Earmarks in Congress - Who, Why and at What Cost?
Earmarks are attachments that lawmakers slip into bills in order to arbitrarily funnel taxpayer money to chosen companies or organizations. The corrupt practice of earmarking will continue until American voters flip the offenders slipping earmarks into legislation out of Congress.
"I am looking out for the folks in my district"
This is the favorite "talking point arguement" used by legislators for pilfering funds belonging to taxpayers. John Murtha ("If I'm corrupt, It's because I take care of my district.") is one of many who insures re-election through redirection of America's money into his district.
The reality of the situation is that the earmarker is looking out for him or herself through bribery using taxpayer money. -
The politician directs taxpayer money to companies or organizations who have contributed or will contribute "donations" to insure his or her re-election.
-
The politician then advertises before elections, extolling his or her "achievements" in directing $xxx million dollars to the district. (No mention is ever made in these letters of glowing-self-praise about the fact that funds actually benefited a few shrewd players in the district but were financed by tax dollars and IOUs from everyone.)
"Earmarks are a small percentage of the budget"
This also is a favorite "talking point argument" used by legislators for pilfering funds belonging to taxpayers. Chuck Shumer's famous comment, "And let me say this to all of the chattering class that so much focuses on those little, tiny, yes, porky amendments, the American people really don't care" aptly represents the view of earmarkers in Congress. (Elitists in Congress commonly use the terms "American people" and "I" interchangeably.)
They are wrong. "Every million counts". Sure, they are signing trillion (one million, million) dollar legislations, but there should be some benefit for everything we spend.
Who benefits and how from earmarks?
Benefits to Congressman:
Re-election is purchased with other people’s money! Campaign contributions by companies recieving earmarks finance re-election. With the money, politicians advertise to disguise negatives in legislative record and brag about the money "brought" into the district through the "benevolence and virtue of your humble representative!".
Benefits to Recipient Organizations or Businesses:
Large influx of money that probably could not have been obtained through "above-board" means such as bidding or proposal submissions.
Benefits to Taxpayers:
None. Taxpayers finance and unwittingly enable the unethical behaviors.
Collateral Damages:
-
Ethical businesses that would have won the right to the production money through bidding processes miss out on the opportunity.
-
American citizens get less for their money because less efficient, more expensive, or less capable companies "purchased" contracts that should have been competitively bid.
-
Other Government agencies. For example, according to the Seattle Times, three earmarkers from Washington (Murray, Baird and Dicks) forced the Pentagon to accept a $4.5 million dollar boat produced by Guardian Marine International (the company owners donated well over $10,000 to campaign funds of each politician). The problem with this is that the military did not want and had no use for the craft. However, the earmark amounted to law and due to legal spending/budget caps, the Pentagon had to accept the boat and give up defense/worthwhile purchases of the same dollar amount to remain under the budget cap. Earmarking has repeatedly hit our defense department in this negative manner.
-
America’s youth. Check the US Debt Clock to see the current debt that members of Congress have chosen to hang on each and every American family.
Is this legal?
Members of Congress have written laws legalizing this form of piracy specifically to protect their personal interests. Legality however, does not does not make immoral,unethical, behavior right.
What can we do about it?
If your representative or senator is corrupt… vote him or her out.
|
