'Victories' on the Hill
YOUR E-MAIL ALERTS
WASHINGTON (Creators Syndicate) -- Rep. Jeff Flake, a freethinker in the Arizona Republican tradition, took the House floor last Friday to interrupt celebration over breaking the legislative logjam before beginning the long summer recess.
"The transportation bill," he said, "ought to carry the same warning that drivers see on their rearview mirror: Items are larger than they appear." Flake exposed as phony an 11th hour spending cut in the elephantine measure.
"Mr. President," Flake declared, "please veto this bill." George W. Bush will do no such thing, though it exceeds his spending limits.
On the contrary, the White House brandishes the pork-filled transportation bill as one of several summer "victories."
It joins an energy bill, whose inclusions and omissions raise Republican eyebrows, and the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), bought at the cost of still undetermined tradeoffs.
I had breakfast last week with several conservative House Republicans as they awaited President Bush's address to GOP members pleading with them to vote for CAFTA.
Their mood was not celebratory, as they mourned the absence of radical reductions in spending and radical tax reform. Congress has yet to make permanent the Bush tax cuts, and prospects for Social Security reform remain bleak.
The lawmakers consider this a joint failure, with responsibility shared by the president and the congressional leadership.
The White House "victory" claim on the transportation bill is audacious. In 2004, Bush drew a $256 billion line in the sand, threatening a veto of either the Senate ($318 billion) or House ($275 billion) version.
Just one year later, Bush's line advanced to $284 billion. The bill passed last week was listed at $286.5 billion. But as Flake pointed out, it really is $8.6 billion higher than that because of a budget gimmick.
The package's contents, however, are worse than its label. President Ronald Reagan vetoed the 1986 bill because it contained around 150 items earmarked by individual lawmakers.
The 2005 bill to be signed by President Bush contains nearly 6,000 such earmarks. Many are pure pork: non-highway, non-rapid transit projects, including some that members of Congress accepted as their own after being sold on them by a professional lobbyist.
A random glance at a few earmarks and their House earmarkers shows that pork is bipartisan:
The redoubtable Jeff Flake voted against the transportation bill last Friday. So did two standing committee chairmen, Jim Sensenbrenner and John Boehner ("This is fiscal discipline?" Boehner asked). They belonged to a lonely bunch, outvoted 412 to 8 in the House.
As for the energy bill, it excluded anything that might provoke a Senate Democratic filibuster, such as Bush's showcase energy proposal to drill in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR).
It included a mandate forcing the use of ethanol in gasoline and launching a study of producing ethanol from sugar cane.
The energy bill's sugar provisions sweetened CAFTA, though it is not yet known how much pork was dispensed to facilitate passage after midnight last Thursday.
The legislative mood on Capitol Hill was reflected in the session's closing hours last week when Sen. Max Baucus, ranking Democrat on the Senate Finance Committee, inserted in the highway bill a provision with the effect of keeping open Malmstrom Air Force Base in his state of Montana.
That would have destroyed the entire military base-closing program, whose intent is to keep individual members of Congress from tinkering.
This extraordinary earmark actually passed the Senate before being discovered in the House.
"I'm sorry the House acted as if it knows what is best for Great Falls, Montana," said an unrepentant Baucus. But even this Congress apparently observes some limits.
|© 2007 Cable News Network.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved.
Terms under which this service is provided to you.
Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. Site Map.