Obama Will Be Smart to Sign the Earmark-Laden Omnibus Spending Bill
By Robert Schlesinger, Thomas Jefferson Street blog
The huge spending bill left over from the waning days of the Bush administration is expected to pass today. You know the one: It has nearly 9,000 earmarks, but must be passed by Saturday else sections of the government will grind down because of lack of funding.
President Obama is expected to sign the bill, despite having promised as a candidate to eliminate the noxious pet spending projects. And as I've written before, he's correct not to pick an earmark fight right now. Today's newspapers bring fresh examples of why.
Under the headline "Obama's Budget Faces Test Among Party Barons," today's New York Times reports:
What the Democratic barons of Congress liked best about President Obama's audacious budget was his invitation to fill in the details. They have started by erasing some of his.
Note that the story refers to the budget Obama sent up to the Hill for the coming year, not the spending bill with all the earmarks. And those nearly 9,000 earmarks, by the way, each has a member of Congress who thinks it's a pretty damn good idea.
To drive home the point, here's today's Washington Post:
Democratic leaders in Congress did not expect much Republican support as they pressed President Obama's ambitious legislative agenda. But the pushback they are receiving from some of their own has come as an unwelcome surprise.
As the Senate inches closer to approving a $410 billion spending bill, the internal revolt has served as a warning to party leaders pursuing Obama's far-reaching plans for health-care, energy and education reform.
Healthcare ... energy ... education reform—Obama's big ticket items (as opposed to the merely large-ticket stuff he's dealt with so far while trying to pull the economy out of its sinkhole). President Obama has a huge amount on his plate as it is, and is already encountering resistance from the Hill moving it forward.
Why would he now go out of his way to cause ill will among members of Congress on earmarks of all things? He's smart enough not to do that—and the bet here is that he'll make the same calculation in the fall when next year's spending bills start to move through Congress. And few people not named John McCain will particularly care.
On Facebook? You can keep up with Thomas Jefferson Street blog postings through Facebook's Networked Blogs
- Read more by Robert Schlesinger.
- Read more from the Thomas Jefferson Street blog.
- Read more about earmarks.
Tags: Barack Obama | earmarks
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (16) | Print
Reader Comments
Earmarks=jobs Mr.Couture
Bil..Bill..Bill...just as soon as you folks in California balance your state budget yourself....then you can fight for earmarks...not until you get your house in order and don't ask the rest of us to fund your irresponsible ways out there..then you can have earmarks..is that a deal?
Line Item Veto
Without a line item veto, there is not a lot the President can do. Based on what I have read over 60% of the "pork barrel" was added by the republicans. Based on an interview with Senator King (R), he believes that he has the obligation to ad his "pet projects" that will help his local constituents. That is why people voted for him, to bring dollars into his district. What we need is "full" transparency. We need a web site where one can go that lists all the earmarks and who wrote it and added it.
Earmarks=jobs
McCain demonised earmars, but if you look at them they are not bad. Wasn't one that got slashed a few years back for fixing the bridge in Minisota that collapsed and killed a bunch of people. Seems to me that earmarks are nothing more then requests to fix local problems. That is often a good thing to do. Beside, right now the big problem is that we are loosing jobs left and right. Earmarks will save some jobs and maybe even add a few. I say let's have more earmarks!
advertisement
