Levin Wants Limits on Earmark Ban
Senior Senate Democrats want to limit the scope of an earmark moratorium adopted reluctantly in the wake of President Obama’s pledge to veto bills containing earmarks.
Senior Democrats who chair authorizing committees argue that the earmark moratorium should not cover all “congressionally directed spending” under their jurisdiction.
But Republicans led by Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) are pushing Democrats to apply the moratorium broadly.
“Would anyone want to ban Congress from authorizing or appropriating money for a disaster relief? I hope not. It’s going to take some thinking as to how you define earmark, ” said Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services panel.
Levin and other senior Democrats argued behind the scenes that an earmark moratorium should not apply to a request to fund assistance in response to a natural disaster or a request to give the troops in Afghanistan and Iraq additional equipment.
“If a senator requests additional UAVs, and they’re only assembled in one state, is that an earmark?” Levin said in reference to unmanned aerial vehicles.
Levin argues that a senator should be able to request funding to improve the armor on military Humvees, even if the armor is assembled in his or her home state.
Rule 44 of the Senate requires the disclosure of such requests.
Proponents of a broad earmark ban argue that provisions defined by the Senate rules as “congressionally directed spending” count as earmarks and should be subject to Obama’s veto pledge.
But Levin disagrees. He says these requests should be disclosed but argues that senators should not be prohibited from setting spending priorities.
He points out that Rule 44 only requires disclosure, it does not ban directed spending — one of Congress’s most cherished powers.
“I hope we don’t want to stop Congress from authorizing funds for protecting our troops,” he said. “Disclosure is fine.
“Would we want to ban Congress from doing that?” he said. “We’re struggling with that.”
Click here to read more.