Sen. Tom Coburn is concerned that the opportunity to eliminate earmarks, which the Oklahoma Republican aptly describes as the “gateway drug to federal spending addicition,” is being lost in a charade of congressional smoke and mirrors. Coburn thinks one way to force Congress to approve genuine earmark reform is for President Bush to become much more aggressive in resisting executive branch spending that is mandated by congressional earmarks. He has some other ideas for how Bush can be a player in the earmark reform debate and he described them today in a letter to Bush’s top budget guy, Office of Management and Budget director Rob Portman. Here’s the text of Coburn’s letter to Portman: The Honorable Rob Portman Director Office of Management and Budget 725 17th Street, NW Washington, DC 20503 Dear Mr. Portman, Like many Americans, I have been encouraged by the President s recent calls for Congress to not only reform the earmark process, but to reduce the total number and cost of earmarks. Making the earmark process more transparent and accountable is important, but the best reform is to reduce the number and cost of earmarks. In recent decades earmarks have become a cancer on the federal budget and the legislative process. While any earmark reduction is helpful, we need to pursue bolder measures. No physician, for instance, would stop at reducing a patient s cancer by 50 percent. As Congress considers earmark reform legislation in the coming weeks, I m convinced that the President s ongoing leadership in this area will be critical to ensuring that Congress produces something beyond token reform. The pledge made by the Chairmen of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees, Representative David Obey (D-WI) and Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV), respectively, to place a moratorium on all earmarks until a reformed process is put in place represents a welcome, but ambiguous and incomplete, commitment to reform. While I intend to do everything in my power to help my colleagues whether Republican or Democrat pass meaningful earmark reform, history suggests that Congress will pass just enough reform to claim it has achieved a reformed process before returning to the business as usual practices that voters rejected in November. The institutional and political factors that led to an explosion of earmarks and the phenomenon of the earmark favor factory and its related scandals were not unique to either party, and neither party in Congress has the capability and credibility to reform the earmark process without genuine bipartisan cooperation and the active involvement of the executive branch. I would therefore encourage the administration to consider the following measures that will both encourage Congress to pass meaningful earmark reform and advance the President s goal of cutting the number and cost of earmarks: 1) In light of the current earmark moratorium, immediately direct agencies to cancel nonessential earmarks that were appropriated in previousyears but received recurring funding. 2) Exercise the President s virtual line-item veto authority by directing agencies to ignore non-binding earmarks, like those that appear in committee report language or joint explanatory statements. 3) Direct agency officials to not implement backdoor earmark requests that are delivered by telephone or other indirect means and to create a public record of those requests. 4) Pledge to veto any earmark reform legislation that is weaker than the package passed by the House, which contains minimal but essential reforms. As you know very well, windows of opportunity to pass meaningful reform in Washington do not stay open indefinitely. I would urge the administration to be active, constructive and, when necessary, aggressive, participants in this process. What is at stake is not merely Congress reputation but our ability to put the federal government back on a sustainable fiscal course. For the past 20 years, earmarks have been the gateway to spending addiction in Congress. Earmarks have been extremely costly in their own right but the earmark process itself has kept government bigger and taxes higher than they might be otherwise. The earmark process has also been a debilitating distraction necessary for members and their staff. At a time when we are combating international terrorism and facing entitlement programs like Medicare and Social Security that are on the verge of bankruptcy, it is unconscionable for members to devote so much of their energy to activities that are often better left to local government or private entities. Thank you again for your commitment to serious earmark reform and spending reduction. I look forward to working with you to turn these priorities into accomplishments. Sincerely, Tom A. Coburn, M.D. United States Senator Earmarks Porkbusters Congress Democrats Corruption Bush GOP
