Senate Won't Follow House Ban on For-Profit Earmarks
Patricia Murphy
Capitol Hill Bureau Chief
Posted:
03/11/10
Sen. Daniel Inoye (D-Hawaii), chairman of the powerful Senate Appropriations Committee, will not follow Rep. David Obey's move to ban federal earmarks to commercial businesses. Obey is the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee.
Inoye said he found the House's directive both "quizzical" and not in the best interests of the country.
"I am troubled by what this policy insinuates. It seems to suggest that for-profit entities are corrupt and non-profit entities are above reproach," he said in a statement. "All of our for-profit earmarks are already subject to competition. What is the rationale to eliminate them? All earmarks are also subject to the strict transparency rules that were implemented at the beginning of last year."
The chairman said that the Predator drone, one of the military's most successful weapons systems, came as the result of an earmark to a for-profit defense contractor.
Inoye also noted that the growth in earmarking over the last decade, which the House criticized, has come primarily in the non-profit sector, so preventing for-profits from receiving earmarks would not address the problem the House says it has with the system.
Not to be outdone by their Democratic counterparts, the House Republicans proposed a ban on all earmarks after Obey made his announcement.
Regardless of the decisions by House Republicans and Democrats, Inoye's move means that the House will still end up approving earmarks passed by the Senate. That's because the House and Senate must approve conference reports that combine House and Senate versions of a bill before it becomes law.
Congress awarded nearly $16 billion in earmarks for the current fiscal year, according to the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.
Inoye said he found the House's directive both "quizzical" and not in the best interests of the country.
"I am troubled by what this policy insinuates. It seems to suggest that for-profit entities are corrupt and non-profit entities are above reproach," he said in a statement. "All of our for-profit earmarks are already subject to competition. What is the rationale to eliminate them? All earmarks are also subject to the strict transparency rules that were implemented at the beginning of last year."
The chairman said that the Predator drone, one of the military's most successful weapons systems, came as the result of an earmark to a for-profit defense contractor.
Inoye also noted that the growth in earmarking over the last decade, which the House criticized, has come primarily in the non-profit sector, so preventing for-profits from receiving earmarks would not address the problem the House says it has with the system.
Not to be outdone by their Democratic counterparts, the House Republicans proposed a ban on all earmarks after Obey made his announcement.
Regardless of the decisions by House Republicans and Democrats, Inoye's move means that the House will still end up approving earmarks passed by the Senate. That's because the House and Senate must approve conference reports that combine House and Senate versions of a bill before it becomes law.
Congress awarded nearly $16 billion in earmarks for the current fiscal year, according to the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.