Ending Congressional earmark isn’t going to help budget crisis; Washington politicians will find a way to spend. The earmarks controversy isn’t about the budget, its about open and democratic governance.
Earmarks are long standing budget gimmick by Congress designed to by-pass public scrutiny and provide pay back to campaign contributors and local supporters. Individual members simply insert funding for projects, programs, or grants into appropriation bills.
Earmarks pervert local politics through back room deals between city/county officials, local business insiders, and congressional representatives; deals that may or may not be in the best interests of the community. Any appropriation that does not receive public scrutiny perverts the local political process as voters are almost never aware of hidden financial relationships.
In this election year, a candidate’s stance on earmarks is a dye marker on his stance about open government and corruption. A local Congressional candidate in a recent interview when asked about the “No Earmarks Pledge” immediately asked the interviewer “What’s your definition of an earmark?” The interviewer should have responded “Who are you planning to give money to and why?”
Consider the congressional candidate you’re thinking of supporting. Have they taken the No Earmarks Pledge? If not, do you know where their earmark pork will be headed and why??
