I’ve noticed the recent rise in the use of the term earmarks and a corresponding decrease in use of the term ‘pork barrel’. Are they actually the same thing. Wiki has an article for both, not that they means anything.
Perhaps this goes in General. It started out as an observation, but ended as a question.
They are very similar. Pork barrel funding is funding directed to benefit the constituents of one or more legislator. Often they are enacted in groups, so all the politicians get something for their home districts, and because everybody gets a piece, it’s very hard to stop. “I’ll vote for your bridge to nowhere if you’ll vote for my expansion of Hellhole National Park.”
Earmarks target the money more narrowly. It’s like a grant that’s given with strings attached. “You can have a million dollars, but only if you spend it for a certain thing made by a certain company.” Like a few years ago after Katrina, Barbara Bush got quite a bit of flak for giving a relief “donation” that required LA or maybe New Orleans to use the money to buy some software from her son’s company. It’s all about relieving your crony buddies of the burden of going through a competitive bid process, or justifying an actual need for a product, or even demonstrating that the product works.
Pork is broader than earmarks. Pork is government money brought into a district by a legislator. Earmarks are targeted pork.