The struggle to limit Congressional earmarking practices hit a roadblock yesterday, when House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.), denied a House vote on Texas Representative Mike McCaul’s (R-Texas) “No Monuments to Me” amendment.
Rep. McCaul, who represents the 10th congressional district, which stretches from Austin to Houston, introduced the “No Monuments to Me” amendment last year to over 300 aye’s in the House. However, the amendment only lasted through the first quarter of fiscal 2009, meaning a reprised amendment would be necessary to uphold the legislation.
The “No Monuments to Me” amendment bans all members of Congress from appropriating federal taxpayer funds in the form of earmarks to projects named after themselves, or any sitting member of Congress. The goal is to limit projects from getting special treatment or money simply because they are named after a member of Congress. According to McCaul, “the question is not whether these projects are worthy of taxpayer dollars ... it’s a problem of perception that these projects receive special treatment because of the names they bear. When the American people see this it feeds the belief that members of Congress are arrogant and out of touch with the
people we represent.”
McCaul’s point is valid — a high number of congressional earmarks, and, subsequently, a disproportionately large amount of cash, are allocated to local projects bearing the name of the members of Congress introducing them. They also have a pretty good chance of getting funding from the member personally.
If there is any good news, it’s that the battle against earmarks isn’t a partisan affair — or rather, those who are most notorious for funding projects named after them come from a decidedly bipartisan pool. Projects ranging from a proposed $231 million bridge named Don Young’s Way to a glut of decidedly unimportant, yet well-funded, airport renovations are the products of both democrats and republicans in Congress.
But Senator Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) leads the Congress when it comes to naming things after himself. In a list of “Monuments to Me” funded by sitting members of Congress released from McCaul’s office, Byrd has 17 home-state projects named after himself, including an office building, a freeway, a highway, a high school, a correctional institute and even a telescope. The group Citizens Against Government Waste lists Byrd as having over 30 projects named after him.
Few citizens feel this unwarranted spending is a good use of government funds. Rep. Obey, the authority in charge of dealing with earmarks as House Appropriations Chairman, has made reducing “wasteful” government spending a goal since 2006. His decision to deny the House a chance to vote on the “No Monuments to Me” amendment is curious, to say the least.
A likely reason for his decision is the strong pressure he was under from Rep.
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.).
As House Appropriations Chairman, Obey is in charge of reviewing earmarks submitted by Representatives. Waters submitted an “earmark request for the Maxine Waters Employment Preparation Center in the Labor-Health and Human Services-Education appropriations bill,” according to Texas Insider. Obey denied her the earmark, because the center is named after Waters. But the center was named after her before her stint in congress and has been regularly funded by Congress since 1991. Waters pointed out that the center, as well as other valuable pre-existing entities, would be cut off from funding under the amendment and pressured Obey not to allow the amendment a chance to be voted on again.
Waters, like any member of Congress fighting to fund the types of projects that will get them re-elected, undoubtedly feels the center named after her is worthy of the $1 million she wants taxpayers to give it. And, when compared to projects like Rep. James Clyburn’s golf center, her employment preparation center carries some merit.
But it is unfortunate Waters couldn’t look past her slice of federal funds, and instead supported her cause by convincing Obey to kill the intelligent
amendment altogether.
McCaul says his goal is to make the system more transparent and allow members of Congress to vote on earmarks. Fortunately, the stalwart representative from Texas vows to continue his “No Monuments for Me” push into the fiscal 2010
appropriations cycle.
