Given the millions and millions of jobs we have lost across America, does tattoo removal for gang members really merit federal funding, let alone $200,000 of it?
The debate over pork and earmarks has returned, and now that Democrats can no longer blame Republicans for the practice, they are standing up for it themselves.
President Obama has decided to sign the 2009 omnibus appropriations act, packed with 9,000 earmarks totaling more than $12 billion. Democrats in leadership want to underscore this is only 1 percent of the bill. Let me repeat — $12 billion in individual projects for members of Congress — and they want you to know that isn’t a lot of money.
Clearly, members of Congress have a different view of reality and, ignoring the urgings of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and his own campaign promises, Obama has decided to give this one a pass. He is pledging strong rules of the road going forward — diet starts tomorrow, and all that.
Certainly, many of the expenditures — research for pig odor notwithstanding — would be worthy of private funding or state funding, but why are we doling out these billions when we are propping up AIG, Citigroup, General Motors, et al, before trying to address spiraling foreclosures, joblessness, and the grand policy goals Obama has slated for this year?
Putting off this fight with Congress was a missed opportunity, as I explained in my column this week. Rejecting pork, in a year when he plans to blow up the deficit even more, could help Obama sound more believable when he says he doesn’t want bigger government. And it would even bring a moment of that sought after bipartisanship he talks so much about.
CAN HEALTHCARE REFORM PASS BEFORE AUGUST? Ask A.B. returns Monday, March 9. Please join my weekly video Q&A by sending your questions and comments to askab@digital-staging.thehill.com. Thank you.