What Is Pork Spending?
By Chuck Hyde, Editor of StandBesideHer.com
We hear a lot in the press about pork spending. But what is it?
The simple answer is, it depends on who you are. The original name is
from the term “pork-barreling” and is defined very nicely by
Citizens Against Government Waste who, along with the Congressional Porkbusters Coalition in 1991 developed a set of criteria. Their definition states that a pork-barrel project is one that is inserted into a larger bill and appropriates funds for a specific purpose. They’re contention is that for an item to be pork spending it must meet one of the following criteria:
Requested by only one chamber of Congress;
Not specifically authorized;
Not competitively awarded;
Not requested by the President;
Greatly exceeds the President’s budget request or the previous year’s funding;
Not the subject of congressional hearings; or
Serves only a local or special interest.
Again, the reality is that if you are the recipient of the spending, it is vitally important. And, to be fair, it might be. But the fact remains that it is an item that benefits only a specific entity and the question needs to be asked, should we all be paying for it? The argument here is one of central government v local control, and, funding. Should I, living in Michigan, pay for flood control in Little Rock, Arkansas? Conversely, should the taxpayers of Arkansas pay for a sidewalk snowmelt system in Lansing, Michigan? While the merits and even necessity of both can be argued, the question is shouldn’t local residents benefiting from a program that only has localized and specific applications pay the cost?
There also is the concern of how the pork is inserted. It is usually inserted into a bill with no debate on it’s merit or cost effectiveness. Congressional members often vote on bills without fully reading them (congressional members have publicly admitted to this). This sets up circumstances in which these pork projects are “snuck” into a large and cumbersome bill without anyone else knowing.
Without arguing the merit of an appropriation inserted as pork spending, the issue of the process needs to be addressed. The system as it stands now is ripe for abuse. The problem with reform is the real world definition of pork spending. We can use the definition set forth above, it is quite good. But unfortunately these groups are not members of congress and they do not face re-election. The real purpose of pork spending is to “take the bacon home” to the congressional district and keep getting re-elected. And, unfortunately, the people that have to reform the process are the congressional members themselves. While we do have a few members who take a stand and refuse to participate, John McCain is making his stance a part of his presidential campaign, there is little incentive for congressional members to change the system.
To sum it up, pork spending is like garbage.
As one man’s garbage is another man’s treasure,
so it goes with pork spending. One man’s pork is
another man’s necessary program to help the children/elderly/unemployed.
Before you think I am callous, realize that “pork” is generally for
something like the “hippy museum” (a museum dedicated to the
Woodstock concert supported by Senator Hillary Clinton), a Lawrence Welk museum,
a swimming pool in Puerto Rico (an island with beautiful beaches), or
$320 million for a bridge in Alaska that is being built so that the 8,900 residents of
Ketchikan do not have to wait 15 to 30 minutes for a $6 ferry ride to the island of
Gravina (population 50) and it’s airport. These are all real congressional appropriations or
requests and any politician worth their weight can make an argument for them
being necessary for children/elderly/unemployed to pull at our heart strings.
About The Author: Chuck Hyde is editor of StandBesideHer.com. He is also a husband and father of two teenage boys and a younger daughter. His family lives in the northern Midwestern rural United States, where they enjoy camping, fishing, and other outdoor activities together. Chuck is a Registered Nurse in an inner city emergency room and has had a lifelong addiction to politics.
COMMENTS: Do you have a comment about this editorial?
Email Chuck here
to share it.
