Earmarks: What and why

If you've followed D.C. politics the last few years, you'll know the term earmarks. They are vilified by the Bush administration and have plagued both Republican and Democrat congresses as wasteful spending. For all of the news about, the condemnations of, and the commitments to change the process of earmarking in congress, there has been little explanation of the practice.

In short, earmarks are items attached to bills that pay for a project without going through the scrutiny of congressional and executive approval. Think of going to the grocery store with a budget and a shopping list. As you walk through the aisle, you realize you wanted pickles. Now, it wasn't on the list. Knowing you're going to spend more than was budgeted, you decide not to call everyone to make sure it's okay to spend the extra couple of bucks and buy the pickles. This is essentially earmarking.

When you add an item here and there, it's no big deal. In fact, it's more convenient. The problem is, when it becomes common practice to tack 20 to 30 bucks of extras on your grocery trip every couple of weeks. This is what congress has done. To get around approving every spending item they add them to other, often unrelated, spending bills.

Earmarks have gone from being a convenient way to pay for incidental expenses to a way for congresspersons to pay for pet projects back home. They have become the bread and butter of many hoping to win re-election in their districts. Responsible use of earmarks makes congress more efficient. Abuse of earmarks results in overspending and questionable use of federal dollars.