Earmark Enablers
March 7th, 2008 by Peter SudermanIn today’s Potomac Watch column, Kim Strassel provides yet another reminder of the overall sad state of GOP elected representatives:
Many [GOP legislators] remain ambivalent about [John McCain] — not because they question his conservatism, but out of resentment that he may get in the way of their earmarks.
This has resulted in a behind-the-scenes brawl, as spend-happy Republicans resist efforts by wiser heads to fall in behind Mr. McCain’s anti-earmark message. At best, the spenders risk an embarrassing pummeling by their own nominee that could hurt them in their own re-election campaigns. At worst, they could undercut one of Mr. McCain’s more persuasive messages.
They shouldn’t count on Mr. McCain cutting them slack. He’s always reveled in publicly humiliating pork-barrelers, including those in his party, and seems gleeful at the prospect of using his new podium to continue his crusade.
For a variety of reasons, conservatives went along — or at least put up too little resistance — to Republican spending over the last few years. And during that time, plenty of GOP lawmakers grew to enjoy the power of pork. It’s unfortunate that it was tolerated for so long, and conservatives deserve a substantial share of the blame for not protesting excessive spending by the Bush White House and the Republican congress. But though past failures will certainly make the current battle more difficult, I don’t think it should be sworn off.
It’s of course true that earmarks make up a relatively small portion of the total federal budget. But they also represent a culture of waste, and, even more importantly, they open the door to all sorts of spending shenanigans, in which legislators reward friendlies with giant taxpayer sponsored windfalls. The thing that concerns me as much or more than the spending is the soft corruption to which earmarking leads. Earmarks make political handouts far too easy.
Which, of course, is one of the reasons why FreedomWorks is calling on every legislator — of either party — to sign the No Earmark Pledge. There are many, many areas in which the government could and should cut spending, but most of them aren’t politically palatable right now. The crusade against earmarks (and what they allow and represent), however, has momentum right now, and would provide — at the very least — a strong sign that legislators are taking concerns about government waste seriously.
March 7th, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Gotta say, Peter, I’m impressed by your commitment to this issue, which I wholeheartedly agree with. Kudos for highlighting this:
Absolutely! This earmark pledge is good because it’s a simple and effective way to draw attention to what you rightly call the “culture of waste.” Here’s an action item suggestion. You have a lot of members. Send them some phone numbers! Have your local chapters start calling their reps, ask them if they’re signing the pledge, and if not, find out why. Then start publishing responses here. Do some calls yourself and tell us what the reps say. You could do like a weekly update, even have an earmarks “page” where you list everyone by state and their positions.
March 8th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Hugh Webster, Republican candidate for North Carolina’s 13th Congressional District, was proud to sign the “No Earmark’s pledge Thursday, March 6, 2008.