Even the Senate won’t be making earmark requests this year, according to an announcement made by Senate Appropriations Committee chairman Daniel Inouye (D., Hawaii) today.
“The handwriting is clearly on the wall,” said Inouye in a statement. “The President has stated unequivocally that he will veto any legislation containing earmarks, and the House will not pass any bills that contain them. Given the reality before us, it makes no sense to accept earmark requests that have no chance of being enacted into law.”
“At the appropriate time, I will once again urge the Senate to consider a transparent and fair earmark process,” added Inouye, making it clear that this wasn’t an ideological conversion.
Brian Baker, president of Taxpayers Against Earmarks, praised Inouye’s decision, saying that it, along with the House ban, “effectively puts a stop to the harmful practice of earmarks for the next two years.”
“What a difference a year makes! In January 2009, fewer than 50 Members opposed earmarks, but one year and one election later — because the American people spoke loud and clear — both the House and Senate have now banned earmarks,” said Baker in a statement.
Inouye can talk about banning earmarks because, as the Appropriations chairman, he can put whatever pork he wants into appropriations bills and simply call it "oversight" and "budgetary review."
I guarantee what will happen is that members will no longer insert floor amendments and earmark requests outside of the committee and subcommittee process-- no, instead they'll just ask the members on the Appropriations Committees to make their increases for them, through the "normal" budget process.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@Dave: I had exactly the same reaction.
It says a lot about the gerontocracy that the instinctive reaction to any of its pronouncements is "You lie!"
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse