DEMOCRATS’ PROMISES: TRANSPARENCY IN SPENDING TAXPAYER DOLLARS

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #65: “Get Rid of All” Earmarks
Promise: “Breaking with many Democrats, Ms. Pelosi also spoke out against earmarking billions of dollars for home-state projects, a practice she calls a ‘monster’ that hurts Congress. ‘I’d get rid of all of them,’ she says. ‘None of them is worth the skepticism, the cynicism the public has . . . and the fiscal irresponsibility of it.’” – “Pelosi Promises Fiscal Restraint If Democrats Win,” Wall Street Journal, July 13, 2006

Broken Promise: “Ranking Democrats vowed in December to put a moratorium on earmarks; instead, a record number infect legislation pending in Congress, with 32,000 requests this year, compared with about 13,000 in 2006 …. Ideally, congressional Democrats would keep their pledge to ban earmarks altogether.” – “Earmark Chicanery,” Press-Enterprise (Riverside, CA) Editorial, June 20, 2007

Broken Promise: “House Speaker Nancy Pelosi slipped in a $25 million provision for San Francisco's waterfront on a $15 billion federal water bill at the last minute. It’s pork barrel spending, yes, but more than that. Republicans are crying foul because the federal cash for port improvements and the bill's provision for Pier 35 cruise ship dockage all benefit a toney area of San Francisco -- one where Pelosi's husband just happens to own real estate about a mile away.” – Investor's Business Daily, May 9, 2007

Broken Promise: “In the bill funding EPA and Forest Service projects, Speaker Pelosi obtained $700,000 for a grant for San Francisco for use in the Lower Mission District. . .” – “House panel approves ‘earmarks’ for lawmakers’ home districts, Associated Press, June 22, 2007

Broken Promise: “This year, the House approved a $504 billion defense authorization bill. Among the requesters, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) has one earmark in the bill, for $10 million for Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, as part of the military construction portion of the defense budget.” – “$8B of Pork: Dems Take 60 Percent,” The Hill, May 22, 2007

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #66: Subject Earmarks to Public Scrutiny
Promise: “Put an end to secret earmarks...” – Letter to Majority Leader Boehner (R-OH) from Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Democratic Caucus Chairman James Clyburn (D-SC), and Democratic Caucus Vice-Chairman John Larson (D-CT), February 9, 2006

Promise: “Pelosi and Reid are making the loudest calls for an end to basically anonymous earmarks that, late in the process, are quietly attached to legitimate legislation and then approved by legislators who are unaware of the earmarks and their intent.” – “Democrats Must Make Good on their Vows to Ensure Transparency in Earmarks,” Columbus Dispatch Editorial, November 20, 2006

Promise: “We will bring transparency and openness to the budget process and to the use of earmarks, and we will give the American people the leadership they deserve.” – Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Release, December 12, 2006

Broken Promise: “When Democrats took control of Congress four months back, incoming House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., bragged it would take her party less than 100 hours to curb wasteful pork spending by requiring members to attach their names to their ‘earmarks,’ exposing such waste to the harsh light of public scrutiny. She failed to mention this ‘reform’ would remain in effect for little more than 100 days.” – “Democratic Earmark Reforms Lasted 100 Days,” Las Vegas Review Journal Editorial, June 5, 2007

Broken Promise: “The new game that House Appropriations Chairman David Obey intends to play with budget earmarks this year is worse than the usual hide-and-seek. He is taking the whole thing underground, as though he is to be trusted as a one-man auditor for congressional pork. If this is to be the new ethic that Democrats promised, voters might want their ballots back.” – “Pet Projects Pushed Out of Public Eye,” St. Petersburg Times Editorial, June 5, 2007

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #67: Ensure Members Have No Financial Interest in Earmarks They Sponsor
Promise: “Another key Democratic reform requires House members seeking earmarks to certify that neither they nor their spouses have any financial interest in the project.” – “In the Democratic Congress, Pork Still Gets Served,” Washington Post, May 24, 2007

Broken Promise: “[Pelosi] requested $25 million for a project to improve the waterfront in her home district of San Francisco. Her request did not note that her family owns interests in four buildings near the proposed Pier 35 project.” – “In the Democratic Congress, Pork Still Gets Served,” Washington Post, May 24, 2007

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #68: Allow Lawmakers to Challenge Individual Earmarks
Promise: “I think, first of all, with any bill, any provision, whether it is an earmark or not, there should be transparency. So that’s what we have said – and I hope you would agree – that before Members vote on a bill there should be appropriate time for people to be able to read it, that it would be a matter of public record, and if there is an earmark that can stand the scrutiny, then that transparency will give the opportunity for it to be there.” – Then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Conference, March 16, 2006

Broken Promise: “Rather than including specific pet projects, grants and contract in legislation as it is being written, Democrats are following an order by House Appropriations Committee Chairman to keep the bills free of such earmarks until it is too late for critics to effectively challenge them. – “House Democrats Sidestep Their Own Rule to Shield Lawmakers’ Pet Projects From Scrutiny,” Associated Press, June 3, 2007

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #69: Pass an Earmark-Free Continuing Resolution
Promise: “‘This is an earmark-free bill,’ says Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D) of Illinois, who chairs the Democratic Caucus.” – “The House and Senate Struck a Deal on Spending Bills Wednesday in a First Test of Reining in Deficits,” The Christian Science Monitor, February 2, 2007

Broken Promise: Emanuel and other Democratic leaders brought a massive spending bill (“continuing resolution”) to the floor during the opening weeks of the 110th Congress, and claimed it was earmark-free -- but the bill actually contained hundreds of millions of dollars worth of hidden earmarks. “. . .[The Democrats’] claim of ‘earmark’ purity doesn’t stand up to scrutiny. …The ‘no earmarks’ loophole was big enough to allow a convoy of earmarks into the final bill, including $185 million for agriculture research projects and $50 million to build an experimental rain forest in Iowa.” – “Democrats’ No Earmark Pledge ‘Doesn’t Stand Up to Scrutiny,’” Opinion Journal’s Political Diary, February 2, 2007

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #70: Apply Earmark Reforms to Earmarks in Tax and Authorizing Bills
Promise: “You can’t just have earmarks viewed on the appropriations bill unless you take up earmarks in tax bills and earmarks in authorization bills… But if you are going to have earmarks and you are going to have transparency, you have to do it in the appropriations bill and in the tax bill and in the authorization bill. I would put it in writing.” – Then-Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), Press Conference, September 7, 2006

Broken Promise: “Republican leaders noted the deal only covers appropriations bills and pledged to continue to fight for more transparency in the authorization process. Minority Whip Blunt said there was absolutely no reason not to extend the proposal to authorization and tax bills.” – “House Dems, GOP Still Struggling to Cement Earmark Deal,” CongressDaily PM, June 14, 2007

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #71: Hold Members Accountable
Promise: “[W]e will help bring back fiscal responsibility by holding members accountable for their earmarks …” – Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Press Release, January 3, 2007

Broken Promise: “[W]e were unable to vet properly and certify properly the 32,000 requests. But we had to move ahead with the appropriations bill.” – Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD), Interview on CNN’s American Morning, June 13, 2007. Instead of holding members accountable for their earmarks, House Democratic leaders attempted to move appropriations bills that included slush funds for secret earmarks – earmarks that would be “airdropped” into House-Senate appropriations conference reports at the last minute, eliminating virtually all member accountability for those earmarks.

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #72: Provide Notice of Earmark Requests
Promise: “A Member, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner who requests a congressional earmark, a limited tax benefit, or a limited tariff benefit in any bill or joint resolution (or an accompanying report) or in any conference report on a bill or joint resolution (or an accompanying joint statement of managers) shall provide a written statement to the chairman and ranking minority member of the committee of jurisdiction...” – Democrats’ House Rules Package, Clause 17 of Rule 23

Broken Promise: “Murtha addressed the letter only to Intelligence Committee Chairman Silvestre Reyes (D-TX), not Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), the panel’s ranking member. Hoekstra has said he was not given a copy – an apparent violation of House rules. All earmarks must be disclosed in writing to both the chairman and ranking member.” – “Murtha Sent Earmark Letter Five Weeks After Deadline,” The Hill, May 22, 2007

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #73: Outlaw Use of Earmarks to Buy Votes
Promise: “The package produced by Obey, Barney Frank (D-MA), David Price (D-NC), and Tom Allen (D-ME)…is designed to…outlaw the use of earmarks to buy votes...” – Press Release from the Kansas Democratic Party, January 10, 2006

Broken Promise: On NBC’s Meet the Press, host Tim Russert asked several questions of Ways & Means Committee Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-NY) on Democratic leaders buying votes to win passage of their “slow-bleed” scheme:

RUSSERT: “But in that bill was $20 billion of so-called pork, money for cricket infestation, tours of the Capitol, security at the National Convention, peanut crops. Why would the Democrats put that kind of money in such a serious bill?”

RANGEL: “Because they needed the votes. That bill, we lost so many Democrats, one, because people thought we went too far and others because we didn’t go far enough. And so a lot of things had to go into a bill that certainly those of us who respect great legislation did not want in there.” – NBC’s Meet the Press, April 1, 2007

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #74: Scrutinize Every Spending Request
Promise: “[Democrats] are committed to auditing the books and subjecting every facet of federal spending to tough budget discipline and accountability, forcing the new Congress to choose a new direction and the right priorities for all Americans.” – Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-CA) “A New Direction for America,” Page 25

Broken Promise: Instead of spending time during the opening months of the 110th Congress subjecting appropriations bills to unprecedented scrutiny, Democratic appropriators spent four months attempting to pass a supplemental appropriations bill they knew would be vetoed. Then when it came time to move forward with the 12 standard appropriations bills, Democrats created slush funds for secret earmarks, claiming they didn’t have the time to review every earmark request. “Obey has defended his policy as a practical necessity. He said his staff cannot address each of the more than 30,000 earmark requests members have already filed in time to finish work by the Fourth of July recess.” – “Dems, GOP Near Deal to End Spending Fight,” The Politico, June 13, 2007

DEMOCRATIC PROMISE #75: Require Members to Disclose Earmark Requests
Promise: “Upon taking control of Congress in November’s midterm elections, Democrats vowed…to require lawmakers to disclose their requests and to certify that money they are requesting does not benefit them.” – “In the Democratic Congress, Pork Still Gets Served,” Washington Post, May 24, 2007

Broken Promise: The new majority has made no move to require their members to disclose their earmark requests. And while Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-IL) called on some members to make public all their requests, he pointedly refused to call on Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) to do so, and she has not. As the Washington Post reported: “The new majority is already skirting its own reforms.” – “In the Democratic Congress, Pork Still Gets Served,” Washington Post, May 24, 2007