To be honest with you, as long as an earmark is appropriated under the federal authority granted in the Constitution, I don't have a problem with them. The earmarks that are open checks to fund cronies or a silly pet project are offensive. There is definitely a fine line; however eliminating earmarks isn't going to save this country from the towering debt.
Let me give you an example of a good earmark, since I have given you an example of a bad earmark. I have noted many times we pay 18.4 cents per gallon of gas for the federal fuel tax. This money shouldn't leave the district it was paid in, but the simple fact is, it does. Since it does, our representatives owe it to the people to make sure that the money is returned to the district, especially since roads are party of Article One Section 8. As long as we have a federal fuel tax to fund and maintain roads, I am for these types of earmarks.
However, the topic of earmarks does come with much caution. Believing Thomas Jefferson had the best vision for America as a founding father with James Madison also in the mix, Jefferson warned of the pet projects and how they would corrupt Congress.
In 1796, Jefferson wrote James Madison and warned him of the pet projects. “Other revenues will soon be called into their aid, and it will be the source of eternal scramble among the members, who can get the most money wasted in their State; and they will always get the most who are the meanest.” Of course, we have seen this meanness by some members.
However, we still have a problem. That problem is ensuring the tax dollars that are taken out of Congressional districts for legitimate projects like roads are returned. This is the main reason I am not on board with the Republicans who want to end earmarks all together. Earmarks offer transparency. Obviously, you can see them at work. How do we ensure this money is returned back to the district if the power to earmark is banned?
I recall a Sunday afternoon at my dinner table when Republican Congressional candidate Jeff Wisdom asked to drop by to share his economic plan with me. Jeff was very excited and wanted to run it past me before he presented it on the Vincent David Jericho radio show. From the moment I heard the plan, I knew Wisdom had a solid plan that would end wasteful pork barrel spending once and for all. While many people are applauding the Republicans efforts today, there is no guarantee wasteful spending will be a thing of the past. It really comes down to this.
As long as you send money to Washington, politicians of either party are going to look for ways to spend it. That's why we have earmarks, entitlements, bureaucracies, etc. Wisdom's plan put the government on a serious diet. First, no money was sent directly to Washington. Fuel and other taxes stayed put in the state. Therefore there was no need to count on a representative to ensure this money was returned to the district when the need arised. Secondly, we weren't nickel and dimed in taxes. Basically Wisdom's plan created a system of taxation that allowed Congress to create a federal budget within the limits established in the Constitution. Once that budget was ratified, each state would be sent a bill based on the percentage of their population.
For instance, if Missouri's total population is 2.6%, Missouri's bill to the federal government would be 2.6% of the federal budget. As well, the state would not be responsible if the federal government didn't live within the limits of their budgets. The budget would have to be balanced.
This is a responsible way of ending federal earmarks. Quite simply put, that money from the federal fuel tax we send to Washington for roads would never leave the state, and there would be no need to count on your elected representative to send it back to the district, which is what an earmark really does.
I guess to sum it up, the real problem here, even with earmarks banned, we are sending too much money to the federal government. Earmarks are just rhetoric these leaders are using as an illusion to make you think they are serious about cutting out wasteful spending, but the truth is, there is too much money going to Washington. Had the states stopped federal oppressive taxation and stood up for their rights rather than sell their states' rights for federal dollars we wouldn't even being having this discussion. If you want reform, don't beg for earmark reform. Demand tax reform. Stop money from leaving your district and your state so you don't have to hope it returns to the district.
And finally this from Berkeley Electronic Press:
Pork barrel spending is a drop in the budgetary bucket. Using data assembled by Citizens Against Government Waste, they show that total federal spending in 2008 due to earmarks was $17.2 billion, compared with discretionary spending (set annually by Congress) of approximately $1.1 trillion, entitlement spending (required by law) of more than $1.5 trillion, and spending on interest of more than $240 billion. Since 2000, pork spending has remained fairly even, while spending in other categories (e.g., defense, medicare/social security) has risen appreciably. Thus, “while increasing levels of pork may be symptomatic of a larger government spending problem, they are not the underlying cause.”
