Wednesday, January 10, 2007

Earmark Battle in the Senate   [Kathryn Jean Lopez]

"Porkbusting" types are not happy:

CQ TODAY – CONGRESSIONAL AFFAIRS
Jan. 9, 2007 – 9:09 p.m.

Critics Still Not Satisfied With Senate Earmark Provision

By Steven T. Dennis, CQ Staff

Senate Democratic and Republican leaders proposed tougher earmark disclosure rules Tuesday but left in place an exemption that would allow sponsors of thousands of earmarks to remain hidden.

New language proposed by Majority Leader Harry Reid, a Democrat from Nevada, and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican who represents Kentucky, continues to exempt “federal” projects, such as Department of Defense construction projects, that constitute a large portion of earmarks.

Sponsors of earmarks benefiting “non-federal” entities would be disclosed. Those earmarks would be accompanied by a justification, and the amendment would require lawmakers to certify that neither they nor their spouses would benefit.

Tom Coburn, an Oklahoma Republican, criticized the proposed rules as inadequate and sent a letter to White House budget director Rob Portman urging a presidential veto of the legislation (S 1) unless the earmark disclosure rules are broadened at least to the level adopted by the House (H Res 6).

“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,” Coburn wrote.

Aides said Coburn has prepared an amendment that would prohibit earmarks that benefit not only spouses but also immediate family members, as well as family members of Senate staff.

Coburn urged President Bush to instruct agencies to ignore report language that does not have the force of law but that contains instructions for the bulk of earmarks. The president has joined in a call for an earmark overhaul but has allowed agencies to continue funding earmarks that are not included in bill text.

Coburn’s staff complained that the Reid-McConnell earmark language would not explicitly apply to earmarks that are not in bill text, which could lead to less than 5 percent of earmarks being covered.....

In an e-mail this morning, a Coburn staffer says, "The 95 percent earmark exemption in the Senate bill is more a practical joke on taxpayers than it is real reform.

 

01/10 10:22 AMShare