Back in 1986, as Congress engaged in a last-minute scramble to fund the government, a Republican congressman from Pennsylvania slipped an earmark into a massive funding bill, turning a small exhibit of steam-powered trains — known as Steamtown USA — into a national park. Three decades, nearly $100 million, and one congressional earmark ban later, that project continues to cost taxpayers millions of dollars annually.

The “Bridge to Nowhere,” the North Carolina teapot museum, the indoor rainforest in Iowa, and yes, Steamtown USA, were among the many egregious earmarks that led fed-up taxpayers to press for a ban on such spending. Like triceratops and velociraptors, earmarks were declared extinct, fossilized relics of a bygone era.

But what taxpayers and many in Congress don’t realize is that, despite a successful ban on new earmarks, we are still paying millions of dollars for the old ones. Through unexpended funds, carve-outs in the tax code, and grant awards, spending on past earmark projects and their recipients still roams the federal budget landscape.

Today I am releasing a report, Jurassic Pork, which will highlight the fossilized pork projects still embedded or buried in the federal budget. It should serve as a reminder of the past scandals that brought about the extinction of earmarks, and as a warning that the cost of earmarking often long outlives the practice itself.

Jurassic Pork digs into just two-dozen of the many earmarked projects and recipients of congressional bounty that continue to cost taxpayers. Take for example the aptly named VelociRFTA, a bus rapid transit system in Colorado covering the 40 miles between Aspen and Glenwood that began as an $810,000 earmark. Since the earmark ban took effect in 2010, thanks to continued federal funding, this vestige has cost taxpayers $36 million.

Also highlighted is the American Ballet Theatre, which supplemented a flow of federal grant money with more than $800,000 earmarked from a member of Congress who also happened to perform in one of the group’s recent productions.

And then there are the 6,000 unspent highway earmarks representing $5.9 billion that sit idle in a Department of Transportation account. These include pork projects like the $600,000 Upper Delaware Scenic Byway Visitor Center in Cochecton, N.Y. Unfortunately for taxpayers, the visitor center ended up being built in Narrowsburg. Because the location was specified as Cochecton, the money will likely continue to sit on the federal government’s ledger.

Within these unspent transportation earmarks, there is a smaller group — often referred to as “orphan earmarks” — that have had less than 10 percent of their funding spent after 10 years. According to the Congressional Research Service, 70 earmarks worth more than $120 million remain on the books. In August 2015, more than 1,200 earmarks from the last major highway bill will officially hit “orphan” status, representing $2 billion in yet-to-be spent funds.

With a near-bankrupt Highway Trust Fund, Congress should find a way permanently park this unspent pork. To that end, I’ve also introduced the Jurassic Pork Act, which would rescind funding for orphan earmarks, and return that money back to the Highway Trust Fund.

Like John Hammond, the billionaire CEO of the failed theme park in the first Jurassic Park film, not everyone in Congress is content to leave these relics in the past. Not a year after the earmark ban was implemented in the Senate, then-Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) proclaimed, “I’ve done earmarks all my career, and I’m happy I’ve done earmarks all my career.” Others from both sides of the aisle have argued that a return to earmarking would help lard up, or “incentivize,” votes.

But tax dollars don’t exist for political horse trading, nor as a reward for powerful members to dole out as tribute. Taxpayers should remain vigilant against these types of pleas for parochial spending and a return to pork as we knew it.

The moratorium on earmarks put an end to such shenanigans. But as readers of Jurassic Pork will see, the spending on their legacy continues. Taxpayers have already seen the ending of this movie. We don’t need to be treated to a sequel.


Click here to view the original op-ed. 

Senator Flake

By Sen. Jeff Flake
April 8, 2014

Few qualities are more American than a zeal for fair play. That’s why, when reports emerged last spring that the Internal Revenue Service was targeting conservative groups applying for a certain tax-exempt status, fair-minded folks of all political stripes expressed outrage.

Far from being a fringe conspiracy theory, the discovery of government-sanctioned bias against conservative organizations requesting 501(c)(4) status was reported by none other than the IRS’ own inspector general.

Since that discovery, several IRS employees — including the acting commissioner — have resigned, and the House of Representatives, the Senate and the Department of Justice are each conducting investigations.

But despite the scorching questioning of IRS leaders and well-founded condemnation from all corners, the agency still has not learned its lesson on impartiality. What the IRS can’t do with permission it seems determined to do by fiat.

On Nov. 29, 2013, the agency published a proposed rule that would further trample on the free-speech rights of 501(c)(4) organizations and restrict their activities. The rule singles out the same conservative groups previously targeted by the IRS and threatens to limit their participation in a host of advocacy and educational activities, even nonpartisan voter-registration and education drives.

These activities have a clear role in promoting civic engagement and social welfare — the exact purpose of the 501(c)(4) designation. The IRS’ proposed rule would force groups such as the National Taxpayers Union and the American Civil Liberties Union to quit such activities or risk losing their tax-exempt status.

Proponents of the rule claim it is necessary to clear up “confusion” about tax exemption and to bring greater transparency to political spending. This is little more than a convenient cover to quiet conservative critics while leaving others free to engage in political discourse. The administration should pay attention to the liberal groups denouncing this proposed rule and its detrimental impact.

The ACLU slammed the rule as producing “the same structural issues at the IRS that led to the use of inappropriate criteria in the selection of various charitable and social welfare groups for undue scrutiny.” The Alliance for Justice Action Campaign and even the Sierra Club have been equally critical.

In three months, more than 140,000 comments were submitted, the most for any rule-making.

To halt this latest attempt to quash free speech, I introduced the Stop Targeting of Political Beliefs by the IRS Act, which would prohibit for one year the finalization of this proposed rule.

It would also prevent additional targeting of 501(c)(4) groups by restoring the IRS standards and definitions that were in place before the agency began going after conservative organizations.

The House of Representatives recently passed an identical bill, and the Senate legislation already has 40 co-sponsors. It deserves the support of the full Senate.

However, Democrats have refused to allow the bill to come to the floor for debate and a vote. And President Obama has issued a veto threat against it.

That threat is a clearly disproportionate response to legislation aimed at protecting free-speech rights of conservatives and liberals alike. It also demonstrates how badly the Obama administration wants to sweep this problem under the rug while silencing any remaining critics.

My bill is simple and fair: It merely suspends new IRS rule-making regarding 501(c)(4) groups until the ongoing investigations are completed. When a powerful government agency has a problem with bias and abuse, that’s exactly what Congress should be doing — and the least the public should expect — until this issue is resolved.


Click here to view the original op-ed. 

By U.S. Rep. Marsha Blackburn and U.S. Sen. Jeff Flake

By Rep. Marsha Blackburn and Sen. Jeff Flake
Sept. 24, 2013


As we approach the Oct. 1 deadline when "Obamacare" begins to go into effect, it becomes more and more evident that the president's health-care law is not ready for prime time.

Through our congressional oversight and the feedback we get from businesses and families around the country on a daily basis, we have seen just how frustrated people are with the impact Obamacare is having on their lives.

It has become very clear that this law is unworkable. A CNN poll last week shows support for the president's health-care law waning, with only 39 percent of Americans now in favor of Obamacare, down from 51 percent in January.

With the Obama administration's decisions to delay several parts of the health-care law, including the employer mandate, it is clear that even the White House now recognizes what the rest of America already knows: Obamacare is a train wreck.

Businesses small and large across our states have shared stories about the burdens Obamacare is placing on them. Couple that with the most recent jobs numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and it is difficult not to conclude that Obamacare is having a dampening effect on the country's economy.

That is why we have introduced legislation that would delay all Obamacare provisions and taxes for one year. H.R. 2809 and S. 1490 seek to postpone all provisions of the Affordable Care Act taking effect on Jan. 1, 2014 or later by one year from the date of enactment.

Delaying Obamacare is a necessary step in our efforts to get this law off the books and replace it with real health-care solutions that work for American families and businesses. It builds on efforts already taken by the House and Senate to delay both the individual and employer mandates. In fairness to American taxpayers, the best thing we can do right now is to implement a one-year delay so we can continue to chip away at this disastrous law.

Postponing Obamacare gives us the best chance to defund it. If we delay the law, the administration will be unable to collect new taxes, provide subsidies or expand Medicaid -- all things that put taxpayers further on the hook.

As Republicans continue to work to implement real health-care solutions for Americans, our legislation is the right step to take. In fairness to taxpayers, our best option today is to delay Obamacare's implementation for one year and continue to work to enact policies that put patients and doctors in charge of health care and do not require trillions of dollars of taxpayer money.


Click here to view the original op-ed.