REBECCA WAGE: Must reduce pork-barrel spending

Published online on Saturday, Oct. 17, 2009

The unsustainable federal government deficit should add a new sense of urgency to President Obama's pledge to cut pork-barrel spending. The Congressional Budget Office projects that the deficit, now 11% of the gross domestic product and higher than at any time since World War II, is on track to double in 10 years. The alarm bills should be ringing.

But are they? Recently the Senate debated the 2010 Pentagon spending bill, which already totals $626 billion. On top of that, senators added $2.7 billion of the most blatant form of pork barrel spending: special interest earmarks. Funding for earmarks is tacked on to the military spending bill for projects that were not requested by the Pentagon and are not subject to public review or hearing.

Why earmarks? Earmarks are used by incumbents to raise campaign contributions. Companies that receive earmarks all too often turn around and contribute to the member of Congress who made the earmark. It is pay-to-play politics and it's perfectly legal in Washington.

For example, individuals associated with Raytheon Corp and the University of Southern Mississippi donated to Sen. Thad Cochran's recent re-election campaign. In return, the Mississippi Republican earmarked $132 million in special projects that benefitted the University of Southern Mississippi and Raytheon, as well as other earmark recipients, in the current military spending bill, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Rep. Jerry Lewis, a Republican representing the area around San Bernardino County, received $13,800 in campaign contributions from employees of ESRI, a geographic information system company. To show his gratitude, he tacked on a $7 million pet project called Improving Support to the Warfighter, which integrates intelligence using geospatial analysis techniques.

If the Pentagon needed these or other earmarked projects, they would have asked for it. This clever and pervasive system works on both sides of the aisle, making any restriction on earmarks extremely unpopular.

These earmarked projects may be a waste of taxpayers' money, however they are a bargain compared to unrequested items added during committee markups for major weapons systems, such as additional C-17 cargo jets, F-22 stealth fighter planes and VH-71 presidential helicopters. Parts for these planes and helicopters are manufactured in almost every state and congressional district, so that any attempt to cut these projects meets fierce political resistance.

Including funding that goes to the Energy, Veterans and Homeland Security departments, total U.S. military spending amounts to nearly $1 trillion a year. The nation can't afford to spend billions of dollars on military projects that are not necessary for the nation's defense, all in the name of preserving incumbents' jobs. There are many other domestic projects far more deserving of these billions of dollars, such as health care or renewable energy.

A remedy for these wasteful and corrupt earmarks has been proposed. Last year, Congress passed legislation requiring members to publicly identify recipients of earmarks. And in April, Democratic Rep. Paul Hodes of New Hampshire introduced legislation that would break the link between campaign contributions and earmarks.

The Clean Law for Earmark Accountability Reform Act, HR 2038, prohibits a member of Congress from accepting a contribution from a person or company that had previously received an earmark from that member.

So far only 10 members of the House of Representatives have co-sponsored the bill and it has yet to be introduced in the Senate. However, both Sen. John McCain and President Obama have spoken out against the abuse of earmarks in the past and now both should get behind the Hodes bill.

With their support, and support from citizens outraged at the corruption of the political process in Washington, Congress could take an important first step toward ending the Capitol's unseemly and wasteful pay-to-play politics.