Feeding time in Congress

Well, that didn't take long:

WASHINGTON (AP) - Get out the trough, it's feeding time. Congress has decided that an election year with recession written all over it is not the time to be giving up those job-producing ``pork'' projects bemoaned by both parties' presidential candidates.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has quietly shelved the idea of a one-year moratorium on so-called earmarks, the $18 billion or so in pet projects that lawmakers sent to their home states this year. Senators in both parties have voted to kill the idea.

The California Democrat earlier had signaled her support for the idea of including no legislative earmarks in next year's budget. She pulled back in the face of resistance by Democratic allies and after the Senate turned a thumbs-down by a resounding 71-29 vote in mid-March.

Status quo reigns.

Status quo 1, Change 0

Senate old bulls late last night successfully blocked a reform measure that would have banned earmarks for a year. The vote was a setback for reformers and more importantly the American people.

By blocking the ban, the Senate's powerful old guard scored a victory for the status quo. Those who have desired change in the way the Senate conducts business lost.

Still, all is not entirely gloomy. The fact that the measure drew the support of all three Presidential contenders is a good sign. It is a signal that the issue has arrived with the public. Of course the Senate is always the last to realize these things, so it makes sense that reformers will have to continue pushing the issue to get it through the thick skulls of senators that America wants change.

The "cooling saucer" still works in that the Senate remains the most insulated. But sometimes as in this case, it is a real pain in the rear.

The Republicans who voted "no" on this measure read off as a who's who of the Senate porkers:

Bennett, Utah; Bond, Mo.; Brownback, Kan.; Bunning, Ky.; Cochran, Miss.; Coleman, Minn.; Collins, Maine; Craig, Idaho; Crapo, Idaho; Domenici, N.M.; Gregg, N.H.; Hagel, Neb.; Hatch, Utah; Hutchison, Texas; Lugar, Ind.; Murkowski, Alaska; Roberts, Kan.; Shelby, Ala.; Smith, Ore.; Snowe, Maine; Specter, Pa.; Stevens, Alaska; Vitter, La.; Voinovich, Ohio; Warner, Va.; Wicker, Miss.

It was nice to see GOP Leader and long time appropriator Mitch McConnell vote with the reform caucus for once. But some actual leadership would be nice as well, considering the man did not say one word in favor of the measure leading up to the vote. As our hero Braveheart says, "men don't follow titles, they follow courage." But then again, this is the Senate, not the fields of Falkirk. Baby steps I guess...

(Editor's note: The picture top right depicts Reid, Durbin and Schumer. They got top billing because they were the most vocal opponents. But the GOP had plenty of their own who hated the measure as you see in the roll call above. They were just more quiet about their position leading up to the vote. Their silence was mostly because this issue -- while it has bipartisan appeal -- is more important to a vocal section of the conservative base than it is to the liberal base. GOP anti-reformers were scared to be vocal about this so they waited in the shadows, cast their vote "nay" and then slunk away. Lame. Cowardly.)

Harry Reid's dim view of the Founders

Today in the Senate is ground zero for the earmark fight we have been covering here. As the moment of truth approaches, pork-barreling politicians are pulling out the heavy guns. Check out this laughable rhetoric from the Senate's fearless leader Harry Reid:

"As we look back in history, the Founding Fathers would be cringing to hear people talking about eliminating earmarks," Reid said.

Ummmm, yeah...Somehow I have trouble seeing Adams, Jefferson and Madison get all upset about eliminating a practice that led to the excess and corruption we have come to expect from our Congress. Bridges to Nowhere, Jack Abramoff-like super lobbyists, indoor rainforests, teapot and hippie museams...yes, this is the stuff of the Founding Fathers! Ah, Harry the Patriot, Defender of First Principles standing athwart history!

Forgive me, but a Congress that produces over 15,000 earmarks totaling $17 billion in one year seems to fall quite short of Jefferson's call for a "wise and frugal government."

Even Democrats get it

Missouri Democratic Senator Claire McCaskill took to the floor today to support the conservative amendment to eliminate pork barrel spending. Her remarks are pitch perfect. Kudos to McCaskill who is sure to get some flack from big spenders in her party.



Hat tip: Andy Roth

Reid's slip betrays truth behind pork barrel spending

As you know from previous posts, the Senate this week is ground zero in the battle between reformers and pork-hoarding Senate old bulls. Legislation to stop the earmarking practice in the Senate for a year has garnered the support of all three major Presidential candidates as well as that of an unusual list of Senators.

Usually reform measures like this are rapidly swept under the rug by the old guard, but much to their dismay this one looks like it won't be so easy because of the media attention brought by the Presidential candidates.

Still, the an unholy alliance of Republican and Democrat old bulls are pulling out all the stops. Harry Reid and Dick Durbin are smugly predicting another victory for the pro-pork alliance. During a press conference yesterday however, Reid had a quite unfortunate slip of the tongue:

"I hope that senators of good will on both sides of the aisle will step forward and say, 'We have an obligation to our clients — to our constituents,'" Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid pleaded to his colleagues.

Uh oh...cats out of the bag Harry. It is all about the clients. In Harry's case, the "clients" are the lobbyists who ask for earmark money for certain projects on behalf of their own clients. If Harry can't deliver for his clients then the lobbyists can't deliver for theirs'. And if nobody delivers, how does Harry get his campaign coffers enriched and how do the lobbyists attract more clients and how does the status-quo broken Congress continue?

UPDATE: Much more here from Heritage's The Foundry

Now everyone hates earmarks

A bill to eliminate the practice of congressional earmarking, AKA wasteful and corrupting pork barrel spending, is all of a sudden drawing a lot of attention. John McCain pledged his support and then the levy broke.

The AP reports:

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday joined Republican presidential candidate John McCain and a small band of GOP senators in making a run this week against the billions of dollars in home-state pet projects Congress funds each year.

Obama, locked in a head-to-head battle with Clinton for the Democratic nomination, was the first to declare through a spokesman Monday that he would support a one-year moratorium on so-called earmarks when it comes up for a vote later this week. Clinton followed shortly afterward through a spokesman.

The poobahs of pork in both parties as well as their Senate leaders suddenly found themselves on the spot after stalwartly defending lawmakers' practice of steering federal dollars to their home states.

The furious pace at which momentum is building for this measure is impressive. Old bulls in the Senate who want to maintain their right to direct tax dollars wherever they want are now in quite a pickle. Will they look sillier maintaining their position or flip flopping on something they have fought so hard to keep from coming to a vote?

This scenario is a bit like the immigration reform bill. There were many in the Senate who favored the amnesty measure, but when push came to shove the American people spoke so loudly that they had to flip their votes at the last moment on the Senate floor. Fearing a backlash, they quietly voted against amnesty and then slunk away.

It is good to know that there are still issues that matter enough to people that even entrenched old bull Senators can feel the heat.

RELATED: WSJ Editorial -- Earmark Showdown

UPDATE: Keep an eye on Andy Roth at the Club for Growth. He has been all over this issue as well as David Freddoso.

The sleepy old Senate

There are reasons to dislike McCain, but his crusade against the wasteful and corrupting practice of pork barrel spending -- or earmarking as Washingtonians call it -- is not one of them. But don't tell this to the Old Guard who runs the Senate GOP. Unlike their House counterparts led by John Boehner, Senate GOP leadership is drawing a line in the sand against their Party's nominee. Come hell or high water, they are going to maintain their right to use taxpayer dollars to buy reelection.

The Wall Street Journal's Kim Strassel explains:

Newly minted presidential nominee John McCain stepped into the Rose Garden this week to receive President Bush's blessing. What the cameras didn't catch were pork-addicted congressional Republicans blowing raspberries from their offices.

With all the talk about how Mr. McCain needs to unify his party, lost has been the question of whether some people will let him. Washington Republicans know he's their best shot at retaining the White House. Yet many remain ambivalent about him -- not because they question his conservatism, but out of resentment that he may get in the way of their earmarks.

This has resulted in a behind-the-scenes brawl, as spend-happy Republicans resist efforts by wiser heads to fall in behind Mr. McCain's anti-earmark message. At best, the spenders risk an embarrassing pummeling by their own nominee that could hurt them in their own re-election campaigns. At worst, they could undercut one of Mr. McCain's more persuasive messages.

Read it all.

Some people never learn...

Good 'ol Jack!

The New York Times Editorial page slams Jack Murtha:

The new earmark disclosure rules put into effect by Congress confirm the pre-eminence of Representative John Murtha at procuring eye-popping chunks of pork for contractors he helped put in business in Johnstown, Pa. The Pennsylvania Democrat, a power player on defense appropriations, exudes pride, not embarrassment, for delivering hundreds of millions of dollars in largesse to district beneficiaries. They, in turn, requite with hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign donations.

Read it all here. This is one of those rare occasions where the NY Times hits the nail squarely on the head. Their conclusion that "the Murtha operation — which has become a model for other entrepreneurial lawmakers — is a gross example of quid pro quo Washington," is impossible to disagree with when you look at the evidence.

The House of Representatives returns from their holiday recess this week, the Senate next week. Don't expect lawmakers to be clamoring for too much reform on this, as many of them are in neck deep in the pig pit.

UPDATE: President Bush may have the last laugh with the porkers in Congress.