Pork barrel politics refers to government spending that is intended to benefit constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes.
It is said the term originated early in American history, when slaves were sometimes given a barrel of salt pork as a reward, and had to compete among themselves to get their share of the handout.
Typically it involves funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated in a particular area but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples, but they do not exhaust the possibilities.
Pork barrel spending is often allocated through last-minute additions to appropriation bills. A politician who supplies his or her constituents with considerable funding is said to be "bringing home the bacon."
One of the most famous pork-barrel projects was the Big Dig in Boston, Massachusetts. The Big Dig was a project to take a pre-existing 3.5 mile interstate highway and relocate it underground. It ended up costing $14.6 billion or over $4 billion per mile.
Sunday, March 30, 2008
This Little Piggy Went to Congress
Posted 8/9/2005 9:50 PM
Pet projects make roads bill a real Lulu — of excess
Late in Ronald Reagan's presidency, he decided to take a stand against Congress' habit of squandering money on pet projects of no national value. He vetoed the 1987 highway bill because it was $10 billion over his budget and included more than 100 projects demanded by members of Congress.
"I haven't seen this much lard since I handed out blue ribbons at the Iowa State Fair," Reagan said at the time.
He should see what's happening now. President Bush flies to Illinois today to sign a transportation bill that's $12 billion fatter than he wanted and uses accounting gimmicks to pretend otherwise. Worse, it contains a whopping 6,371 congressional "earmarks," a 50-fold increase over the number Reagan rejected.
Pork has always been part of politics, and a little bit of it can help grease the gears of government. What makes this legislation remarkable is the sheer magnitude of pet projects, and the shamelessness of the members of Congress promoting them.
Tucked into the highway and mass transit bill are funds for bus stops, parking lots, hiking paths, museums, even horse trails and a "deer avoidance system."
Motorists will pay at the pump to finance:
• $223 million for a bridge linking Ketchikan, Alaska, to an offshore island where only 50 people live.
• $231 million for another locally controversial bridge linking Anchorage to an undeveloped point of land nearby — a bridge the bill names "Don Young's Way," for the Alaska congressman and Transportation Committee chairman who pulled off the boondoggle.
• $5.8 million for a snowmobile trail in Vermont.
• $3 million for "dust control mitigation" on Arkansas' rural roads.
• $480,000 to rehabilitate a 19th century warehouse on the Erie Canal in New York.
Young is the champion at tapping the Treasury for local projects, mandating almost $1 billion for public works across his thinly populated state. And he self-aggrandizingly twisted the bill's name into the cumbersome "Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act — A Legacy for Users." The resulting acronym, SAFETEA-LU, redeems a promise to name the bill for his wife, Lu.
Other powerful members of Congress have used their clout similarly. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, R-Calif., grabbed $630 million for his largely agricultural district. Rep. James Oberstar, top Democrat on the transportation panel, snagged $121 million for his Minnesota district, including $560,000 for a Paul Bunyan State Trail.
The earmarks divert nearly 10% of the bill's spending to congressional whim, reducing the amount state transportation departments have to allocate among bottlenecks, dangerous intersections and other priorities.
Congress once behaved better. In 1914, the House of Representatives adopted a rule prohibiting legislation funding specific roads, leaving those decisions to professionals. The ban has never been revoked, just ignored.
Even in death, Reagan can't escape Congress' enthusiasm for turning gas tax revenue into political pork. Among the earmarks in this year's bill is $2.3 million for "landscape enhancements ... for aesthetic purposes" — new plantings — along the Ronald Reagan Freeway in California.
Congress eventually overrode Reagan's veto, but he had the right idea. Instead of celebrating the transportation bill today, Bush should be following his example and sending it back to Congress for a thorough de-larding.
Posted 8/9/2005 9:50am at www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-08-09-our-view_x.htm
Pet projects make roads bill a real Lulu — of excess
Late in Ronald Reagan's presidency, he decided to take a stand against Congress' habit of squandering money on pet projects of no national value. He vetoed the 1987 highway bill because it was $10 billion over his budget and included more than 100 projects demanded by members of Congress.
"I haven't seen this much lard since I handed out blue ribbons at the Iowa State Fair," Reagan said at the time.
He should see what's happening now. President Bush flies to Illinois today to sign a transportation bill that's $12 billion fatter than he wanted and uses accounting gimmicks to pretend otherwise. Worse, it contains a whopping 6,371 congressional "earmarks," a 50-fold increase over the number Reagan rejected.
Pork has always been part of politics, and a little bit of it can help grease the gears of government. What makes this legislation remarkable is the sheer magnitude of pet projects, and the shamelessness of the members of Congress promoting them.
Tucked into the highway and mass transit bill are funds for bus stops, parking lots, hiking paths, museums, even horse trails and a "deer avoidance system."
Motorists will pay at the pump to finance:
• $223 million for a bridge linking Ketchikan, Alaska, to an offshore island where only 50 people live.
• $231 million for another locally controversial bridge linking Anchorage to an undeveloped point of land nearby — a bridge the bill names "Don Young's Way," for the Alaska congressman and Transportation Committee chairman who pulled off the boondoggle.
• $5.8 million for a snowmobile trail in Vermont.
• $3 million for "dust control mitigation" on Arkansas' rural roads.
• $480,000 to rehabilitate a 19th century warehouse on the Erie Canal in New York.
Young is the champion at tapping the Treasury for local projects, mandating almost $1 billion for public works across his thinly populated state. And he self-aggrandizingly twisted the bill's name into the cumbersome "Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act — A Legacy for Users." The resulting acronym, SAFETEA-LU, redeems a promise to name the bill for his wife, Lu.
Other powerful members of Congress have used their clout similarly. House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Bill Thomas, R-Calif., grabbed $630 million for his largely agricultural district. Rep. James Oberstar, top Democrat on the transportation panel, snagged $121 million for his Minnesota district, including $560,000 for a Paul Bunyan State Trail.
The earmarks divert nearly 10% of the bill's spending to congressional whim, reducing the amount state transportation departments have to allocate among bottlenecks, dangerous intersections and other priorities.
Congress once behaved better. In 1914, the House of Representatives adopted a rule prohibiting legislation funding specific roads, leaving those decisions to professionals. The ban has never been revoked, just ignored.
Even in death, Reagan can't escape Congress' enthusiasm for turning gas tax revenue into political pork. Among the earmarks in this year's bill is $2.3 million for "landscape enhancements ... for aesthetic purposes" — new plantings — along the Ronald Reagan Freeway in California.
Congress eventually overrode Reagan's veto, but he had the right idea. Instead of celebrating the transportation bill today, Bush should be following his example and sending it back to Congress for a thorough de-larding.
Posted 8/9/2005 9:50am at www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2005-08-09-our-view_x.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
