US House reaffirms reforms on earmarks
Deal restores requirement to disclose all member-sponsored projects including the right to challenge projects on House floor.
from the June 15, 2007 edition
Page 2 of 3
"Earmarks should be open to public vetting, full debate, and floor challenge," said Rep. Jeff Flake (R) of Arizona, who has led a crusade against earmarks, often against members of his own party.
"We are legislators; we are not potted plants here. To be relegated to just writing a letter and asking for a response is simply not sufficient," he added.
Toward 2 a.m., Chairman Obey challenged Mr. Flake: "The gentleman has offered a lot of motions in the past two years to strike earmarks. Could I ask him how many of them have been successful?"
"Not one," Flake responded. "I came to the floor 39 times and was beaten like a rented mule every time."
But the level of public interest and scrutiny over earmarks has increased since those votes, he said, in an interview. Obey "misjudged the way this is viewed outside the Beltway."
On Monday, Obey announced a revision of committee policy on earmarks: Instead of including member projects, identified by name in spending bills, earmarks would be fully disclosed before the August recess – after all House votes on spending bills, but before the final appropriations are worked out in a conference with the Senate. Lawmakers objecting to any earmark could send a letter to the committee challenging the project.
The move set off protests from editorial boards to accountability websites in the blogosphere. Within hours of the Obey announcement, more than 770 people volunteered to help Congress vet earmarks this cycle on the porkbusters.org website.
"The question is whether Congress is going to live up to the reforms they promised or create conditions which we know corrupt things: earmarks decided behind closed doors and an opaque process," says Bill Allison, of the Sunlight Foundation. "There's no reason not to make the requests public now."
RSS feed
