More Lawmakers Give Up Earmarks
By SAM HANANEL
Associated Press
January 22, 2008
WASHINGTON (AP) -- A growing number of lawmakers in Congress are voluntarily giving up one of the biggest perks of office -- at the risk of alienating their constituents.
More than 20 members of the House and Senate have vowed not to seek any new earmarks for their districts, saying they won't take advantage of a system pilloried for wasteful spending on projects such as the Alaskan ''bridge to nowhere'' and a teapot museum in North Carolina.
''There's a growing awareness that the system is broken and we aren't going to fix it unless some of us start taking a stand,'' said Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., a third-term congressman who decided last year to stop requesting so-called pork-barrel projects.
Kline is part of a mostly Republican group of lawmakers opting out of a system they say is rife with abuse in spite of the promise of an overhaul. The list includes Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., Jim DeMint, R-S.C., and Tom Coburn, R-Okla., who for years have criticized earmarks as wasteful. They want to end a process in which earmarks are often based not on their own merit but on the clout and seniority of the member making the request.
Yet Kline has faced criticism back home, where some local officials weren't pleased to find out how much his stand is going to cost. A majority of commissioners on the Scott County Board in Shakopee, Minn., said they were disappointed that Kline wouldn't seek earmarks for a new county road needed to link Interstate 35W with a busy regional highway.
''I told him I'd prefer that he continue to work within the system while fighting it,'' said Jon Ulrich, a commissioner. ''The projects that we were requesting were very worthy projects.''
Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill, a freshman Democrat, is facing similar scrutiny for her refusal to request earmarks during her first year in office. Fellow Democratic Rep. Emanuel Cleaver of Kansas City said her stance is costing his constituents money that will just end up benefiting people outside Missouri.
''The reality is if I decided not to fight for earmarks, tax dollars paid by residents of my district would not go to pay off our national debt,'' Cleaver said. ''The money would merely go to another state.''
McCaskill defends her decision, saying other worthy government programs that have broader appeal get slashed while the cost of earmarks continues to soar.
''Is the program for Head Start more important than an individual roof on an individual day care center?'' McCaskill said. ''What we should be doing is focusing the money on the programs that touch the most people in the most efficient and effective way.''
Widespread criticism of the earmark process hasn't stopped the vast majority of lawmakers from requesting them. The massive spending bill passed by Congress in December had nearly 9,800 earmarks at a total cost of more than $10 billion.
>> Continued -- Page 1 2
Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
| 
