Senate Democrats alter ‘earmark‘ rules

http://localnewsleader.com/jackson/stories/index.php?action=fullnews&id=95511

Senate Democrats alter ‘earmark‘ rules
Staff and agencies
17 April, 2007


By ANDREW TAYLOR, Associated Press Writer 1 hour, 41 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - Under pressure from GOP conservatives, the chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee announced new rules Tuesday to overhaul the way lawmakers send taxpayer dollars to their districts and states.

The rules would require all earmarks — the footnotes in bills that lawmakers use to deliver federal bacon to their states — be clearly identified in documents accompanying appropriations bills. The requesting senator, the recipient of the earmark and its purpose would have to be made public and posted on the Internet.

The idea is that greater openness and public scrutiny of earmarks — which critics often called "pork barrel" spending — would mean some of the more wasteful projects would get killed before being added to legislation.

The new rules resemble those passed by the Senate in January as part of an ethics reform bill that has yet to pass the House. But the annual appropriations process gets started next month and Senate Democrats had given no sign they would require changes to the earmarking process absent action on the ethics bill.

They lost a procedural bid to change Senate rules — a more difficult hurdle than simply altering Appropriations Committee policies — but Byrd‘s announcement seemed linked to the conservative duo‘s stepped-up efforts.

Coburn noted that the Appropriations Committee had not implemented the reforms when instructing senators on how to officially ask for earmarks. Byrd spokesman Tom Gavin said new instructions would be issued later Tuesday.

The public has been angered by scandals such as the bribery conviction of former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham, R-Calif., who obtained more than $2.4 million in bribes after using his seat on the House Appropriations Committee to obtain earmarks for defense contractors.

Indiana didn't need Alaska's bridge to nowhere.

But, I do want to know who is responsible so as to give them credit (or look for bribery).