This doesn’t put the “new” in “news” but Russ Feingold supports a ban on earmark spending, the topic of a recent “brief and inconclusive” conversation among Congressional Democratic leaders.
Feingold has never requested an earmark, calling it “an unfortunate way to spend money,” so his support of a ban is no surprise. What would be a surprise is if House Appropriations Committee chair Dave Obey endorsed a ban. Obey has been bringing home the bacon to Wisconsin’s 7th CD for 40 years. However, Obey is facing a relatively legitimate challenger in Sean Duffy, mainly due to the anti-establishment political climate of the present. It may be in Obey’s best interests to sign on to a fiscally responsible bill banning earmarks, although that will lead to more accusations of hypocrisy on Obey’s part.
The Roll Call article addresses the possibility the idea could;
“Meet stiff resistance from some corners of the Democratic Caucus that cherish earmarks as…a political necessity in an increasingly hostile environment for incumbents. “
Yet the general public does not like the idea of earmarks. The next election is closer than the next pork barrel project, measured vote to ribbon cutting. A ban on earmarks would be great PR for a party often (and unfairly) accused of spendthrift policies.
A Congressional ban would also take the pressure off President Obama, who has failed to come through on a campaign pledge to reform earmarks. Republicans attacked mercilessly when the stimulus bill passed and will continue as long as federal budgets are laden with billions in wasteful, earmarked spending.
A ban on earmarks would be good policy and good politics comings together for Democrats.
