The Swine Line

Read this article in today’s Washington Post if you want a grim and infuriating reminder of the insidious and corruptive influence of earmarks and why they are dangerous for our political process (how quickly we have forgotten the Duke Cunningham lessons).  They are NOT, by and large, benign projects inserted by do-good members of Congress, who know best what their districts’ needs are, the mantra so often trotted out as the rationale for the epidemic of congressional earmarking.  Earmarks stymie progress, thwart innovation, generally muck up the spending process.  This story is especially egregious because Sen. Landrieu micromanaged and inflicted even more harm on one of the most dysfunctional, vulnerable school district’s in the country, here in Washington, D.C.  This is a testament to the grotesque insouciance with which members of Congress abuse their status and power, victimizing unsuspecting citizens in the process.  There is a very rational, political reason why earmarks have exploded over the last ten to fifteen years and that reason is MONEY.  And I mean money in the reelection coffers of the lawmakers who sponsor these projects, not the money for the recipients.  All earmarks should be treated with suspicion.  In particular, whenever you see a lawmaker sponsor an earmark for a recipient outside his or her district or state, like the infamous “Coconut Road” earmark in Florida, sponsored by Alaskan Don Young, start scratching, then start digging.