Today congressional Republicans are contemplating presenting a
united front against earmarks. For a long time, I've viewed the
campaign against earmarks as misguided. They represent about 1
percent of federal spending, making them a minuscule part of
government growth. Eliminating them all wouldn't even directly
reduce any spending, it would merely affect how the spending is
disbursed. It's not clear that government spending controlled by
unaccountable bureaucrats would be less wasteful. Attacking the
log-rolling that is central to the legislative process seemed
like barking at the moon.
A better approach to the earmarks issue, I've always argued, is
to use them to demonstrate the absurdity of much of what
government does and defeat much larger spending bills. My
favorite example is the Clinton-era crime bill. Many
conservatives argued against that piece of legislation, which
contained billions of dollars in new social spending, on the
basis of midnight basketball. Use midnight basketball to defeat
the crime bill. Don't take midnight basketball out of the bill
and declare victory.
Having said all that, I think the time has come for the
Republicans to adopt a moratorium on earmarks. It is simply a
threshold issue for fiscal credibility. How many times have we
heard that Republicans are taking a bold stand on this or that
spending bill only to learn that they requested better than 40
percent of the earmarks? If Republicans have their names next to
too many pork barrel projects, they will never be trusted to rein
in more serious spending programs like entitlements. House
Minority Leader John Boehner is right to try to put his party's
image on spending above the needs of his appropriators. We'll see
how it all pans out.