Both Senate majority leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have expressed support for some earmarks. But overall, congressional Democrats agree that earmarks should be fewer and more transparent. This year has seen a 14 percent increase in pork spending over 2008.
(Pablo Martinez Monsivais/AP)Photos (1 of 1)
‘Pig Book’: Congressional ‘pork’ hits $19.6 billion in 2009
Citizens Against Government Waste released its annual report on 'pork barrel' projects Tuesday.
By Gail Russell Chaddock | Staff writer/ April 14, 2009 edition
Reporter Gail Chaddock talks with CSMonitor.com's Pat Murphy about the 'Pig Book' and a change of heart about earmarks on Capitol Hill.
Reporter Gail Chaddock
Washington
Capitol Hill lawmakers added 10,160 pet projects – aka “pork barrel” projects – to this year’s government spending, fewer than in the previous budget cycle but at a higher total cost.
That’s the bottom line from the Pig Book, a list of member projects inserted in annual spending bills, released Tuesday by Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW). The watchdog group, which has issued the Pig Book each year since 1991, calls it “the book Washington doesn’t want you to read.”
For the record: The 10,160 projects – valued at $19.6 billion – represent a 14 percent increase in the cost to taxpayers over last year’s spending on “pork.” That’s even though the number of projects went down 12.5 percent during the same period.
“Everyone in Washington has promised a new era of transparency and restraint in earmarks, from President Obama to the leaders of both parties in Congress,” said CAGW president Tom Schatz in a briefing Tuesday. “Sadly, the hard numbers from the 2009 appropriations bills tell a different story. The current Democratic congressional majority is following the same trajectory as their Republican predecessors. They came into power promising to cut earmarks and made a big show of it during their first two years. However, as the 2009 Pig Book amply illustrates, pork-barrel spending is growing fast.”
Ferreting out sponsors of congressional earmarks was once devilishly complex. But as of fiscal year 2008, Congress has required members to identify their own earmarks. Does that mean the Pig Book is obsolete?
Hardly, reformers say, because the issue now is enforcement.
“Until fiscal year 2008, we never saw a name next to an earmark. That was a watershed moment for us and taxpayers, to see a project with a name next to it,” says David Williams, CAGW vice president of policy. “Unfortunately, this year we saw a little backsliding with more anonymous earmarks, especially in defense.”
Of the 10,160 projects is this year’s Pig Book, CAGW identified 221 earmarks worth $7.8 billion that were funded in violation of Congress’s own transparency rules.
As in years past, Alaska leads the nation with $221 million in earmarks, or $322 per capita. Hawaii, at $302 million in earmarks, or $235 per capita, ranks No. 2.
The name of former Sen. Ted Stevens (R) of Alaska – longtime chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, whose conviction on corruption charges was dismissed by a federal judge last week – was scrubbed from the 2009 omnibus spending bill and his earmarks assigned to Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R) of Alaska, CAGW officials note.
The practice of earmarking has been an early flash point between Mr. Obama, who campaigned to change Washington, and the new Congress. When the White House last month signaled that the president would propose a “different way” of handling earmarks, Democratic leaders in the House and Senate warned him off.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said “legislatively initiated proposals” in spending bills are “an appropriate function of the Congress of the United States.”
Senate majority leader Harry Reid noted: “Since we’ve been a country, we have had the obligation, as a Congress, to help direct spending.”
But Obama and congressional Democrats both agree that earmarks should be fewer and more transparent.
That standard, however, has yet to be met, says Taxpayers for Common Sense, another public-interest group that tracks government spending. One issue: Effective this month, members are required to list each of their earmarks on their official websites.
“Unfortunately, many members created a labyrinth that made finding their list of requests difficult or impossible, proving again a lesson learned long ago: simply posting information on the Web is not transparency,” said Taxpayers for Common Sense in an April 10 report.
Moreover, executive-branch transparency isn’t much better. “Many executive branch budget documents are scattered across the federal agencies, buried on websites that require an advanced degree in electronic archeology to dig out,” the report added.
Last week, Obama sent a $83.4 billion supplemental budget request to Congress to fund the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and other foreign operations. At the time, he signaled to congressional
leaders that he would not accept earmarks or unrelated items in the bill.
Comments
4. lc | 04.14.09
Lets keep in mind democrats are responsible for most of the earmarks in 2009 (65%). Democrats = lots of government with higher taxes. Republicans = less government with lower taxes. A smaller government requires less income. Keep in mind it was the private sector that made the US #1 militarily and economically. Our military would be no where without companies like Northrup Grumman, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, BAE systems, Pratt and Whitney, GM, Ford and Chrysler. Our economy, which is #1 in the world with a 14.5 trillion dollar GDP, is based on free market capitalism not socialism. If Obama and the Democrats have their way we will be a socialistic nanny state. This has historically proven itself a failure. Our country has seem many ups and downs in the past and yet we still have the #1 economy in the world thanks to free market capitalism. The democrats are claiming the government will take care of them. This is pure vote pandering. The government has failed and taking care of the people ie: medicare, medicaid, social security, no child left behind and the war on poverty. 40 million people in poverty 50 years ago, 40 million people in poverty today.
5. shamac | 04.14.09
Lets see, we spend millions researching peanuts, cow manure, etc etc. My husband is loosing his job after 26 years, pass me 99,000, maybe I can then keep my home.
6. Richard Higuera` | 04.14.09
I do understand that some “projects” are necessary but the fact that there many that cannot be justified as necessary - for instance the project to send millions to the Irish and sending money to states that already have a surplus of government pork. The action of our Congress absolutely makes me ashamed to be an American. Also, the fact that Obama said he would stop the earmarks and then he signs a bill with over 10,000 earmark - what part of telling the truth do he not understand.
7. Olivia | 04.15.09
QUOTES: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said “legislatively initiated proposals” in spending bills are “an appropriate function of the Congress of the United States.” Senate majority leader Harry Reid noted: “Since we’ve been a country, we have had the obligation, as a Congress, to help direct spending.”
I wonder if Harry and Nancy REALLY believe what they are saying. Somehow, I doubt they would feel this way if they weren’t being paid by lobbyists and campaign contributors to “direct spending” in this “appropriate” fashion.
How we citizens have tolerated this corruption-pretending-to-be-legitimate- spending-on-true-needs is BEYOND me. Why are we so apathetic and tolerant when it is OUR money being stolen?
8. John | 04.15.09
When is this nonsense going to stop? Our hard earned money that we get deducted in our paychecks going to this! It is criminal! I am going to support the Atlanta Tea Party tonight at our state capital. The real criminals our the congressman and senators who vote for these bills. The businessmen are the ones creating the jobs and taxes. Get rid of the businessmen and we may as well kiss our behinds goodbye.
9. Floyd | 04.20.09
We the people are the only ones that will ever give congress and the senate term limits 8 years and no more votes.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks
Leave a Comment
We do not publish all comments, and we do not publish comments immediately. The comments feature is a forum to discuss the ideas in our stories. Constructive debate - even pointed disagreement - is welcome, but personal attacks on other commenters are not, and will not be published.
Tip: Do not write a novel. Keep it short. We will not publish lengthy comments. Come up with your own statements. This is not a place to cut and paste an email you received. If we recognize it as such, we won't post it.
Please do not post any comments that are commercial in nature or that violate copyrights.
Finally, we will not publish any comments that we regard as obscene, defamatory, or intended to incite violence.




1. Toonces | 04.14.09
These guys in DC are a bunch of frauds and phoney double talking pigs.
We need term limits and a balanced budget ammendment. That is the only way to rid ourselves of these awful smelling skunks.
Although we could rise up and take back our country like the people in Thailand and Moldova are attempting.