Earmarks: Good or Bad?
What are “earmarks,” and are they good or bad?
An earmark in the Federal budget is funding set aside for a specific project as opposed to a block of money appropriated by Congress to fund segments of Federal spending.
With block funding, an amount of money is appropriated for a purpose, for example to build roads. It is then divided up and spent on specific projects on a merit basis, as decided by those in charge of choosing the projects.
Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.), weighed in on earmarks last August in remarks to a group of constituents at a home in Granite Bay (attended by SactoDan). He illustrated the benefit of earmarks with the example of the Roseville Highway 80 overpass. It will finally be built because of an earmark in the budget. Had the money been appropriated as part of a block of funds, the Congressman pointed out that a bureaucrat would decide which projects got funded, thus the sorely needed overpass might not get built.
While this illustrates a clear benefit to earmarks, the recent Jack Abramoff scandal has caused the practice has come under fire. A recent article in the Washington Post (Hat tip: Flash Report) outlines the explosion of earmarks in the Federal budget, accompanied by a huge increase in lobbying.
An explosion of special interest funding engineered in part by lawmakers with close ties to lobbyists is drawing increased scrutiny as Congress moves to address concern about corruption that already has led to the conviction of a Republican House member and former GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff.
While earmarks do appear to have some specific benefits, it is naive to believe that corporations are not investing in lobbying for the potential huge rewards. Legislation that is positive to a particular company or industry’s position could have an impact in the billions of dollars. Since US businesses invest money where they get a return on investment, the mere fact that spending on lobbying is going up indicates they are getting something in return.
It is not illegal for Members of Congress to accept donations and favors from lobbyists under certain circumstances, and both Democrats and Republicans do it. Where it becomes illegal is when there is a direct correlation, or quid pro quo as it is called, between a contribution and a specific benefit to the contributor. This is commonly referred to as a bribe.
If there are specific abuses, they should be investigated and those involved should be prosecuted. Meanwhile reforms need to be put in place to protect the American taxpayers from the appearance that their government is for sale to the highest bidder.
Cross-posted at the SactoDan BLOG
January 27th, 2006 at 5:18 pm
K Street’s New Ways Spawn More Pork
An explosion of special interest funding engineered in part by lawmakers with close ties to lobbyis
January 28th, 2006 at 7:09 am
Earmarks, Good or Bad?
Since US businesses invest money where they get a return on investment, the mere fact that spending on lobbying is going up indicates they are getting something in return.