Posted by
Reeson on Tuesday, January 16, 2007 2:48:43 PM
I really liked this piece from the
Cato Institute:
Excerpts from an article by Stephen Slivinski (http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=6955)
"The new Congress has agreed to take action on earmarks, the budget items best known as 'pork projects.' Think, for instance, of the $13.5 million that helped subsidize last year's World Toilet Summit in Ireland, an expenditure worthy of inescapable jests about fiscal incontinence."
"In a mostly party-line 280-152 vote last Friday, the House passed rules changes requiring that both the spending projects and their sponsors be disclosed on the internet at least 48 hours before they are considered on the floor. Congressmen will also be required to justify the public need for the expenditures, and certify that they won't benefit financially from them."
"Nobody can really object to such a reform. It's certainly a good idea to shed some light on what now-convicted über-lobbyist Jack Abramoff called the "favor factory." But we should be realistic about what these reforms can achieve. The impact is likely to be minimal."
"So we probably won't soon see an end to handouts like the half-a-million in taxpayer funds that went to the Sparta Teapot Museum in North Carolina in 2005. Earmark transparency is merely a beginning. A good first step for sure, but hardly the endgame of fundamental budget reform. Future reforms should create an incentive to actually reduce the scope of government overall. In the meantime, it's important to remember that as long as a culture of spending persists in Washington – fueled by a budget process that allows Uncle Sam to be all things to all people – then no matter who is in power, earmarking in some form will always be with us."
This article appeared in the January 22, 2007 issue of Business Week.