The White House has repeatedly touted Bush's "unprecedented steps" to rein in earmarks, but Utah politicians and budget watchdogs call it little more than rhetoric on an issue that could become a rallying cry for Republicans leading up to November's election.
The number of earmarks has grown exponentially since Bush came into office, but now Bush wants to rein in the practice. He promised to veto any spending bill that didn't cut earmark spending in half and issued an executive order requiring federal departments to ignore any earmark that Congress didn't include directly into a law. About 90 percent of earmarks are slipped into reports connected to bills, avoiding most public inspection.
Utah GOP Sen. Bob Bennett believes Bush's executive order will have little impact. "Basically, he is punting that to the next president," said Bennett, who is a member of the appropriation's committee in charge of earmarks.
Bush's efforts will not affect the 11,000 earmarks worth $15 billion included in recently passed budget bills. He is only targeting appropriations during the next cycle, which begins in October, only a few months before a new president takes office.
Democrats may just stall on the budget hoping their candidate will win the presidency. Such a move would make Bush's veto promise "an empty threat," said Ryan Alexander, president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington, D.C.-based nonpartisan group that tracks earmarks.
Utah's delegation backed the calls for transparency, but were much less supportive of the president's call to curb earmarks. Only Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, called for the end of "the abuse of congressionally directed spending."
Bennett said before setting an "arbitrary ceiling," Congress should determine why such directed spending has increased. He blames a backlog of needs created by failed attempts at passing regular appropriations bills.
Rep. Jim Matheson, D-Utah, would be willing to discuss the number of earmarks but said it shouldn't be the focus of the discussion.
"I welcome the change to create greater accountability," he said.
The fight over earmarks is a fight over control of tax dollars. The president and his administration want to direct how the money is spent, but so do members of Congress. This fight stretches into internal Congressional power struggles as well. Appropriators like Bennett have much more power than rank-and-file members like Matheson.
Groups like Taxpayers for Common Sense have rallied for earmark reform, including a general reduction in spending.
When Democrats took control of Congress in the 2006 election, they pushed reforms requiring House members to identify the recipients of their earmarks. The Senate didn't follow suit. Bennett refuses to name the defense companies that received $86 million he secured in the defense budget bill.
Now Republicans in the House are calling for a total moratorium on earmarks until a bipartisan committee can come up with a more transparent system.
Rep. Chris Cannon, R-Utah, supports a temporary earmark moratorium, but he doesn't want to eliminate earmarks. He points to highway projects as one area where he thinks members of Congress should direct spending.
Cannon would like to see Congress hire a company such as Google to create an online database that includes all funding requests as soon as they are made.
"We ought to be transparent about who is asking for what and how it proceeds through the process," he said.
Taxpayers for Common Senses has created a database that includes earmark request letters, which are not available electronically in any other place.
Steve Ellis is a vice president for the group and he said Bush's efforts were laudable even if it gave Congress "months to find a way to make an end run around his efforts."
He said: "If Republicans and Democrats feel like they have to one-up each other on how to deal with these issues, then we are in a pretty good spot."
mcanham@sltrib.com
