Should Congress Bring Back Earmarks? - The New York Times

Readers discuss an editorial that argued that a revival of pork could help polarized lawmakers embrace negotiation and compromise.

To the Editor:

Re “Congress Should Revive Earmarks” (editorial, Nov. 30):

Leaving aside whether a return of earmarks will bring comity to the Capitol, I want to clarify one aspect of your editorial promoting them.

While Democrats deserve credit for transparency reforms initiated in 2007, they did not propose limiting earmark beneficiaries to “nonprofit entities or public projects” until March 2010 and only in the House (the Senate refused to go along). Regardless, many for-profit companies found ways to skirt the House rules before the overall moratorium swept them all away in 2011.

But to dig a bit deeper on the issue, a Congressional Quarterly analysis of our earmark database found that Black and Hispanic Democrats in Congress got on average half the amount the average white Democrat got. They actually received less than the average Republican even though Democrats were in the majority. Political muscle trumped project merit.

If Congress chooses to revive earmarks, it has significant work to do to make the system truly transparent and fair.

Stephen Ellis
Washington
The writer is president of Taxpayers for Common Sense.

To the Editor:

Thank you for the well-reasoned suggestion for addressing gridlock in Congress — to bring back pork-barrel legislation. You made salient points and a persuasive argument.

The demise of pork barrel a decade ago coincided with the decline in safe seats in Congress. By “bringing home the pork” back then, legislators helped to ensure their re-election. Because seniority in Congress meant more power, and more power meant more pork, voters could not afford to unseat their senior senators or representatives, lest they give up the pork.

Earmarks not only brought out the votes at election time, they could also be used to encourage campaign contributions. It’s interesting that the end of earmarks coincided with the increased “contribution” of lobbyists to formulating legislation over the last decade.

Charles L. Payne
Barrington, R.I.

To the Editor:

The suggestion that our current bloated, overspending, wasteful budget process can be ameliorated by allowing members of Congress to slip in earmark spending is as ludicrous as giving an alcoholic person more opportunities to drink.

Ari Weitzner
New York

To the Editor:

Hear! Hear! Maybe reviving earmarks would encourage lawmakers to actually talk to one another, to negotiate in good faith to make life for their constituents better and, in turn, to understand why another member is asking for funds to build a youth center in a rural area in his or her district. Opposing parties might even start to listen to one another and to respect one another.

Anne C. Stalfort
Easton, Md.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

"bring" - Google News
December 07, 2020
https://ift.tt/33OCii9

Should Congress Bring Back Earmarks? - The New York Times
"bring" - Google News
https://ift.tt/38Bquje
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update

Bagikan Berita Ini