Don't give up on earmark reform

Only 14 senators voted against the ethics bill that passed Thursday. To their fiscal-responsibility credit, our state's two senators, Jim DeMint and Lindsey Graham, were among those principled dissenters. And though the overwhelming margins of approval in both the Senate (83-14) and House (411-8) showed that this legislation is veto-proof, that doesn't mean it will achieve meaningful reform on the wasteful practice of pork-laden earmark spending.

Earlier this year, the long-term effort to cast more light on earmarks - a spending tactic by which projects are added to appropriations bills during the conference-committee process - appeared to reach the brink of a grand triumph. That drive for reform, aimed at maximizing spending transparency and minimizing waste of taxpayer money, won the Senate's preliminary approval of overdue changes that make common - and fiscal - sense. Among them: full disclosure of which lawmakers back which earmarks, posting of all earmarks on the Internet within 48 hours of their introduction, and certification that lawmakers and their family members have no financial interests in earmarks.

But after giving those needed advances lip service during last year's election campaign and for much of this year, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., effectively gutted the critical provisions listed above down the legislative stretch - though they did agree to a limited degree of earmark disclosure on the Internet if 'technically feasible.'

The final bill also allows the Senate majority leader (in the present case, Sen. Reid), instead of the Senate parliamentarian as originally proposed, to rule on whether a bill follows earmark-disclosure rules.

At least the bill does contain welcome strengthening of lobbying restrictions, including bans on current members of Congress accepting gifts, meals and travel from lobbyists and revocation of congressional floor privileges to former members who become lobbyists.

But the bill's failure to deliver on its promise of earmark reform remains a disappointing setback for the related causes of spending restraint and open government. As Sen. DeMint appraised the legislation passed Thursday: 'This was about incumbency protection and pretending to do something. There's a lot of smoke and mirrors in the new ethics bill, but upon a close look it's obvious that earmark transparency reforms have been eviscerated.'

Sen. Graham echoed that dismay: 'This legislation does not require an open and public disclosure of earmarks. It is weak and a vast departure from our original legislation.'

It is also a reminder that the entrenched status quo in 'shadow spending' by Congress retains widespread bipartisan support. Though the Democratic majority led the way on scuttling earmark reform, a large majority of Republicans followed, with GOP members backing the final bill 190-2 in the House (our state's entire House delegation voted yes) and 34-14 in the Senate. And remember, the explosion in earmark spending over the last decade occurred under a Republican-controlled Congress.

While this continuation of pork-spending business as usual is a letdown, the defeat shouldn't be considered permanent. Vigilance can shed light on earmark abuse, even if Congress is reluctant to help.

Public disclosure of pork-barrel outrages like Alaska's 'Bridge to Nowhere' will fuel the efforts of genuine earmark reformers - including our state's senators - as they renew their campaign for more ethical government next year.