Thursday, February 08, 2007

DeMint & Coburn: WH Picks a Fight on Earmarks

Roll Call reports that Jim DeMint & Tom Coburn have been pressing the White House to continue the fight against Congressional earmarks. And if OMB Chief Rob Portman can be taken at his word, the White House is picking a huge fight with Congress:

Senate Republican budget hawks are urging President Bush to use an executive order or presidential signing statement to block some of their fellow lawmakers from adding earmarks or pet projects to the fiscal 2007 continuing resolution...

In a Feb. 7 letter to Bush, the group of fiscal conservatives led by GOP Sens. Jim DeMint (S.C.) and Tom Coburn (Okla.) urged Bush to make good on his State of the Union pledge to oppose earmarks.

Noting that Bush “articulated a forceful policy to reform non-legislative earmarks” in future appropriations bills, the letter calls on the “administration [to] take an equally strong stance with regard to [the CR], to clarify that agencies of your administration will not be bound or give any preference to earmarks contained in committee reports or in direct communications from Members of Congress or their staff.”

The group has asked Office of Management and Budget Director Rob Portman in private meetings to urge Bush to use either an executive order or signing statement to explicitly prohibit agency officials from using funds in the CR to pay for these projects and programs unless they are in the national interest, an aide to one of the lawmakers said...

DeMint told reporters Wednesday that he and other conservatives have become increasingly concerned with the likelihood that Members will use their influence with federal agencies to “back-fund” earmarks included either in committee reports last year or multiyear earmarks that were included in the fiscal 2005 or fiscal 2006 spending bills.

DeMint said discussions with Portman and other administration officials led the group to “feel confident they will not honor nonauthorized earmarks.” But the conservative lawmakers also are asking for direct involvement from the White House to make clear that the administration’s policy is to oppose earmarks in general, he said...

An aide to Senate Appropriations Chairman Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) dismissed the bid, noting Byrd and House Appropriations Chairman David Obey (D-Wis.) wrote the CR to eliminate earmarks and that they expected no funds to be used for them. “Sen. Byrd and Congressman Obey made it clear ... that there are to be no earmarks in this legislation,” the aide said, adding that there is “no expectation that earmarks from previous years will continue” under the bill...

Many have made the point that earmarks in committee reports do not have the force of law, therefore the administration is not legally bound to observe them. That is correct. The unwritten corollary however, is that they are bound by 'gentleman's agreement.' Congress and the White House have treated them as if they were law, and if the White House is audacious enough to end that policy, it will not go down well.

If you thought Congress got into a snit when the Justice Department raided Bill Jefferson's office, wait until you see the reaction when they pick on something important!

If the OMB really intends to stop cooperating with Congress on earmarks, I'll be impressed.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

There is no conference or committee report as part of the continuing resolution the Senate is considering this week, so this is a pointless discussion right now.