Earmark Spending in 2011

Published December 23, 2015

There is a big showdown coming on Capitol Hill, not only on the Bush tax cuts, but the low hanging fruit we call earmarks; that spending members of Congress request for their pet projects often on behalf of campaign contributors.

Republicans, after an eight year addiction under President Bush, have agreed to a two year moratorium on earmarks in an effort to hold down spending.

Many Democrats say earmarks don't matter and have no intention of cutting the roughly 7,000 projects that litter the federal budget each year, projects incumbents often sell to voters as evidence of their ability to 'bring home the bacon'. They also say earmarks are merely symbolic, a convenient way for members to appear fiscally responsible while wasting money in other areas.

Here are five reasons they're wrong - earmarks do matter!

1. True, earmarks are only 1% of the federal budget, but look at it this way - that $16 billion dollars in earmarks equals the median federal income tax paid by 6.9 million Americans.

That's right, you'd have to fill the Rose Bowl in Pasadena 75 times with a capacity crowd just to pay for what Congress considers pocket change. That's the blood, sweat and taxes from almost seven million citizens to pay for programs that don't compete against other government priorities for your money.

2. Earmarks provide an unlevel political playing field.

"They protect members," says former CBO Director Douglas Holtz Eakin. "If you've got earmarks and you're safe back home, that's different than some other guy who takes a tough vote to cut some other spending. So it corrupts the budget process in a very fundamental way."

3. Earmarks encourage overspending.

"They're a gateway drug to a spending addiction. Once you have an earmark in a bill - you feel obligated to vote for it, no matter how bloated it becomes," says Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Arizona.

4. A moratorium may actually restore voters' confidence in Congress.

"Ultimately, it's a matter of trust," says budget analyst Brian Riedle of the Heritage Foundation. "Taxpayers are offended when they find their tax dollars are going to tattoo removal shops and Grateful Dead archives. They aren't going to trust Congress to make decisions on Medicare, Social Security, and anti poverty programs, if they feel that's where the savings are going to go."

5. Corruption. Lawmakers funnel millions of your tax dollars to companies that shower incumbents with campaign donations. Congress of course denies there is any trade, or so called "pay to play", but watchdogs say the evidence is obvious: big donors often receive big earmarks.

"Earmarks are bought and sold by lobbyists," says Riedle. "You are not distributing government projects by merit, but the highest campaign contributor."

Bottom line, experts say if Congress can't cut the low hanging fruit, there is no way they'll agree on cutting marginal programs or the really controversial stuff like Social Security and Medicare. Look for a big fight over the 7,000 earmarks worth $9 billion contained in Fiscal Year 2011 spending bills between now and January 1st.

How much will Fiscal Year 2011 earmark spending cost you? Click here to find out.

URL

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/earmark-spending-in-2011