Club for Growth has been keeping a running list of those Members of the House of Representatives who have sworn off pork until the process of earmarking is reformed.  I am proud to have my name on this list, and I hope to see more of my colleagues join me.

To see the full list, click here

I have been an outspoken critic of earmarks, and I frequently blog about some of the most egregious ones on this very blog, but this story by Sheryl Attkisson, from CBS Evening News perfectly articulates why earmarks are unfair and why the system must be reformed.

Attkisson highlights the relationship between Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-LA) and Randy Best, founder of the “Voyager” reading program.  In 2001, Sen. Landrieu earmarked $2 million of taxpayer funds to put the “Voyager reading program” in D.C. public schools. 

Mr. Best, the company’s founder, soon arranged a fundraiser for Sen. Landrieu, widely viewed as the most endangered Democratic Senator up for reelection this year, which raised roughly $30,000 for Landrieu’s reelection war chest.  These donations came from Best’s family, friends, and employees.

Attkisson notes that there are hundreds if not thousands of similar programs and companies out there offering the same or similar product which highlights the fact that this earmark was not competitively bid, and most earmarks are never competitively bid. 

To see the whole areticle by Attkisson. Click Here

This weekend, House Republicans are meeting for the annual members retreat. One of the major topics of discussion will be how to reclaim the reputation for fiscal responsibility.

The way I see it, House Republicans have two strong courses of action.

First, House Republicans should take the offensive and declare a moratorium on earmarks.  There would be some resistance from some Republicans Members of Congress who habitually request earmarks, but the this party is supposed to be that of fiscal restraint…the way the earmark system operates now is far from fiscally responsible.

Second, House Republican Leaders will have the opportunity to name an anti-earmark advocate to the vacancy on the House Appropriations Committee.  This would send a clear signal to the American people that Republicans are dedicated to fiscal responsibility.  Jeff Flake has made it known that he wants the spot, and has been a consistent and vocal opponent of the earmarking process.

I support both an earmark moratorium and Jeff Flake for the Appropriations seat.  However, what course of action to be taken is still in question.  The opportunity to take a stand has come and, if Republicans are truly dedicated to regaining their principles, this weekend will truly be one for the books.

As a dedicated fiscal conservative, I always favor allowing taxpayers to keep more of their own money. But the current stimulus package being discussed would entail an overall increase in transfer payment spending and would not effectively stimulate the economy.    

It is important to realize that the current crisis is a result of a capital and credit crisis, not a consumer spending one.  In order to tackle the crisis head on, I joined my colleagues in the RSC to introduce the Economic Growth Act of 2008.

The Economic Growth Act of 2008 is designed to provide growth-oriented, permanent incentives for economic activity across the board.  This package will result in sustained growth with long-term implications.  This will ensure that Washington takes a back seat to Main Street and job creators are empowered to do what they do best—create jobs.

This legislation contains four main provisions:

• Full, Immediate Expensing.  The bill would allow all businesses to immediately expense—or fully deduct on their tax returns—the costs of assets (including buildings) they purchase for their business in the year that they buy such assets (“Section 179” expensing).  Under current law, businesses can only take limited deductions in pieces, over several years.  By uncapping and accelerating the expensing, this provision would encourage the purchase of assets with which to grow a business.
• Significant Reduction in the Top Corporate Tax Rate.  The bill would immediately cut the top corporate income tax rate from 35% to 25%, aligning it with the average rate in the European Union.  By allowing businesses to keep more of the money they earn, this provision would encourage the expansion of businesses, the hiring of more workers, and an acceleration of investment, while making American companies more competitive internationally.
• End the Capital Gains Tax on Inflation.  The bill would index for inflation the cost basis used when calculating the capital gains tax on assets acquired before the end of 2008.  Under current law, the capital gains tax is based on the difference in the original purchase price of the asset and the sale price of the asset.  However, some of this difference, or “gain,” can be attributed to inflation.  By effectively reducing the amount of a gain that is taxable, this provision would encourage the movement of capital in 2008 and spur voluminous economic investment.
• Simplify the Capital Gains Rate Structure.  The bill would allow corporations to benefit from the 15% capital gains rate.  Under current law, individuals pay a top capital gains rate of 15%, but corporations are subject to a 35% top rate.  By encouraging corporations to sell unwanted assets, this provision would unleash funds and materials with which to create jobs and grow the economy.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its report on The Budget and Economic Outlook: Fiscal Years 2008 to 2018. I am off to a Budget Hearing Committee, and this is a lengthy report, but at first glance this is what stands out to me.

According to the report, the budget deficit fell in 2007 for the third year in a row.  It dropped from $316 billion in 2005 to $248 billion in 2006 to $163 billion in 2007.  Revenues in 2007 totaled $2.6 trillion (18% of the GDP), which is a 6.7% increase from the previous year. 

In 2008 the federal government is expecting a 3.4% increase in tax revenue despite the economic downturn.  So, if government spending could increase by 3.4% or less, the deficit will stay the same or go down.  Perish the thought! Who really believes this Congress will hold fast to fiscal responsibility and keep spending below 3.4%? Not me. In that scenario we would actually have a surplus, even in the current economic condition of this country. But back to reality…

The real question is, will Democrats remain within the 3.4% increase in spending?

I will be appearing LIVE tomorrow morning on CSPAN’s Washington Journal from 7:30-8:00am EST. to discuss the state of the economy and the economic stimulus proposals circulating in Congress.  

I hope you can tune in.

As some of you may have heard, Rep. Wicker (R-MS) has been appointed to the U.S. Senate to fill the spot for recently retired Senator Trent Lott (R-MS).  This frees up a seat on the House Appropriations Committee.

I have long argued that the appropriations process is broken and needs to be reformed; in fact, I have taken a pledge to not request any new earmarks until we do so.  Now, we have a real chance at changing the earmark culture in residence in Washington, D.C. 

Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ), has submitted a petition to the House Republican leadership for consideration for the open seat on the panel, and I believe he would be an excellent candidate for the open seat.  Jeff Flake has long been a vocal and fearless advocate for reform of the earmark process, government spending, and oversight.

With this vote, the Republican Steering Committee has an opportunity to show that House Republicans are serious about fiscal responsibility.  I sincerely hope Mr. Flake will have the opportunity to send his message of open government and reform  to the American people.

It is time for a change. 

To make your voice heard visit Make it Flake

Below you will find an editorial that appeared in today’s New York Times. If the Liberal New York Times is printing editorials on wasteful Congressional pork projects, a clear message is being sent to Murtha and other Democrats to clean up the earmark process and pursue real reform.

January 14, 2008 -- New York Times Editorial

The Pork King Keeps His Crown

The new earmark disclosure rules put into effect by Congress confirm the pre-eminence of Representative John Murtha at procuring eye-popping chunks of pork for contractors he helped put in business in Johnstown, Pa. The Pennsylvania Democrat, a power player on defense appropriations, exudes pride, not embarrassment, for delivering hundreds of millions of dollars in largesse to district beneficiaries. They, in turn, requite with hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign donations.

Mr. Murtha led all House members this year, securing $162 million in district favors, according to the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense. In all, eager members in both houses enacted 11,144 earmarks, worth $15 billion. Taxpayers may be inured to $113,000 for rodent control in Alaska or a million for Idaho’s weed management. Mr. Murtha’s universe is a far more complicated and costly creation of interlocking contractors who continue to feed at the public trough despite reviews questioning their performance.

In 1991, Mr. Murtha used a $5 million earmark to create the National Defense Center for Environmental Excellence in Johnstown to develop anti-pollution technology for the military. Since then, it has garnered more than $670 million in contracts and earmarks. Meanwhile it is managed by another contractor Mr. Murtha helped create, Concurrent Technologies, a research operation that somehow was allowed to be set up as a tax-exempt charity, according to The Washington Post. Thanks to Mr. Murtha, Concurrent has boomed; the annual salary for its top three executives averages $462,000.

There’s been no report of Mr. Murtha’s profiting personally. "This is about jobs," the congressman insists. But the Murtha operation — which has become a model for other entrepreneurial lawmakers — is a gross example of quid pro quo Washington. Every one of the 26 beneficiaries of Mr. Murtha’s earmarks in last year’s defense budget made contributions to his campaign kitty, a total of $413,250, according to the newspaper Roll Call. The Pentagon, seeking its own goodies before Mr. Murtha’s committee, is noticeably hesitant to challenge his projects. And we’re not hearing a lot of objections from his colleagues — not after members have ladled out a fresh $15 billion for their own special interests, just in time for the coming elections.

The President has an opportunity to send a clear message to Washington and its obsession with spending. 

Before the recess, Congress hurriedly sent the omnibus appropriations bill to the President littered with roughly 9,000 earmarks.  To no one’s surprise, many of these earmarks were not included in the text of the bill, but rather tucked away in the committee report, bypassing the new earmark rules.

On December 18, The Congressional Research Service (CRS), the nonpartisan research arm of Congress, stated that earmarks placed into committee reports do not have the force of law. 

Technically speaking, Committee Reports do not carry the force of law, and the President is not constitutionally required to enforce any language other than that of the legislative text, and in this case he should not..

Earlier this year, President Bush and Democratic Leaders agreed to cut earmarks to less than 7,000.  The Democratic Congress has clearly failed on their end of the deal. 

The President must hold up his end of the deal and send a signal to Washington and the American people that fiscal recklessness will no longer be tolerated.