War on Terror's Local Front: The Battle of the Budget Bill
By Alicia Mundy
Seattle Times
March 28, 2007
Index-Galena Road in Snohomish County, Northwest electrical rates and the Christmas-tree crop all have something in common: They would be funded under cover of the global war on terrorism.
Senators added those projects and nearly 100 others nationwide to the $122 billion bill to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
The spending plan includes $40 million for citrus farmers hit by frost, $25 million for spinach growers ruined by E. coli outbreaks, and $100 million for security at next year's Republican and Democratic political conventions, to name just a few of the nonwar expenses. They total about $20 billion.
U.S. Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., tried to shame colleagues into removing funding for the unrelated projects from the legislation, formally called the Global War on Terror Supplemental Appropriations Act.
At least one senator isn't budging: Patty Murray, the Democrat from Washington who championed several projects in the war-spending bill, including money for flood-damaged roads and port security.
In the Senate Tuesday, Murray helped lead the Democratic fight against Coburn's amendments to strip some projects, known as earmarks, from the bill. His amendments were in limbo as of Tuesday.
The Senate is expected to vote on the bill today or Thursday.
"The appropriators have spoken," said an angry Coburn. "They have said 'Yes, it is OK to do things such as pay for the conventions of the Democratic and Republican parties ... with an emergency bill.' "
All this may be only political theater. President Bush has vowed to veto the spending bill because it includes a timetable to withdraw troops from Iraq. A similar bill passed the House last week.
Coburn, the Senate's loudest voice against earmarks, has been at odds with Murray for two years over appropriations, targeting her successful efforts to get $500,000 for the Olympic Sculpture Park in Seattle. He often cites the park money as a prime example of "pork."
Last week, Murray announced that she had won $35.9 million to fix the state's flood-damaged roads, including the Index-Galena Road that was washed out last fall by the Skykomish River.
The Senate Appropriations Committee, on which she serves, included the money in the version of the Iraq war spending bill that it approved March 22. The money also would repair roads in Mount Rainier and Olympic national parks, and in the Mount Baker-Snoqualmie National Forest.
"This funding will help residents and communities get back on their feet after devastating floods," Murray said in a statement. "It's important for public safety and our economy."
Bush declared last November's flooding in King and Snohomish counties a disaster, noted Murray's spokeswoman, Alex Glass.
"There's disaster money for Hurricane Katrina roads" in the Iraq spending bill, Glass said. "Senator Murray is not going to sit by and say disasters in Washington don't count," she said.
Murray's port-security measure, the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act, also would get a boost from the war spending bill. Congress approved her port bill last September but stripped out most of the funding.
So Murray added $295 million to the Iraq spending bill. It would pay for port-security grants, cargo screening overseas and more customs officers. The Port of Tacoma would get $5 million to create a test project to screen cargo moving from ship to rail.
"The safe-ports act provides a comprehensive system to protect our people and our economy from terrorists," Murray said. "The White House has not put the dollars behind port security that are needed, so I'm doing it in the Senate."
It's not unusual for members of Congress to fund projects by attaching them to unrelated legislation.
In December 2005, when Republicans controlled Congress, the defense-appropriations bill included money for Arctic winter games and an American Civil War center.
In the Iraq war spending bill, a bipartisan effort by Northwest politicians squeezed in a provision aimed at holding down electrical rates charged by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA).
The White House has been trying to force the BPA to use excess revenues to pay off its federal loans early. Currently, the BPA can use that money to keep rates stable.
The bipartisan addition would maintain the current rates for now.
As for the Christmas trees, a $40 million earmark on the bill would help tree and bush growers hurt by disasters. It's unclear who added that provision, but it specifically mentions Christmas trees.
