Senate Draft on Lobbying Clamps Down on Earmarks

[Judi Lynn]

Senate Draft on Lobbying Clamps Down on Earmarks
Rules Panel Would Target Narrow Spending and Require Prompt Disclosure of Meals Received

By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 28, 2006; Page A07

The Senate Rules Committee plans today to draft legislation that would make it harder for lawmakers to win narrowly focused appropriations and tax breaks called earmarks and to compel lawmakers to quickly disclose any meals they accept from lobbyists.

The plan, which was still being worked on yesterday, will probably form the basis of the first of a series of bills in Congress this year designed to curtail lobbying after the Jack Abramoff political corruption scandal.

Separately, Republican leaders in the House neared an agreement to temporarily ban privately funded travel for House members. A senior House aide said the ban would be in place until an effective process for preapproving trips could be established.

The Rules Committee measure would allow the Senate to strip individual earmarks from conference reports, which are bills in their final stage before they are sent for the president's signature. Currently, lawmakers are often powerless to remove the provisions when legislation is so far advanced.
(snip/...)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/27/AR2006022701241.html?nav=rss_politics

[pinto]

1. What an odd pairing. But if it flies, I'm all for it. Earmarks are pork.

[sandnsea]

2. Earmarks are to guarantee project funding

We have earmarks to make sure money goes to the particular projects they're intended for. Teacher training, curriculum development, after school programs, child care awareness programs. Most of the short term social programs are all done through earmarks. Letting them frame this as just pork is flat out the stupidest thing we could do. It doesn't have anything to do with the long term corporate subsidies and tax cuts that lobbyists get paid to go after.