When Is An Earmark Not An Earmark?

Posted by | December 11, 2010 22:34 | Filed under: Top Stories

by Stuart Shapiro

Um, when it is requested by a Republican.  Chapter 3 of (approximately) 654 in the GOP betrayal of Tea Party “principles” comes in the form of backtracking on one of their signature issues.  And it’s not just establishment GOPers who are saying they want earmarks to continue.

Conservatives like [Tennessee’s Phil] Roe, Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann and Iowa Rep. Steve King (pictured) are among those trying to figure out a longer-term, sustainable way to get money back to projects in their districts.

“This isn’t trying to be too cute by half of what is an earmark and what isn’t,” Bachmann told POLITICO on Wednesday. “But we have to address the issue of how are we going to fund transportation projects across the country?”

An earmark by any other name, is still an earmark.  Now don’t get me wrong, I’m completely comfortable with representatives working to secure funding for projects in their districts.  But then again, I wasn’t the one screaming about the evil of earmarks as a cornerstone of my campaign to take the House back from Democrats.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2010 Liberaland
By: Stuart Shapiro

Stuart is a professor and the Director of the Public Policy
program at the Bloustein School of Planning and Public Policy at Rutgers
University. He teaches economics and cost-benefit analysis and studies
regulation in the United States at both the federal and state levels.
Prior to coming to Rutgers, Stuart worked for five years at the Office
of Management and Budget in Washington under Presidents Clinton and
George W. Bush.

Leave a Reply