How the earmark ban is really working 

Tim Carney points out in an excellent column today that Republican appropriators -- once a strongly pro-spending bloc in the old GOP majorities -- have completely lost their cohesion as a political force. Among the reasons?

Short of kicking members off the committee, the chairman used to use earmarks -- the promise of more pork or the threat to strip existing pork -- to enforce loyalty from other appropriators. That's why Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., calls earmarks "the gateway drug to a spending addiction," and it's why banning them could save taxpayers much more than a more simplistic accounting would suggest.

Earmarks are really important in greasing the skids for bad bills like Obamacare, but they have an additional value as a disciplinary tool to be used against anyone who supports fiscal responsibility in other areas. Vote against us, and you lose your pork. Without earmarks, there is no punishment available for the appropriations chairman to mete out.

About The Author

David Freddoso

David Freddoso came to the Washington Examiner in June 2009, after serving for nearly two years as a Capitol Hill-based staff reporter for National Review Online. Before writing his New York Times bestselling book, The Case Against Barack Obama, he spent three years assisting Robert Novak, the legendary Washington... more
Pin It

More by David Freddoso

Latest in Nation

© 2018 The San Francisco Examiner

Website powered by Foundation