Monday, August 13, 2007

Earmark in Defense Appropriations

Robert Novak's column today describes the mostly lonely quest of Representative Jeff Flake (R-AZ):
With the midnight hour approaching on Saturday, Aug. 4, near the end of a marathon session, Democratic and Republican leaders alike wanted to pass the defense appropriations bill quickly and start their summer recess. But Republican Rep. Jeff Flake's stubborn adherence to principle forced an hour-long delay that revealed unpleasant realities about Congress.

Flake insisted on debating the most egregious of the 1,300 earmarks placed in the defense money bill by individual House members that authorize spending in their districts. Defending every such earmark was the chairman of the Appropriations defense subcommittee: Democratic Rep. John Murtha, unsmiling and unresponsive to questions posed on the House floor by Flake. Murtha is called "King Corruption" by Republican reformers, but what happened after midnight on Aug. 5 is not a party matter. Democrats and Republicans, as always, locked arms to support every earmark. It makes no difference that at least seven House members are under investigation by the Justice Department. A bipartisan majority insists on sending taxpayers' money to companies in their districts without competitive bidding or public review.
Despite the protestations of the Democratic leadership, very little has changed when it comes to earmarks.

Bringing home the bacon is a part of every Congressman's job and most of the time, many of the earmarks may actually be a wise investment of the taxpayer dollars, but as Flake pointed out in debate, some of the earmarks for Defense Appropriations Committee Chairman John Murtha (D-PA) are not only excessive but unwanted by the Pentagon.

The Pentagon is a bureaucracy quite capable of getting what it needs, if they determine that they don't need it, why are we still funding it?

No comments: