- The Washington Times - Friday, January 12, 2007

Randy Cunningham, the former Republican representative from California who has retired to a prison work camp in Arizona, is dictating the congressional agenda now more than when he was in office. The scandal caused by his practice of supplementing his official salary by exchanging government contracts for bribes is one of the main factors driving the new spending rules the House has approved and the Senate is considering.

Nearly every story about earmark reform, which is supposed to discourage legislators from using narrowly targeted spending to curry favor with donors and constituents, mentions Cunningham. Yet it’s hard to see how the reforms adopted by the House could have prevented his graft, since they include an exception for just the sort of earmarks he found most profitable.

Nor are the changes likely to stop members of Congress from trying to buy votes with taxpayers’ money. The reforms rely mainly on greater openness to shame legislators into better fiscal behavior, and when it comes to pork, legislators have no shame.

The new rules require House members to submit written requests for earmarks to the relevant committee’s chairman, identifying the recipient, describing the purpose and certifying neither the sponsor nor his spouse has a financial interest in the expenditure. Information about earmarks in legislation considered by the House will be made available online.

But as Citizens Against Government Waste notes, these disclosure requirements do not cover earmarks designated for federal agencies, which are how Cunningham generated most of his graft income. Instead of allocating money directly to the two companies that paid him some $2.4 million in bribes, he obtained Defense Department project earmarks that resulted in contracts for them.

An inquiry by the House Intelligence Committee, on which Cunningham served, found he had bullied committee staffers into going along with the earmarks and pressured Pentagon officials into awarding the contracts. As a member of the House appropriations subcommittee in charge of defense spending, he had enough clout to overcome his enablers’ misgivings.

At least Cunningham had the decency to hide what he was doing. For legislators who brag about taking money from taxpayers around the country and spending it on parochial projects in their districts or states, the threat of publicity does not seem much of a deterrent.

During the last election season, Rep. Charles Taylor, North Carolina Republican, created an interactive online map showing the pork he had won for each county in his district, including $1 million for an Appalachian wine institute, $2 million for an astronomy center in Transylvania County and $3 million for a local school “to promote healthy childhood development and prevent violence.” Republican Sen. Conrad Burns of Montana, which is in the top 10 for both per capita pork and federal spending per dollar of federal taxes, boasted of sponsoring some $2 billion in earmarks for the state.

“That money is going to be spent somewhere,” Mr. Burns explained. “I want Montana to get first share.” In a political culture with no respect for constitutional limits on federal spending, that attitude is sadly common.

But contrary to what politicians like Mr. Burns and Mr. Taylor seem to believe, the connection between pork-barrel spending and re-election is unclear. In his 1991 book “The Culture of Spending,” political scientist James L. Payne concluded, based on data from the mid-1980s, that “a congressman’s support for spending does not seem to have any significant effect on his electoral showing.” Mr. Payne also noted the political success of fiscal conservatives who pride themselves on eschewing earmarks.

It’s possible too much pork might even be bad for a politician. Both Mr. Taylor and Mr. Burns — who had served 16 and 18 years, respectively — lost their bids for re-election, perhaps partly because Cunningham’s corruption made the earmarks about which they bragged seem disreputable. If so, we can thank the crook for helping restore some semblance of fiscal discipline.

Jacob Sullum is a nationally syndicated columnist.

Copyright © 2019 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.


Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide