Wrapped inside the many Sopranos references in Paul Kane's Capitol Briefing today is today's must-read budget blog entry. There are four appropriations bills up for a vote this week and the Republicans plan to gum up the works by forcing them to be read word-for-word. The tactic is a protest over the Democrats' decision to open up earmarks to public scrutiny, but not until August. The House appropriations chairman is already warning that if the Republicans go through with this, there may be no earmarks for anyone.

Earmarks may be a small part of the overall budget and pale compared to the long-term fiscal challenges the country faces. But as a major source of political pork, they're incredibly symbolic when it comes to building the public trust the government's going to need in tackling the long-term problems. So it's important that the earmark debate has a less-ambiguous ending than The Sopranos did.


2 comments on this entry

Re: Will Earmarks Get Whacked?

My wife's job is dependednt on an earmark.  We talked about this last night and we agree that we would rather the funding be rejected after an honest review and have her lose her job than continue down the path of spending based on back room deals.  Transparency and trust is what is needed.  Today we have neither.  No tough decisions will be accepted by the public without both.  I realize that the pork spending does not amount to a hill of beans relative to our unfunded liabilities, but baby steps is probably the way to go towards establishing trust and transparency.


Re: Will Earmarks Get Whacked?

I really admire you and your wife for taking that position. One fo the key things in making progress on this issue is looking beyond "what's in it for me" and thinking about the big-picture problem. I hope more people will be able to take the long view, as you and your wife have.