Lesson II: Checks on Beef and Pork Abuses

Earmarks can be good for democracy. This is the first lesson we must not forget. But our second lesson must focus on the need to check routine abuses.

Instead of spending 41 billion dollars for obscure pet projects, a 'Constituent Choice" earmarking program spending only ten dollars per capita, half under the transparent coordination of district Representatives and half under the transparent coordination of Senators, would cost only six billion dollars.

In order to relieve the congressional leadership from the temptations of using the threat of eliminating or cutting the "Constituent Choice" allotments as a way to blackmail or intimidate the ordinary members, there must be a mandate preserving these funds off-the-top regardless of other budget factors. This fair formula approach coupled with transparency will certainly reduce some of the awesome powers of the leadership; however, they will still hold monumental powers. Past budget and earmark abuses have been largely perpetrated by the leadership wielding their unchecked deal-making prerogatives.

This Lesson II on Earmarking will address the need for checks on routine appropriation abuses.

Inspect the "beef" before you check the "pork."

It is impossible to gauge the impact of the earmarking phenomenon without first focusing on the overall budget and appropriations process. Billions of dollars are earmarked out without names being attached during the regular budgeting process. To simplify the exposition let's call it "beef."

* Senator Howard Baker (R-Tennessee) was the earmarking progenitor of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Project in Tennessee. Even after President Jimmy Carter denounced the project as a blatant waste of the taxpayers' dollars, the boondoggle was continued until it had devoured more than eight billion dollars. On October 26, 1983, by refusing to appropriate an additional 1.5 billion dollars Congress finally sealed the sewer drainpipe.

* The Boston Congressional Delegation has served as guardians over the more than 14 billion dollar "Big Dig" boondoggle. This tunnel to rescue Boston from traffic congestion has gone on and on through investigations and obvious systemic corruption resulting in civilian fatalities. Right before our eyes, with considerable transparency, construction racketeering has profited mightily. But outspoken members of the Boston delegation, who in the early '80s announced that they felt duty bound to speak out against Black street crime in order to show that liberals were not soft on crime; these same civic saints have failed to confront the classic crimes related to this most favored Massachusetts earmark.

* Through the regular budget process, before the earmarks are discussed, Senator Robert Byrd has crammed his state of West Virginia with appropriations for federal facilities, many of which could have performed more efficiently and effectively in other locations. Add up the appropriations over the last 40 years and you enter the stratosphere of mega-billions.

These three cases illustrate costly choices that have been made in the closed circles of the top leadership. The record will further show that these same privileged few who carve up the beef later return for the greater share of the pork. Taxpayers must scrutinize the entire process. Citizens in this nation, which is proud of its democratic-capitalism, are amazingly derelict in their duty to review and scrutinize their investment in the national budget. Welfare families who are seen using their paltry monthly allotments to buy steaks in the supermarket are demonized. But over several decades kingpins in the Congress are left free to pass out billions of dollars in funding for worthless earmarked schemes.

And the Pentagon, which is the greatest vehicle for wasteful earmarking, refuses to be audited. We must remember that the earmarked projects which Congressman Duke Cunningham used to barter for homes and prostitutes were all Department of Defense concoctions.

The Department of Defense, which is responsible for the execution of the trillion-dollar War in Iraq, is weighted down with questionable expenditures, which constitute mainstream beef waste. Cheney's earmarks for Halliburton and Blackwater and many others hide under the cloak of national urgency contracting. Voters must not allow the new and exciting focus on pork earmarks to become a diversion channeling the demand for accountability away from 95 percent of the nation's annual appropriations. To make the budget safe for "Constituent Choice" items, the entire process must be vigorously examined.

Lesson III (To be continued): The Logistics of Constructively Implementing "Constituent Choice" earmarks.

Comments

[January]

So, Congress needs a boss? Do tell. I thought that was the Fourth Estate's job. Isn't that what it means to be the "Fourth Estate"?

Who is the boss of the Fourth Estate? They have no boss since the GOP administration has allowed media conglomeration limited only by what's for sale and how much individual corporate holders have to spend.

Time for a Fifth Estate? The Internet? Thank goodness truth has found a way to make an appearance.

[esl]

Senator Bayh and Congressman Ellsworth of IN, my representatives in Congress, have gotten almost $10 million in earmarks for Ameriqual, a company owned by Steve Chancellor, friend and patron of the Bush family. I wish someone would investigate earmarks going to this company which already is making huge profits from suppying MREs to the military. The company hires a number of retarded and handicapped people who already draw government checks. I bet the company does not pay them the going rate of pay but probably saves a ton of money throught that program, too. When are people going to wake up? The rich are stealing us blind and our representatives in Congress are the carpetbaggers delivering the money.

[Aaror]

Perhaps what we need is ways to reduce spending-including "historical," spending. Perhaps either an internet citizen's vote to reduce/eliminate funding for programs, or an ability for the House (which the constitution gives the power of the purse) to cut spending via some sort of petition, thereby bypassing leadership and committees.
The latter would just require a representitive to write up the spending which should be cut, and the amount is should be cut to. Then if the required number of other representatives signs it, the spending is cut-end of discussion. The leadership could make a new bill to restore the funding, but then another petition could cut it again.
Now the real doozy in my proposal: Allow a minority to cut funding. Why should 51% of the votes be the cutoff for spending? If 40% of the representatives (200) was the required number to cut spending, pork and pet projects would be harder to support. You could even assign reps random numbers for each petition, so that they could sign in secret, preventing the leadership from punishing someone for signing a petition.

[MAX1]

.

Congressman,

Which came first?
The Constitution or earmarks?

Which one is being ignored so as to preserve the other?

Since when is WARRANTLESS... LEGAL?
Since when is TORTURE... LEGAL?
Since when is FRAUD... LEGAL?

Just HOW are you supporting and defending the Constitution of the U.S.A. when you excuse and allow it's usurpation and willful violation by ANY member of our Federal Government?

More so, ANY failure to defend and support the Constitution's intent is not only a failure of one's duty, but an act of patriotic treason.

IMPEACH THE CRIMINALS NOW!
Support H. Res. 333
Where are your articles of impeachment?

.

[davefoc]

Very nice article. I expected some kind of partisan diatribe on the subject.

Of course it was also a little depressing. No matter which party gets in power, we're still going to have massive amounts of corruption. Unless there were enough people that got elected to congress with Mr. Owens since of reasonableness about all this. I don't see that happening in my life but it's was still nice to see that somebody in congress wasn't completely cynical. But maybe Mr. Owens is just as cynical as everybody else. I know I voted for a lot of Republicans over the years that have spent the last seven years savaging the resources of this country with their corruption and they all said nice things about being careful with the country's money also.

[Stoyver]

Great article! A little too abstruse for some, hence the "prok" comment. I was unaware of the amount of rank political manipulation that earmarks underwent. If only the public knew! If only they would pay attention. If only our broken corporate media would return to public service.

[Novista]

I guess I'll have to wait for Lesson III. Got to be a pony in there, somehow.

But as for my perusal of past history, all I can conclude is, federal government subsidy is just taking from some for some few favoured others. Complete with inefficiency and corruption.

Lincoln did it, and Wilson and FDR, though I guess earmarks was not the exact mechanism. Still, the principle was the same.

[suki21693]

"Earmarks can be good for democracy."

But massive crushing debt? Not so much.

[ebbtide]

Well I don't think I have ever eaten Prok. LOL

But I do eat bacon and pork tenderloin, pork loin and pork chops and it is very good.