I've said often enough that John McCain's message of change and reform isn't going to work because he can't give a real example of what, exactly, those reforms entail. I've neglected McCain's emphasis on vetoing earmarks because it's nonsense, but this Politico article gives us all an opportunity to revisit the subject.
The story makes clear that even if John McCain is elected president, both parties in Congress will fight to retain their spending prerogatives, especially since McCain doesn't seem to oppose earmarks the president puts in the budget. Lawmakers are committed enough to this fight, according to the article, that it could spark a government shut-down. They will argue, correctly, that they are given the power of the purse by the Constitution, and have the right to a say where federal money is spent -- more so than the president, certainly.
But would cutting earmarks save money? Not really. Earmarks are only .6 percent of federal spending. Cutting all of them wouldn't come close to affecting the deficit, or to making up for the massive tax cuts that McCain is proposing. This is especially true because earmarks come from pre-existing funding streams that have already been appropriated; they are just specifications for where funding ought to go. Further, many earmarks are things the U.S. wouldn't be wise to cut: our aid package to Israel, housing for veterans, and funding for numerous other important policy goals.
True, some of them are junk ("bridge to nowhere" ring a bell?) and that's why most earmark reformers have focused on transparency. A bill passed in 2006 created a searchable federal database of all earmarks, so now both the media and citizens can see which lawmakers want which projects and determine if they're wise policies or corrupt conflicts of interest. (Fun fact: McCain and Barack Obama signed on to co-sponsor the bill on the same day.) The other method of allocating funding, open competition for the awarding of grants, is important as well, but as we've seen throughout the Iraq War, for instance, "open" competition can be gamed quite effectively.
So the next time John McCain promises to reform earmarks, keep in mind that he won't -- and that it would be bad if he tried. That's some straight talk.
--Tim Fernholz
