Breaking Down President Obama's New Earmarks Pledge

Let's get a couple of facts out of the way right now:

1. The Omnibus Spending Bill may be full of pork, but it's not full of pork from earmarks. Taxpayers for Common Sense has identified $7.7 billion in earmarks, but that adds up to less than one percent of the spending. So let's say it's sprinkled with earmark pork.

2. The earmarks are 60% from Democrats and the other 40% tacked on by Republicans. So both parties have their fingerprints all over this practice.

But let me break down what President Obama said at The White House Wednesday on what the future of earmarks will be, now that he's signed this bill with thousands of them included.

You'll have to do some scrolling down and back up as you read the President's remarks as posted on The White House website:

In my discussions with Congress, we have talked about the need for further reforms to ensure that the budget process inspires trust and confidence instead of cynicism. (1) So I believe as we move forward, we can come together around principles that prevent the abuse of earmarks.

These principles begin with a simple concept: Earmarks must have a legitimate and worthy public purpose.(2) Earmarks that members do seek must be aired on those members' websites in advance (3), so the public and the press can examine them and judge their merits for themselves. Each earmark must be open to scrutiny at public hearings, where members will have to justify their expense to the taxpayer.(4)

Next, any earmark for a for-profit private company should be subject to the same competitive bidding requirements as other federal contracts. The awarding of earmarks to private companies is the single most corrupting element of this practice, as witnessed by some of the indictments and convictions that we've already seen. Private companies differ from the public entities that Americans rely on every day -- schools, and police stations, and fire departments.

When somebody is allocating money to those public entities, there's some confidence that there's going to be a public purpose. When they are given to private entities, you've got potential problems. You know, when you give it to public companies -- public entities like fire departments, and if they are seeking taxpayer dollars, then I think all of us can feel some comfort that the state or municipality that's benefitting is doing so because it's going to trickle down and help the people in that community. When they're private entities, then I believe they have to be evaluated with a higher level of scrutiny.

Furthermore, it should go without saying that an earmark must never be traded for political favors.

And finally, if my administration evaluates an earmark and determines that it has no legitimate public purpose, then we will seek to eliminate it, and we'll work with Congress to do so.(5)

1. It may be a little late for that. A new Rasmussen Reports poll finds less than a quarter of Americans (23%) believe the federal government truly reflects the will of the people.

2. Who makes that decision? I'm sure there are lawmakers who believe projects such as $819,000 for catfish genetics research in Alabama and $95,000 to help the state of New Mexico locate a dental school are "legitimate" and "worthy."

3. This has been a pledge of the Obama Administration, but this transparency has yielded mixed results. The White House did post the Omnibus legislation on their website (or at least a link to it) on Friday. But CBS News points out that while he promised he would "not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days," the Economic Stimulus, CHIP and Lilly Ledbetter Fair Play measures were signed without meeting that standard.

4. Taxpayers for Common Sense reports there are 8,570 earmarks in the Omnibus Spending plan. Who is going to have time for more than 8,500 public hearings?

5. I did a Google News search for editorials on the future of earmarks with the Obama Administration in The White House. Take your pick:

The Dallas Morning News

Forbes roundup

Hartford Courant

Los Angeles Times

Politico.com