…because something along these lines is better than nothing along these lines.

But is anybody really going to buy this as a principled move? I’m a proud, card-carrying Republican….but even I’m looking at this and saying “A far easier thing to do when you’re out of power, no?”

One of the more depressing legacies of the 12 year period of Republican control of Congress is that the average number of earmarks in that time period skyrocketed.

I long ago gave up hope of ever seeing earmarks brought under control. The best I think we’ll ever see are either symbolic gestures or baldly political ones — either way, they’re bogus.

There are enough people and groups now monitoring ear marks that any Republican who fails to adhere to the pledge will be exposed and hopefully penalized at the polls and in the Republican conference.
Congratulations to John McCain who has been on a career long quest to get his colleagues to acknowledge that ear marks are a spending and corruption problem.
Only time will tell whether this pledge includes “projects” like the ones Rep. Cantor defended in the Stimulus Bill because he had worked so hard to get it; the “I voted for it before I voted against it” excuse. I fear these “essential” projects which our current politicians use like candy to win elections are not going to be called ear marks but are ones that are “good for the people in my district”. If history is a guide to the current Republican leadership and members, they will say or do anything to be in charge of spending our money to enhance their own power and re-elections.
They have certainly never proved that they will act fiscally responsible. Maybe I’m too much of a cynic or maybe this time they mean it.

He was dismissing the effort as inconsequential. He just doesn’t get it. Sure, earmarks may be a small part of the total budget. But if we can’t trust these guys to get the small things right, how are we supposed to trust them to get the big things right?

and lead by example

Sure, and a necessary start. As noted (all over the place) the total dollar value of the earmarks is small beer. Most of the earmarks are not new money, either; they are generally a re-directing of money already budgeted.

But they represent so much. Firstly, earmarking is a usurpation of local government authority. That right there makes any earmarking a betrayal against the Republican principle of limited government. Secondly, is the blatant influence peddling that it represents. Third is the ‘cult of personality’ that it engenders, not unlike the Soviet system that Republicans fought so hard and so long and so committedly to overthrow. Seeing such an attitude among Republicans is abhorrent in the extreme. Fourthly, a true Republican would have left that money in our pockets in the first place; it would not be available – whether properly budgeted or no – for such a repulsive gesture.

I have long maintained that if our Federally elected officials want to direct money around at the local level, then they should resign and go run for city council.

“the first step to figuring out why you are in so much debt is learning to stop spending money that you do not have. Also, stop taking more and more of other people’s money in an attempt to compensate.”

Well, that’s what I’ve had to do in my house. Why not expect it of the House — and the Senate?

I live in a small bubble of conservatism in Orange County on the left coast. Fortunately my Congressman is John Campbell and here is his email regarding this important decision regarding earmarks. Remember this is only a ONE YEAR moratorium so far:

“Earmarks: Yesterday, the entire House Republican Conference voted to take a 1 year moratorium on requesting ANY earmarks. That means that all Republicans in the House will now join the position that I have held for some years, which is to not request any earmarks whatsoever. Also this week, the Chairman on the House Appropriations Committee, David Obey (D-WI), said that no earmark requests will be approved for ‘for-profit’ companies in the future. These are very significant steps. It means that the message has finally gotten through to all Republicans and many Democrats that the earmark process is wasteful and corrupting and that it has to change, particularly in these times of unprecedented debt and deficits. There have been only 3 of us who have been relentless on this issue: myself, Jeff Flake (R-AZ) and Jeb Hensarling (R-TX). This is a huge victory for us and a step forward.

But it’s not over. House Democrats are still, at this time, going to request earmarks for other purposes and the Senate has yet to agree to any restrictions. And all of these moves are temporary, for this year only, yet permanent solutions to end earmark abuse are required. Also, earmark reform should only be a part of reforming the entire budget process so we can get out of these reckless deficits. We will see if House or Senate Democrats follow our lead. ” Congressman John Campbell (R) CA

They only “earmark” a dollar amount of the spending bill to a specific project. The overall spending level is unaffected. That is Inhofe’s complaint about concentrating on earmarks. The problem is most of the bills to which earmarks are attached are spending in areas the Feds have no business being involved in under any circumstances.

Federal patronage is not allowed under a proper reading of the Constitution. As earmarks are a symptom of unconstitutional spending, fine, ban them. But don’t forget, the real battle is in ending Federal patronage altogether.

For those who say there is no difference between Ds and Rs, the ATU has come out with their ratings for 2009. The combined average score for Senate and House Republicans is 87. The score for Democrats is 6.