Earmarks

The conservative House Freedom Caucus has come out swinging against the idea, voting to formally oppose any form of congressionally directed spending, “whether in the 117th Congress or any future Congress.” Caucus members argued that the practice is ripe for abuse and would only lead to “pork-barrel” spending.

“They’re a bad idea. I’m opposed to them,” said Rep. Warren Davidson (R-Ohio), a member of the Freedom Caucus. “They’ve been described as a gateway drug toward corruption.”

“I am totally against it,” added Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), a co-founder of the group. "I don’t think Republicans should be supportive of earmarks.”

The Republican Study Committee, the largest conservative caucus on Capitol Hill, will meet next week to discuss the issue. But the group started circulating a memo, obtained by POLITICO, warning that “capitulating to calls for reinstating earmarks will amplify the power” of Democratic leaders and could “create a more hierarchical Congress.”

[...]

Republicans — who first banned earmarks when they took over the House majority following the 2010 Tea Party wave — haven’t been totally aligned on the issue, with some warming to the idea in recent years. While the practice is still formally prohibited under current House GOP conference rules, some Republicans have argued that allowing lawmakers to ensure money for specific projects restores power to the legislative branch and could help make the institution more functional.

[...]

Rep. Chuck Fleischmann (R-Tenn.), an appropriator, said the future of earmarks would ultimately be a conferencewide decision. But one of the biggest potential selling points, he said, is that bringing back earmarks would take authority away from the Biden administration. And he also noted that Democrats want to make the process more transparent. “If I had to

bet, Democrats will move forward with or without us,” Fleischmann said. “The question is, will we be able to avail ourselves of them?”

[...]

Democrats have not yet released their plan, but [House Majority Leader Steny] Hoyer has indicated the process would be reformed and earmarks would be used to help public and nonprofit projects.

[...]

Across the Capitol, Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said he would defer to Alabama Sen. Richard Shelby, the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, on the issue.

  

Mitch McConnell deferred to someone? Is Satan skating?

[T]he internal dynamics are tricky, especially for McCarthy. If the California Republican throws his weight behind earmarks, it could infuriate the right — a crucial constituency for McCarthy to have in his corner.

But if McCarthy discourages Republicans from requesting money for proposals that benefit their districts, it could put his own members at a huge disadvantage while letting Democrats reap the rewards from the spending practice.

Earmarks can help members direct critical resources to their districts, giving them an easy way to earn points with constituents back home. The practice can also be a useful tool for congressional leaders who are trying to corral votes for certain spending bills. And with President Joe Biden pushing for a massive infrastructure package this Congress, there may be even more temptation for the GOP to get on board.

But some Republicans are still haunted by the infamous “bridge to nowhere” — a massive proposal to build a bridge between Ketchikan, Alaska, and a nearby island with an airport — that inspired the initial earmark ban. That's not to mention the earmark scandals that helped end the careers of lawmakers in both parties during the early 2000s.

...but hey, do what you want...you will anyway.