Earmarks Continuing in Defense Spending Under Obama

We all know that liberals don't understand the proper application of the military and of military force. But that doesn't mean they can't find a way to use the military.

Most people think Republicans are happy to have pork in defense bills and dismiss it when considering liberals. And while campaigning last year, Obama said, "And, absolutely, we need earmark reform. And when I'm president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely." (1)

But "wise" must be in the eye of the beholder. We can see from an editorial in USA Today that earmarks continue under the Democratic regime (2).

Now, his administration is lauding a $636 billion defense spending bill, for the fiscal year that began Thursday, that includes $2.7 billion in earmarks.

The measure contains funding for a new destroyer and 10 C-17 cargo planes that the Pentagon did not ask for. It also includes hundreds of smaller earmarks for projects of special interest to individual lawmakers, among them $25 million for a World War II museum in New Orleans and $20 million for the Edward M. Kennedy Institute for the United States Senate in Boston, a kind of think tank dedicated to the legacy of the late senator. (3)

And they want to keep alive a troubled missile-defense interceptor program and continue the troubled VH-71 presidential helicopter program (4).

Representative Jeff Flake (R-AZ) noted that at least 70 of the earmarks are for former clients of the PMA Group, a lobbying firm close to appropriations subcommittee head John P. Murtha (D-PA) that is now being probed by the Justice Department and the House ethics committee (5).

Although President Obama has repeatedly criticized earmarks, the White House statement of policy on the House bill obliquely criticized only "programs that fund narrowly focused activities." No mention was made of items such as a proposed $8 million Defense Department grant Murtha inserted for Argon ST, a Pennsylvania military contractor that has contributed $35,200 to him in the past four years, or of a $5 million grant Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) inserted for DRS Technologies, a Florida contractor that has contributed $46,350 to Young during that period, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense.

The White House criticized the addition of $80 million for the Kinetic Energy Interceptor program, which Gates and other Pentagon officials have said is technically troubled, behind schedule, and billions of dollars over budget. But Northrop Grumman, the principal contractor, is building a technology center in Murtha's district that would bring 150 related jobs, and Murtha's subcommittee sought its continuation as a way "to recoup the technology," according to an appropriations staff member, who was not authorized to speak on the record (6).

You can find the defense spending bill here in PDF.

==================
1. "Go "line by line" over earmarks to make sure money being spent wisely" (2008, September 26). PolitiFact.
Retrieved October 5, 2009, from PolitiFact

2. "Our view on federal spending: Cuts in military pork fall short of rhetoric" (2009, October 5). USA Today.
Retrieved October 5, 2009, from USA Today

3. "Our view on federal spending: Cuts in military pork fall short of rhetoric" (2009, October 5). USA Today.
Retrieved October 5, 2009, from USA Today

4. Smith, Jeffrey R. (2009, July 30). "House Seems To Be Set on Pork-Padded Defense Bill". The Washington Post.
Retrieved October 5, 2009, from The Washington Post

5. Smith, Jeffrey R. (2009, July 30). "House Seems To Be Set on Pork-Padded Defense Bill". The Washington Post.
Retrieved October 5, 2009, from The Washington Post

6. Smith, Jeffrey R. (2009, July 30). "House Seems To Be Set on Pork-Padded Defense Bill". The Washington Post.
Retrieved October 5, 2009, from The Washington Post