The lie of the earmark

Don't get me wrong.  Nobody likes wasteful government spending.  Nobody likes bridges to nowhere or airports for a handful of corporate executives. But when the media decides to report on wasteful government spending, it tends to be in regards to the dreaded 'earmark.'

And as everyone knows, John McCain is the 'anti-earmark' champion.  And so a media that perpetuates a narrative that earmarks is the main thing to look at when it comes to wasteful government spending, it necessarily plays right into John McCain's hands.

This is a bunch of nonsense.  Earmarks are such a tiny drop in the budget.  The vast majority of wasteful government spending comes in the form of graft, buying things the government doesn't need in non earmark form (ie. none of Duke Cunningham's spending was 'earmarks'), no bid contracts, etc etc etc.

Let's look at some numbers.  

Total outlays by the US government - $2,902,000,000,000

According to a piece I just saw on CNN, 'nonpartisan' watchdog group Citizens Against Public Waste just released their report on 'pork.'  CNN put up a graphic.  Total spending on earmarks:  $271,000,000,000.  That's a daunting looking number, but let's look at it compared to total outlays.

271,000,000,000/
2,902,000,000,000

So it appears as if pork might be a problem and the media and the "nonpartisan" watchdog group correct, as that's 9.3% of government spending.  But here's the thing...it's not.  That 271 number is total earmarks since 1991.  Let's put the numbers for strictly 2008 up to compare:

17,200,000,000/
2,902,000,000,000

Estimated medicaid fraud in 2002 compared to 2008 total government outlays

10,000,000,000/
2,902,000,000,000

So there you have it.  The media is all up in arms about .005% of the total outlays of the federal government, while John McCain cozies up to Airbus to get them a gigantic contract and withholds a stack of Abramoff records higher than the Washington Monument and proposes expansion of the biggest government spending boondogle in history, the war in Iraq.

A lot of earmarks suck, some are good and necessary, but by in large telling the earmarks tale is a right wing, media perpetuated lie that merely serves into the larger narratives of Democrats being 'tax and spend' and 'Government is too big.'

•  Nothing?

  not a single comment?

  crap.  I guess it's back to candidate diaries.

  by whereisboblafollette on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:27:55 AM PDT

  •  What is an earmark?......... well,

    it's congressional currency.

    It's the way to create a legal kickback.

    It's the money that buys votes re re-election.

    It's the basis to create a bribe.

    It's a method to steal public funds legally.

    It's the grease that makes our government work.

    It's the initial step of creating corruption re the new congresscritters.

    It should be outlawed,.... immediately.

    Earmarks are not innocent little thank yous.

    Every piece of legislation should be read page for page, word for word. Failing that the congresscritter's vote shouldn't be counted.

    Any earmark inserted after debate and/or after final vote should come from the offender's own pocket.

    by 0hio on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 10:56:10 AM PDT

•  The way I see it...

  ...if earmarks are really such a miniscule portion of the budget, we could eliminate them today and never miss them.  
  To me, it's not about saving money as much as denying Bush an excuse for vetoing good legislation.

  by Bill W on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:49:53 AM PDT

•  I agree with your sentiment, but be careful.

  The truth is, no matter where you try to focus your attention, they are playing the magician here, distracting you from watching how the trick works.

  Basically, we need to get rid of all waste simultaneously, otherwise we can't do anything. Any attempt to "chip away at it" will soon discover that it grows far faster than can be kept up with.

  by NoMoreNicksLeft on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 09:59:37 AM PDT

•  Thanks

  I've been running into this crap all day on the mainstream news because of the recent release of the 'pig book'.

  I agree earmarks can be a bad thing but the overall narrative is let's drown the government because they steal our money...ignoring that these outlays comprise a fraction of the budget so small - medicare fraud almost outstrips it as you pointed out, or as another example the costs of the war in Iraq for about 2 months exceeds all the earmarks for 2008.  Its also about half of what the taxpayers ponied up (up to$29 billion) to bail out a private bank (Bear-Stearns) that because of the reckless actions of its overpaid management and lack of oversight of its Board and shareholders managed to endanger the entire financial system.

  Not one word on any of the reports putting the earmark amounts in perspective as part of the budget.  Numerous mentions that McCain doesn't do earmarks.

  *kicks the media in the shins*

  by puppet10 on Wed Apr 02, 2008 at 03:57:05 PM PDT