Earmark (politics)

In United States politics, earmarks refer to congressional provisions that direct approved funds to be spent on specific projects, or that direct specific exemptions from taxes or mandated fees.

Earmarks can be found both in legislation (also called "Hard earmarks" or "Hardmarks") and in the text of Congressional committee reports (also called "Soft earmarks" or "Softmarks"). Hard earmarks are binding and have the effect of law, while soft earmarks do not have the effect of law but by custom are acted on as if they were binding. [http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/m012606.pdf] Typically, a legislator seeks to insert earmarks that direct a specified amount of money to a particular organization or project in his/her home state or district.

Definition

Congressional earmarks are often defined loosely as anonymously authored guarantees of federal funds to particular recipients in appropriations-related documents.

The federal Office of Management and Budget defines earmarks as funds provided by Congress for projects or programs where the congressional direction (in bill or report language) circumvents Executive Branch merit-based or competitive allocation processes, or specifies the location or recipient, or otherwise curtails the ability of the Executive Branch to manage critical aspects of the funds allocation process.

Attempts have been made to define earmarks in ethics and budget reform legislation. However, due to the controversial nature of earmarks and the effects these definitions would have on Congressional power, none of these has been widely accepted.

Despite the lack of a consensus definition, the one used most widely was developed by the Congressional Research Service, the public policy research arm of the U.S. Congress:

"Provisions associated with legislation (appropriations or general legislation) that specify certain congressional spending priorities or in revenue bills that apply to a very limited number of individuals or entities. Earmarks may appear in either the legislative text or report language (committee reports accompanying reported bills and joint explanatory statement accompanying a conference report)." [ [http://www.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33295_20060306.pdf Comparison of Selected Senate Earmark Reform Proposals ] ]

In the United States legislative appropriations process, Congress is required, by the limits specified under of the United States Constitution, to pass legislation directing all appropriations of money drawn from the U.S. Treasury. This provides Congress with the power to earmark funds it appropriates to be spent on specific named projects. The earmarking process has become a regular part of the process of allocating funds within the Federal government.

Earmarking differs from the broader appropriations process, defined in the Constitution, in which Congress grants a yearly lump sum of money to a Federal agency. These monies are allocated by the agency according to its legal authority and internal budgeting process. With an earmark, Congress has given itself the ability to direct a specified amount of money from an agency's budget to be spent on a particular project, without the Members of the Congress having to identify themselves or the project.

See also

* Pork barrel

References

External links

* [http://earmarks.omb.gov/ Earmarks Database] from the Office of Management and Budget, official government website
* [http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:SDAvCrzBZ24J:www.dodig.osd.mil/Audit/reports/fy08/08-110.pdf+history+of+congressional+earmarks&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=29&gl=us "Results in Brief: The Cost, Oversight, and Impact of Congressional Earmarks Less Than $15 Million," Inspector General of the US Department of Defense]
* [http://earmarkwatch.org/ Earmark Watch] citizen watch group
* [http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/m012606.pdf Earmarks in Appropriations Acts] , January 26, 2006 memorandum by the Congressional Research Service (CRS) appropriations team
* [http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2007/pdf/concepts.pdf The Budget System and Concepts] , January 2006 document by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
* Congressional Research Service report [http://www.opencrs.com/rpts/RL33295_20060306.pdf Comparison of Selected Senate Earmark Reform Proposals] RL33295 published March 6, 2006.
* [http://www.cagw.org/ Citizens Against Government Waste]
* [http://thehill.com/business--lobby/appropriators-omb-differ-on-how-to-cut-earmarks-2007-05-21.html Appropriators, OMB differ on how to cut earmarks] , The Hill newspaper, May 21, 2007
* [http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/060529/29earmarks.htm Loading the Pork Train: A case study of why earmarks may be getting out of hand] U.S. News & World Report, Danielle Knight, 5/21/06
* [http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/20/washington/20earmarks.html Congress Is Still Pursuing Earmarks] New York Times, 12/20/06
* [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/27/AR2008012701655.html Agencies Share Information By Taking a Page From Wikipedia] Washington Post, Monday, January 28, 2008