Earmark Loopholes
By Editorial
Wall Street Journal
May 19, 2006
When the House passed its lobbyist-reform bill last month, we praised the earmark transparency provision as a rare bright spot. Maybe we spoke too soon. Outsiders have now had a chance to inspect the fine print, and if Sarbanes-Oxley were this full of loopholes, few businesses would complain.
Under the House bill, all earmarks inserted into appropriations during the conference committee stage must identify the earmarker -- unless, we now discover, the earmark goes to a federal agency, as nearly half of them do. Another notable earmark exception has been carved out for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the mortgage giants that are political honey pots for the Members. As far as we know, the two companies have never received an earmark before -- which raises the question of whether they are about to become a new earmark shelter for the Members to disguise their pork-barrel habits.
Oh, and earmarks directed to state and local governments are also exempt from the requirement under some circumstances. How big a loophole is that? "It could be as big as the appropriators are clever," Representative Jeff Flake (R., Ariz.) told us. "And they're pretty clever." Congressman Flake has been fighting the earmark tide since long before it became a cause celebre, and he's hoping the loopholes can be narrowed when the House and Senate sit down to agree on a common version of the bill.
Perhaps with the House's Appropriator-in-Chief, Californian Jerry Lewis, now under investigation for allegedly steering millions in appropriations to a lobbyist via earmarks, reform will take on added urgency. But GOP leaders should understand that this kind of cynical loophole-writing won't make voters feel any better about them come November.
Senator Tom Coburn
Subcommittee on Federal Financial Management, Government Information, and International Security
340 Dirksen Senate Office Building Washington, DC 20510
Phone: 202-224-2254 Fax: 202-228-3796
|
|
