency budgets. Additionally, now members have to justify their spending upfront with their name attached for all to see.

Sunshine and transparency ... what a concept.
Last week, Mr. Bush declared open war on the report earmarks, bringing a foot-high stack of the add-ons with him to a speech in Manassas.

"Let that sun shine in. It's called transparency," Mr. Bush said. "If the members of Congress think it's a good idea, then they ought to vote it up or down and then send it to my desk so I know full well that there's been full scrutiny in Congress."
Excellent. That only bodes well for you and me and less well for the porkers in Congress who have raided the treasury at will in the past to fund their pet projects in an attempt to ensure their re-election.
Return to Main Blog Page

Previous Comments to this Post 

Let’s face it.

Pelosi is a failure.

After all the crap with the military airplanes she is just another political hack.
Now the Congress is running on either without her (outta control) or with her (hypocrit). Perhaps she should hire Mandy.
Written By: Neo
URL: http://

Earmark Intelligence Committee spending for Afghanistan war.

The agencies(e.g. USAID) were just funding tools for the member.
Written By: sa
URL: http://
"I’m never more interested in, and excited about, the Republican Party than when they are the opposition Party."
- Jon Henke
Leading Republicans suddenly concerned about spending restraint and transparency? Huh. How about that.
Written By: Bryan Pick

Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Vicious Capitalism


Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks