The Earmark Game Continues

Dr. Bill Smith, ARRA Editor: Most of us back home are unaware of the "not so" niceties of Capitol Hill intrigue. Thankfully, we have been advised about major topics by lobbying, watchdog groups and the press. However, even Washington insiders seek good news sources. "Roll Call" watches and reports what is going on the "Hill." It is free to congressmen and their staffers but will cost us $435 a year, a lot to "earmark" in an average family budget.

A D.C. insider sent me an article from last week's Roll Call written by Paul Singer titled "Mollohan Earmarks Nearby Land." The word "earmark" peeked my interest and provided more insight in to the "Earmark Game" played by in the U.S. House. To summarize, Singer reports:

A $1 million earmark request by Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-WV) would allow the Interior Department to expand a wilderness area neighboring properties the Congressman owns. Mollohan’s request for the project — contained in the Interior-environment appropriations bill passed by the House on Wednesday — was dated six days after the Dominion Post newspaper of Morgantown, W.Va., reported that the Justice Department had issued a subpoena for a witness to testify before a grand jury about Mollohan’s finances. Critics have accused Mollohan of steering earmarks to friends, business partners and contributors.

A Mollohan spokesman flatly rejected the notion that there was anything wrong with the earmark, and pointed out that conservation groups and the federal government have deemed the wilderness area a high priority project. Mollohan himself said any allegation that he is profiting from the earmark is “far-fetched to the point of absurdity. . .”

Sipping the varied viewpoints as to whether Mollohan's earmark was "good or bad," let's note the insights to the "earmark game" provided in the close of Singer's article:

The Appropriations Committee did not review each earmark request for possible ethics concerns, requiring only that the paperwork and disclosure forms be in order before the earmark was added to the bill. However, the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct ruled in May that an earmark requested by another congressman Rep. Ken Calvert (R-CA) for a transit station near several commercial properties he owns did not amount to a financial conflict because Calvert was not the sole beneficiary of the project and the increase in his property value was speculative. In its letter to Calvert, the committee said when determining the impact of an earmark on a Member’s real estate holding, the factors to consider include whether the real estate “would be affected uniquely or as part of a class.”

Earmark critics argued this precedent would allow Members of Congress to pursue almost any earmark, as long as it benefited other people as well as themselves.

Read More (Subscribe to Roll Call needed). Hey, maybe a congressman would insert an earmark to fund Roll Call subscriptions for average wage earning citizens next to an earmark in a Veterans Appropriation bill like past ones for construction projects that have noting to do with the VA. or veterans. Hum ...

---

Tags: Bill Smith, earmarks, Paul Singer, Roll Call, US House To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the ARRA News Service. Thanks!