Earmarks. What Are They and Why?

A Congressional earmark is an appropriation of money attached to a spending bill which must be spent as marked, or earmarked. By custom, each Member of Congress is allowed to add some earmarks usually for his or her own district, to any spending bill. Those additions are not checked or reviewed and sometimes are simply outrageous. Yet in a free and open system where “one hand washes th other” this kind of practice is bound to happen.

When were earmarks first used? I don’t know but you can be pretty sure they were not used prior to the speakership of “Mighty Joe” Cannon. 1903 to 1911. He was called “Mighty Joe” because he was the most powerful speaker we ever had. As Speaker, he appointed all the committee membership. He designated the chairman of each committee. At that time, members of a committee did not speak until spoken to by the chairman. And Speaker Cannon allotted all new bills to the committee of his choice.

The Speaker and a small cadre of committee chairmen RULED the House of Representatives as it never had been before or since. In other words, you pretty much had to go along to get along. The House has undertaken various reforms ever since he was replaced. There are still vestiges of his rule. Speaker Cannon would not allow a newly elected member to make a speech on the House floor during his first year in office. And, the new member’s maiden speech had to have the PRIOR approval of the Speaker. There would have been no earmarks in Mighty Joe’s tenure. Note: Wikipedia says he was known as “Uncle Joe” but I have also seen him referred to as “Mighty Joe” which I think is more accurate.

Earmarks must have the tacit approval of the majority of each chamber in the Congress. As you can easily imagine, if the House or Senate leadership did not want an earmark by a member of the opposing party, that would be easy enough to accomplish as well as stopping one by a member of the dominate party. Earmarks therefor flourish as a form of gentlemen ’s agreement. Or a general recognition of what goes around comes around. The main reason for earmarks having such bad publicity is the abuse some members have put them to.

Senator Ted Stevens, GOP of AK is the one who earmarked $200 million to build a bridge to serve about 70 residents who are now served by a ferry boat. It’s the Bridge to Nowhere. House member John Murtha, Dem of PA, is the current reigning King of Earmarks. He has the very unsavory habit of accepting campaign contributions from ALL the recipients of his earmarks, a practice even I find disconcerting.

For the most part, earmarks are well used. Sometimes even the best intended earmark is questionable. I like to remind readers of one in my own home state and local district. The publicly owned Louisville Zoo now has one of the nation’s finest small gorilla parks. It cost $30 million. The city, county and state of KY each put up $5 million and the local congressperson earmarked $15 million to finish the project. If you believe zoos and aquariums are educational tools, then it is surely an aid to educating and understanding one magnificent animal species, the highly endangered Western (Africa) Highland Gorilla. (gorilla gorilla beringei).
www.gorillafund.org...

I attribute the recent growth in the use of earmarks to the Reagan Revolution. He (and Republicans that followed him) gutted the United States Civil Service that formerly “watched” over America and would have been a professional source of recommendations to the Executive Branch for needed improvements and additions to our national infrastructure. We no longer have that, so it is up to each of the 435 Congresspersons to fill that empty space in governance. Unfortunately, it is now a ad hoc system where under the Civil Service it was well studied and planned. But what the hey, that’s democracy at work!

And too, the reason it is used by 94 of the 100 US senators is that there are all too many projects that get lost in the $3.1 T. annual Federal budgets. Do not think for ONE SECOND that Presidents are not using EARMARKS all day, every day. And THAT is why earmarks will continue. I’ve seen some earmarks in KY for $15,000 to finish remodeling a small town post office. Yes, if the earmark says, payable only to a local contractor and there is but ONE local contractor, then that is NOT good. I am now worried that open and competitive bidding might have finished the same job for much less than the earmarked amount.

But what the heck, does not Haliburton routinely steal millions from the DoD with cover from VP Cheney? Why not let some little guys into the stealing game? Why do only the Big Boys get to steal from the Fed Treasury? Hey, I’m an equal opportunity stealing type! And by all means, let’s do some Set Asides on this stealing too.

[edit on 2/17/2008 by donwhite]