Print
E-Mail
tool name
closeThere are ways to end earmarks and gerrymandering
Burt Talcott
Guest columnist
Earmarks and gerrymandering are destroying our democratic republic. Few political schemes are more detrimental to our body politic — locally and nationally.
“Earmarks” are particular special interest line items inserted in governmental appropriation budgets, without consideration by the legislative body — always to pander for votes or campaign contributions, rather than for a general public purpose.
“Gerrymandering” is the rigging of legislative district boundaries to help ensure the re-election of incumbents. Both major political parties collude with candidates to perpetuate this anti-democratic process.
Legislators — city and county councilpersons, state and federal representatives and senators — were established and elected to legislate. Early legislators did that.
Gradually, legislators, at all levels, began and emphasized a “constituent services” function, such as assisting with Social Security, veterans, Medicare and citizenship problems, which is more effectively and evenly administered by executive bureaucrats.
The composition of legislative staffs was reversed from 10:2 for legislative assistants to 10:2 for constituent services assistants. LAs assisted legislators in researching, drafting, promoting and over-seeing new laws or reviewing and revising outdated laws. CSAs spend their time assisting constituents, friendly lobbyists and campaign contributors — continuously trolling for votes and campaign contributions for the next election.
The prime duty of legislators was shifted to their committee staffs.
Desperate or worried politicians have fortified the staff work of their CSAs by inserting items in appropriation bills “earmarked” for influential constituents or contributors. The number and amounts of “earmarks” have grown exponentially in recent election cycles — from $200 or $300 and a few million dollars, to more than 9,000 earmarks and billions of dollars.
The “bridge to nowhere” in Alaska (Sen. Stevens, R-Alaska); almost every public facility in West Virginia is earmarked and named for Sen. Byrd, D-W.Va.; and Rep. Jack Murtha, D-PA, earmarked $150 million for “Jack Murtha Airport” in Johnstown, which serves only three flights a day to only one city, Washington, D.C., plus billions of dollars in past years for friends and relatives.
These are only examples of the 9,000 earmarks in the recent budget bill. Pure corruption of our political-legislative system!
Stevens, Byrd and Murtha are not alone. From “pet projects” to the whole appropriations process, the federal budgets have become a gigantic collection of earmarks — a form of micromanagement by Congress to promote their individual re-elections.
“Pay to play” is not confined to Illinois politics. Lobbyists and contributors “pay” in various forms for political favors and repay in earmarks, pork and special legislation.
Earmarks are widely disapproved by taxpayers and prudent politicians. President Barack Obama campaigned vociferously against them — a popular issue for him because rival John McCain always opposed “pork” and earmarks.
As president, Obama is no longer a “pork and earmarks” reformer — rather an “Earmarker-in-Chief” and the proposer of the largest pork-laden budget in history, plus $800 billion in “stimulus” projects, which Murtha called “the Obama earmark bill.”
“Pork projects and earmarks” are the quintessential re-election stimulus bills. If these were not sufficient re-election stimuli, most legislative district boundaries have been gerrymandered to ensure re-election of most incumbents — a “double whammy” to our republic.
All legislative district boundaries (except the U.S. Senate) are required by the Constitution to be “contiguous, compact and equal in population.” Few districts are in constitutional compliance; most favor one or more special interest group, because politicians determine the boundaries. Both major political parties are complicit in the gerrymander schemes.
Our dismay and anger should not be leveled at only federal elected officials. Earmarks, pork and gerrymandering also are prevalent at the state, county and city levels of government.
Such collective special interest earmarks and pork projects could exceed billions in inappropriate state expenditures — and anger state taxpayers. Pork is pork, and it’s resented everywhere, because everyone else pays.
All earmarks should be prohibited. President Obama and most legislators claim they are opposed; but once they’re elected, they can renege on campaign promises — and again get away with voting for earmarks because their re-elections are almost assured by their gerrymandered districts which give them a huge political advantage.
Gerrymandering should be prohibited, but it won’t happen because district boundaries are fixed by politicians. Term limits for legislators, similar to the term limits for presidents and governors, would help to change the flawed conditions; but incumbents will fight “tooth and nail” to preserve their power, pay, perks, privileges, pensions and perceived prestige — but somehow they must be persuaded to change their terms.
More transparency is essential in all political campaigns, contributions and policies; for instance, no one should be permitted to contribute to the campaign of a candidate for whom he cannot vote (many candidates receive a majority of their campaign funds from outside their districts — some receive as much as 80 percent, so who do you think controls them?).
All campaign contributions should be reported fully to all opposing candidates and the media immediately when made or promised. No campaign contribution or promise should be permitted within seven days of the election. And severe penalties should be imposed for any violation.
These and other reforms can only be accomplished by concerted, persistent grassroots efforts by committed citizens who truly want to save our republic.
Persuasion must precede action. Anyone for real change?