July 7, 2008 -
July 14, 2008 • Vol. 13, No. 41 Download Now! (pdf)

 

EDITORIAL
An Indecent Decision
by Matthew Continetti

SCRAPBOOK
Buckminster Fuller, Justice Anthony Kennedy

ARTICLES
Closing the Enthusiasm Gap
by Stephen F. Hayes

Very Retiring Republicans
by Fred Barnes

McCain, Obama, & the Catholic Vote
by Ryan T. Anderson

History's Fall Guys
by Dean Barnett

Shaken and Stirred Up
by Reuben F. Johnson

A Heaping Bowl of Mush
by Philip Terzian

Laughter at the Supreme Court
by Lee Ross

FEATURES
L'Affaire Enderlin
by Anne-Elisabeth Moutet

BOOKS & ARTS
Talking Politics
by Christopher Hitchens

Isn't That Special?
by Andrew Roberts

Boris the Good
by Andrew Nagorski

After the Fox
by Edward Short

Unholy Thoughts
by Stefan Beck

Speak the Speech
by Judy Bachrach

Rhymers' Dictionary
by John Simon

Keeping Score
by James M. Banner Jr.

Here's My Plan
by Matthew Continetti

Identity Theft
by Edith Alston

Cops on the Case
by Jon L. Breen

CASUAL
Lost in the Personasphere
by Andrew Ferguson

PARODY
Fred Flintstone wins McCain's eco-challenge


« Iran's Military Mafia | Main | Required Reading 05/30/2007 »

House Backtracks Futher on Earmarks; CNN Notices Abuses

The Democrats promised reform when they took back Congress, but those promises continue to unravel. Though they came to power promising to take the mystery out of earmarking, and require full disclosure, Appropriations Committee Chairman David Obey recently said that earmarks will only be inserted in legislation at the last minute--immediately before final passage:

House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) said Tuesday he would not include earmarks in appropriations bills until they reach conference, angering some of his Republican counterparts and prompting accusations that Democrats were going against their pledge to reform and bring transparency to the earmarking process...
Any such earmarks dropped into the conference report will comply with House disclosure rules, Obey promised.
“If we choose to insert earmarks in conference, it will be under the rules that require every one to be inserted by name,” he said.
But Republicans complain that Obey’s decision effectively bars Members from attempting to strike individual earmarks on the House floor, and they fear Democrats could use the threat of losing earmarks as a club over Republicans.

Under the rules adopted by House Democrats at the start of the Congress, pork-barrel projects inserted into conference reports are subject to the same disclosure requirements as earmarks in other legislation. However, conference reports are pretty much never amended on the House floor, removing the ability to strip egregious wastes of taxpayer money. Furthermore, conference reports are typically voted on mere hours after they are agreed to; there's rarely enough time to read the report--even if you can get your hands on it.

It's also hard to take Chairman Obey's promises on disclosure seriously, since he asserted the right a few months ago to insert a whole class of earmarks without any disclosure at all. The underpinning for the argument seems to be that when a committee chair introduces a bill with earmarks, he isn't really a person bound by disclosure rules--he's more of an institution.

The backtracking on earmarks hasn't gone entirely unnoticed; CNN recently produced this piece on the failure of Congressional Democrats to clean up the institution as promised. Obey and his counterpart in the Senate--Robert Byrd--feature prominently:

The more things change...

Email the article House Backtracks Futher on Earmarks; CNN Notices Abuses to a friend:

Send this article to:


Your email address:


Message (optional):


 
Contributors
Editor:
Michael Goldfarb

Contributors:
Dean Barnett
Jennifer Chou
Brian Faughnan
Ulf Gartzke
Reuben F. Johnson
Thomas Joscelyn
Stuart Koehl
John Noonan
Bill Roggio
Samantha Sault
Search
Archives
Contact
wws@weeklystandard.com
Categories
Feeds: Atom | RSS
[What is this?]
Powered by
Movable Type 3.2