As House Republicans meet on Wednesday to discuss their plans for next year, three of them are attempting to bring back the practice of earmarking.
As the Daily Signal reports, GOP representatives John Culberson, Mike Rogers, and Tom Rooney have sponsored a rules amendment that “would bring back legislative earmarks for some government agencies, including the Department of Defense, the Army Corps of Engineers, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Bureau of Reclamation.”
The Daily Signal also mentions that if the measure gets approved, “lawmakers would be able to request earmarks once again as long as the sponsoring member is identified, the earmarks initiate in committee, and they don’t increase spending.”
This contrasts with a policy the House GOP first adopted in 2010, when its caucus adopted a one-year ban on earmarks after they became synonymous with government waste and corruption. They eventually banned them in advance of officially assuming the House majority later that year, after the Tea Party wave helped Republicans take the speaker’s gavel.
Before that period, members of Congress used them to tell government agencies how they should spend their money, often focusing on pet projects for their specific districts. Examples range from the federal funding of surveillance cameras to the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere” sponsored by Rep. Don Young of Alaska.
But this isn’t the first time politicians have tried to revive the practice. In 2012, Young offered a similar pro-earmark amendment but failed to pass the measure. Rooney himself garnered bipartisan praise after he pitched the idea to the House Rules Committee in September.
Supporters of earmarks say they are needed to help broker deals on Capitol Hill.
“Eliminating earmarks altogether has diminished Congress’ ability to solve hard problems,” Jason Grumet, president of the Bipartisan Policy Center, wrote in a November articlefor the Washington Post. “The give and take that is often necessary to overcome entrenched differences is impossible if there is nothing to give or take.”
Earlier this year, Alabama representative Bradley Byrne said: “It always perplexed me as to why we would want unelected government bureaucrats making decisions about how we spend money in our districts rather than people who were elected by the people of the United States.”
Budget hawks, however, are very displeased with the development.
David McIntosh, president of the Club for Growth, told the Hill that “this is a test of whether Republicans are listening to the American people.”
“It’s been barely a week since voters sent a resounding rejection of Washington insider politics and yet House Republicans are already on the verge of proving they’re tone deaf,” he said.
Heritage Action CEO Michael Needham also noted in a statement on Monday that “any attempt to roll back the longstanding ban on congressional earmarks — the lubricant that empowers politicians to cut bad deals — would amount to a rebuke of [anti-corruption] voters. Americans deserve an honest, transparent government that is working for everyone, not simply doling out favors to a well connected few.”
