.jpg)
Site Search
.jpg "Enter the caption")
Earmarks defended: Not evil, just part of budget
Print
Email
Mobile
Reader comments
By GARRY RAYNO
New Hampshire Union Leader Staff
Monday, Mar. 10, 2008
New Hampshire's senators and representatives in Washington are far from leaders in congressional "earmark" spending, but they still returned about $185 million in taxpayer money to the Granite State, a review by the New Hampshire Union Leader shows.
And they see the practice as good for their constituents.
"I'm perfectly happy to defend any of the earmarks I've gotten over the years," said the state's senior U.S. senator, Republican Judd Gregg.
►Who in NH got federal earmarks? (5)
Earmarks are found both in legislation and committee reports and have the effect of law, targeting funds for specific projects.
"The people's trust in their government is undermined by congressional earmarks," President George W. Bush said this year, promising to veto "any appropriations bill which does not cut the number and costs of earmarks in half."
Bush later issued an executive order directing federal agencies to ignore earmarks not voted by Congress.
Gregg views earmarks differently than President Bush.
"Congress has every right to prioritize how money is spent as the executive branch does," Gregg said. "If not, then you turn over a huge authority to embedded bureaucrats in the executive branch."
In the context of a "disciplined budget," some earmarks are good, as long as they are transparent so it's clear how the money is spent, who asked for it and who the recipient is, Gregg said.
Taxpayers for Common Sense reports the federal budget for 2008 includes 11,331 Congressional earmarks worth $15.3 billion.
A recent article in "The Hill," the newspaper that covers Congress, notes freshmen Democratic members of the House were "showered with earmarks" as the House leadership bids to retain its majority status going into the 2008 general elections.
New Hampshire's Democratic freshmen U.S. Reps. Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter were not the top freshmen, according to The Hill, but they were in the top third of their class.
Bringing money home
In this fiscal year's budget, Gregg's signature is on earmarks totaling about $75 million.
Gregg is seldom the only senator earmarking a project; rather he and Sen. John E. Sununu together request projects and contracts or work with one or both of the state's U.S. representatives, Hodes and Shea-Porter.
For example, the I-293 interchange project in Manchester will receive $1.7 million in an earmark that Gregg and Shea-Porter requested.
Gregg's singular earmarks total about $6 million based on information on the U.S. Office of Management and Budget Web site.
Many of those earmarks are for the state's colleges and universities.
Often earmarks translate to jobs for the Granite State.
Gregg was one of the signers on defense department earmarks that included $12.1 million for Insight Technology Inc. of Londonderry and $14.5 million for BAE Systems in Nashua. Sununu also signed the earmarks.
Sununu's earmarks total about $60 million.
He was alone in reserving $339,000 for the University of New Hampshire to expand business and high technology programs. His defense department earmarks were almost identical to Gregg's, totalling $58 million.
According to a news release from the two senators, the defense department budget included $66 million for research, development and production programs by New Hampshire companies.
Hodes signed on to earmarks totaling about $25 million. A review by the New Hampshire Union Leader indicates he is the sole signer for about $4 million in projects and contracts.
Hodes, who represents the state's second district, earmarked $400,000 for rail safety projects throughout the North Country.
Shea-Porter's earmarks also total about $25 million, excluding earmarks for Pease and the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, which had multiple signers.
Among her earmarks are $400,000 for the Avis Goodwin Center to build a new facility and $370,000 for the Wentworth-Douglass Hospital in Dover, which also includes the signatures of Gregg and Sununu.
She included several earmarks for nursing programs at Franklin Pierce College, the state community college in Manchester and at the Massachusetts College of Pharmacy and Health Services in Manchester.
How earmarks work
Gregg said earmarks have to be viewed in the context of the entire federal budget and entitlements such as Medicaid, Medicare and Social Security, which represent the real money.
Because there have been abuses like the infamous Alaska "bridge-to-nowhere" project, Gregg said the focus is on earmarks, which represent less than 1 or 2 percent of the federal budget. Gregg likened the situation to a town meeting where people "argue over a new (police) cruiser for two hours and then approve the school budget in 10 minutes."
Sununu said increasing transparency is good.
Any funding earmark should be part of the legislation and not just written into the committee report, should not be put into the conference bill at the last minute and should go through the House or Senate so they are thoroughly vetted, he said.
Sununu and Gregg cited land conservation efforts in the Great Woods and Lake Umbagog as projects funded through earmarks.
"All of those requests were vetted through the process and had broad support across New Hampshire," Sununu said.
Hodes' $432,000 earmark for developing a virtual trip to the Mt. Washington Observatory drew a rebuke from the state Republican Party's chairman.
Hodes notes that Gregg also earmarked the project, which will allow students in New Hampshire and the rest of the country to access observatory resources via the Internet.
"I certainly have seen how broken the system has been and it needs to be cleaned up from the waste and corruption and the bridges-to-nowhere," Hodes said. While more accountability and more transparency have been added, additional changes are needed, Hodes said.
Hodes said the state only gets back 67 cents for every dollar sent to Washington in taxes, while New Hampshire has very pressing needs.
"In the past, representatives and senators were allowed to insert earmarks into appropriations bills without having to put their names on them," Shea-Porter said. "Spending ballooned out of control, and we ended up with outrageous and wasteful projects like the bridge to nowhere."
She said she would like to see much less reliance on earmarks, even though many of them are for good causes.
"I regret that some politicians attack earmarks in press releases and then brag about their own projects and never admit that their projects are earmarks also," Shea-Porter said.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. © 1997-2010.
YOUR COMMENTS
Shea-Porter promised she would go to Washington to ELIMINATE earmarks. How quickly she seems to have forgotten that promise.
- John, Rochester
Sorry, I gave you too much credit. I thought that it would be obvious if you were a country of 300,000,000 people and you gave so much it might be related to how many people you have as citizens. I guess that if you were San Marino (population 28,000) and gave $2,000,000 in foreign aid that would be about as worthy as our .7 percent donation. Actually that would still make their contribution greater as their GDP is so much smaller per capita. Be careful about your facts and try and understand what they mean. We give less per capita than other of the developed nations and we are richer. The thing about charity is that it is supposed to be given for the benefit of those to whom it is given – not dependent upon how much you get back. Otherwise it is an investment. Remember your grandmother giving you handkerchiefs because it bothered her that your nose ran. That is not a gift. All this talk about what a religious country we are and the concept of charity seems to have come down to compassionate conservatism. Now that's an investment.
- Robert, Deerfield
Wow Robert your Clintonian ignorance is really showing today. Of this "small" amount of aid we give can you tell us the 'facts' of how much we ever got in return? can you tell me how many countries we have bailed out or helped that paid us back? Earmarks should have heavy scrutiny and be voted on individually. I will not deny and any smart person cannot deny the benefit this state has gotten from some of them. But when you hear about the 'bridge to no where" in Alaska and things like that then you have to wonder. If you look at the earmarks mentioned thay all go to places that have the most political persuasion. I293 in one of the most populated parts of the state. Big defense contracts again in the southern most populated area. What about the northern part of the state where they are losing all their industry and jobs. What money have they gotten. Point is the system is a joke and needs to be reformed.
- Bill B., Pelham
Hey Jill from Sunapee, I went to the web sight you gave and WOW! such an objective source of information I cant believe no one else is using it and shouting from the mountain tops, the breath of which would be the evil doers are…for the most part….Republicans………Holly corruption Bat Man! Find several credible sources please before you boar us with internet dribble you were given by your college professor. I say if they are dirty throw them to the curb, Republican or Democrat. The only problem is that the Lefties and the media see it differently, if a Democrat does something wrong its politics if a Republican does something wrong its corruption.
- Anthony, Troy, NH
Hey, Campers! Look for yourselves!
http://www.citizensforethics.org
While you're at it, you might find this disturbing: entitled: "Crew Releases 3rd Annual Most Corrupt Members of Congress Report." www.citizensforethics.org/execcorruption
Don't do it if you just ate, though.
- jill shackford, Sunapee
Hey Robert from Deerfield, the only person spouting off with out having any facts is you my friend. Here are some facts that took only 30 seconds to find….In 2006 (the latest year I could find records for) US Foreign Aid about 26.9 Billion dollars, the European Union about 1.03 Billion. What you said, “ We give less foreign aid than any other developed country” completely and utterly with out merit. Don’t get me wrong, the 27 states that make up the EU also have aid programs of their own and if you added up all that money and the monies of the EU it might very well be greater than that given in aid by the US. But as far as individual states and their foreign aid appropriations goes, no other country comes even close to the US.
- Dan, Nashua
Hay Robert from Deerfield, here’s some facts for you that didn’t come from the Daily-konfusion or Moveleft.org. The USA gives more in foreign aid than any other developed nation OECD Development Statistics Online so check out your facts before you blog! Also, it does not matter who is doing the earmarking it is not constitutional, moneys should only be appropriated after they have gone through committee and been approved through proper canals. You can’t say if one side of the isle does it, its ok and if the other side does it, it’s wrong. Our elected officials have too much power and we the people have to put a stop to it by voting to end earmarks and pork, and how about term limits for senators while we are at it.
- Anthony, Troy, NH
The term "earmark" for the government equates to the term "toetag" for the taxpayer!
- Leslie S, Manchester,NH
Who's kidding who? Earmarks are nothing but pork barrel projects that are requested by a senator or representative simply to help make him or her look good at election time. And yes, they do cost us money no matter how you look at it.
- Brian, Farmington
Let me understand this, if it is our reps and for New Hampshire its called earmarks, for anyone else and of course at election time its called pork barrel spending. By jove I think I've got it!!!
Leno, Raymond
- Leno Hebert, Raymone
How about a few actual facts - that is verifiable stuff not what you heard on Fox Noise? Earmarks result in not one dollar more of money spent than has been budgeted. Earmarks account for about the same percentage of the Federal budget as foreign aid. That number is less than one percent. About seven tenths of one percent not the ten percent that many people think. We give less in foreign aid than any other developed country. Unless you think we somehow donate bombs and tomahawk missles to Iraq.
- Robert, Deerfield
With Shea Porter and Hodes, bad earmarks are the ones Jeb Bradley and Charlie Bass got. Good earmarks are the ones they get.
They are both huge hypocrities. They campaigned to end earmarks but now they arent willing to buck Nancy Pelosi and their party.
They are phonies and should be defeated.
- Steve, Dublin
Eliminate earmarks and reduce the amount of our taxes going to Washington and being redistributed to other states. It looks like 33 cents of every dollar we send is being used for earmarks in other states. If we need something in NH, lets fund it here.
- Johnny, Derry
I am convinced that the ONLY concern of U.S. congressmen and women is getting REELECTED. Our retiring senators and representatives receive the finest pensions in the country (you can be sure their pension plan won't be eliminated in bankruptcy) and receive free medical care for life. So how do they get reelected? Simple! Get as much pork (earmarks) as they can (it used to be called feeding at the public trough) back to the voters and pander to the special interests and lobbyists who can provide reelection campaign funds. Some are more expert than others; Ted Stevens -AK and Robert Byrd -WV quickly come to mind, but even the newcomers learn fast how the corrupt system works.
It's outrageous and disgusting.
- Paul, Hampton, NH
"...the state only gets back 67 cents for every dollar sent to Washington in taxes..."
This is one of the downsides to living in a relatively rich area of the country. Poorer, more rural states usually get more than they put in. However, we do have certain infrastructural projects that are essential for our ability to make money. These earmarks can encourage us to take on these projects. The I-293 interchange project isn't a bridge to nowhere, it's a bridge to Manchester. Kudos to Sen Gregg and Rep Shea-Porter for realizing the importance of this project.
- Breyer S., Manchester, NH
One person's pork is another person's valuable project. I applaud Gregg, Sununu and CSP for at least being forward about going for earmarks. I have seen Hodes press releases that try to hide the projects by calling them "grants". I wouldn't say earmarks fall under generally accepted definition of a grant.
- John, Hanover
Wouldn't it be better if we just kept the 67 cents in the first place?
And wouldnt it be better if we didnt spend more than half of that on weapons and 'enhanced interrogation techniques'?
And, by the way, just how is it that the average senator's investment portfolios return 10 to 12 percent better than the market average?
- Tom, Candia
Our congresspersons are operating in a system that sucks money from the state level and forces us to fight for our money back. They are bringing home the bacon! This is a ridiculous system. We get '67 cents for every dollar sent to Washington'. Just wonderful. The best way to represent us is to work to change Washington. Big order, I know, but someone needs to stand up. Stop the outrageous spending in the federal budget, stop the earmarks, and work to stop the endless sucking of money out of the states and individuals so the states can raise their own money, take care of their own disasters, and spend locally on our own priorities.
- Ann, Manchester
Shea-Porter, as usual, tells only part of her own earmark story. Her office says there's a difference between good earmarks and bad earmarks - and Shea-Porter won't disclose all the earmarks she requests unless they get approved. So, we don't find out about her worst ideas that are rejected by her wiser colleagues.
- Fergus Cullen, Wolfeboro
Earmarks projects should stand on their own and be part of the budget process. Slipping them into other unrelated legislation or with out a review process is devious and ripe for the abuses we have seen for years.
Just say NO and stop the practice.
- tom keane, bow
Everybody does it, so it must be OK? That's the message from our porkers in Washington. My earmarks are good, other people's are bad.
The bottom line is that they are defending spending more and more of our money that never should have been spent. With a huge deficit, they ought to be ashamed of their activities, not trying to tell us how noble they are for getting more pork. This is sickening.
- Glen, Manchester
It's nice to see that some earmarks are going to education. But unfortunately student tuition rates are never offset by these federal infusions. I don't care whether these earmarks are coming home or not, this is our taxpayer dollars going to pet projects built by influence.
- Chris, Merrimack
NOTE: If you have visited this page before, newer comments may be hidden. Press F5, or hold down the Ctrl key while reloading or refreshing the page. (Another option for Firefox users is the Clear Cache add-on.)