# Let’s talk about earmarks in 2021 **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 13, 2021, 8:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819 "2021-03-13T08:49:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2021, 8:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819/1 "2021-03-13T08:49:16Z")
For those who may not remember: earmarking was the practice of specifying funding for a project in a bill, like for a bridge or a new road or hospital, etc. It was a way that legislators could direct projects, and thus federal dollars, right to their districts/constituents. They’re in the news today: > **[Democratic push to revive earmarks divides Republicans](https://apnews.com/article/politics-legislation-coronavirus-pandemic-b05c97336ea4574bf99cc2bc9eeaf90c)** > > WASHINGTON (AP) — Can lawmakers bring home the bacon without it being pork? It's a question that's vexing Republicans as they consider whether to join a Democratic push to revive earmarks, the much-maligned practice where lawmakers direct federal... > [@](#): > > Earmarking was linked to corruption in the 2000s, leading to an outcry and their banishment in both the House and Senate. But many in Congress say the ban has gone too far, ceding the “power of the purse” to party leaders and the executive branch and giving lawmakers less incentive to work with members of the other party on major legislation. > > Democratic appropriators in the House see a solution and are proposing a revamped process allowing lawmakers to submit public requests for “community project funding” in federal spending bills. To guard against graft, the process includes safeguards to prevent conflicts of interest. > > Whether earmarking becomes bipartisan could have enormous implications not only for the allocation of spending across the country, but for President Joe Biden, who is [gearing up](https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-c98de9fe006e508c59857e32fd12ca1a) for a massive infrastructure push that he hopes will attract significant Republican support. With earmarking in place, bipartisanship could prove easier to achieve, as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle could have reason to support bills they would otherwise oppose. > > “This is a matter of allowing members to serve their own constituents,” said Rep. Tom Cole, R-Okla. “Somebody is going to be making these decisions — and I don’t want to bash federal bureaucrats — but somebody who has never been to my district probably doesn’t know the needs as well as I do.” > > With Congress having allocated nearly $6 trillion responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, some conservatives are aghast at the prospect of Republicans participating in a Democratic spending spree. They say their party should resist earmarking, not revive it. > > “This is not the time to fall into the swamp, or into the dark hole of earmarks,” said Rep. Ted Budd, R-N.C. “We’ve got to draw a bright line between Republicans and Democrats right now.” So there it is: yea or nay? Are earmarks just a bad idea? Or are they a normal & necessary part of governance? Can they be implemented to avoid graft and corruption? Should they be? Discuss. ---
**Author:** ![flurb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@flurb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flurb)\ **Post date:** [March 13, 2021, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819/2 "2021-03-13T14:22:52Z")
I never thought earmarks were that big a deal, but I also don’t think that bringing them back is going to promote bipartisanship. The “bridge to nowhere” DID go somewhere — it would have served a community of Ted Stevens’ constituents. Earmarks were never more than a fraction of the federal budget, and they are dwarfed by give aways to corporations and other favored constituencies through the tax code and direct subsidies. That said, bringing them back isn’t going to bring Republicans on board Democratic legislation in any significant way. Their time has passed — a reputation for “bringing home the bacon” just doesn’t matter as much as party affiliation. And Republicans will paint this as a Democratic money grab. It might help to pick off a Lisa Murkowski here or there, but her vote doesn’t matter when you need 60 in the Senate for any non-reconciliation legislation. ---
**Author:** ![DWMarch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dwmarch/32/1010_2.png) [@DWMarch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DWMarch)\ **Post date:** [March 14, 2021, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819/3 "2021-03-14T01:04:15Z")
Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t earmarks and bipartisanship die around the same time? I’m under the impression that once earmarks were taken away, Republicans became the Party of No. Bring back these little bribes and they might become the party of “as much as I still hate the Democrats, it’s good for my constituents so I’m going to hold my nose and vote for that money I wouldn’t otherwise get”. > [@Snowboarder\_Bo](#): > > Can they be implemented to avoid graft and corruption? Should they be? Oh hell, no. They are graft and corruption in and of themselves. But that’s not a bug, it’s a feature. ---
**Author:** ![Snowboarder\_Bo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/snowboarder_bo/32/229_2.png) [@Snowboarder\_Bo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snowboarder_Bo)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2021, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819/4 "2021-03-20T09:19:04Z")
Well that wasn’t difficult at all: > **[House Republicans opt to restore earmarks after lengthy ban](https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-kevin-mccarthy-bills-e58ee8b1902a64c78b02cef54804b93a)** > > WASHINGTON (AP) — House Republicans narrowly voted Wednesday to allow their members to seek earmarks under certain conditions, making a clean break from a decade-long ban against seeking money for specific projects back home... ---
**Author:** ![flurb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@flurb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flurb)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2021, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819/5 "2021-03-20T13:43:10Z")
Huh, I admit I’m surprised a majority of House Republicans agreed to go along with it. Maybe earmarks do still have some pull with voters. I’ll also be interested to see how the process works – if House Rs can get their earmarks in the bill and vote against it anyway it’ll be the best of both worlds for them. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2021, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819/6 "2021-03-20T22:13:13Z")
> [@DWMarch](#): > > Correct me if I’m wrong but didn’t earmarks and bipartisanship die around the same time? I’m under the impression that once earmarks were taken away, Republicans became the Party of No. Bring back these little bribes and they might become the party of “as much as I still hate the Democrats, it’s good for my constituents so I’m going to hold my nose and vote for that money I wouldn’t otherwise get”. I agree with this. I don’t agree that corruption and graft are an inevitable part of the process, though. It’s true that someone is going to get a contract to build something—but there are ways of making it less possible to do it corruptly. Transparency at the various stages of the process can be achieved; money can be followed. And members of the press can and should be incentivized to follow that money—they are all looking for some way of grabbing audiences, now that the Former Guy is (mostly) gone. \ eta: and anything that transfers power back from the Executive branch to the Legislative is important, even if it happens only in small increments. The Imperial Presidency MUST be brought under some kind of control. ---
**Author:** ![silenus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/silenus/32/166_2.png) [@silenus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/silenus)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2021, 10:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819/7 "2021-03-20T22:48:55Z")
> [@flurb](#): > > if House Rs can get their earmarks in the bill and vote against it anyway it’ll be the best of both worlds for them. I would think that such an occurrence would be the exact opposite. Teasing their constituents and then snatching the prize away at the last moment won’t win you any votes in this country. People vote with their wallets first, if they realize what the real issues are. ---
**Author:** ![flurb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/51bf81/32.png) [@flurb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/flurb)\ **Post date:** [March 20, 2021, 11:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819/8 "2021-03-20T23:30:05Z")
What I’m envisioning is that Republicans will get an earmark added to a bill and then vote against the overall bill, knowing that it will still pass. That way they get to take credit for getting the earmark added to the bill, and still bloviate about how they voted against wasteful government spending. This used to happen sometimes back when earmarks were a thing, until leadership wised up and suddenly members who voted against passage found their earmarks had oddly disappeared from the final version of the bill. ---
**Author:** ![Hari\_Seldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hari_seldon/32/5173_2.png) [@Hari\_Seldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hari_Seldon)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2021, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/let-s-talk-about-earmarks-in-2021/937819/9 "2021-03-21T16:58:31Z")
Maybe a bridge to nowhere in WV and another one in AZ could get rid of the filibuster?