People say Congress doesn't focus on implementation, but people don't even look at Congress' implementation of its internal rules! Very fascinating issues. The intersection of approps and constituent engagement is very understudied.
Congress had previously attempted to get earmarks under control from ~1910-1930 by having members authorize tons of projects but letting the President pick as many as were consistent with the total appropriation. Would be interesting to compare/contrast these two episodes of earmark restraint.
The problem with ear marks are that the benifits are concentrated to a particular constituent but the cost are disbursed across the entire country. Hence , we continue to have ever increasing budjet spending. A counter weight to the ear mark problem could be giving the president a line item power along with budjets having singlesubject restrictions. The budjet impoundment act of 1974 needs to be over turned
True - and we definitely still see unevenness in earmark "success" rates based on seniority, committee placement, etc etc etc. But to Bill and Ed's point from the COS interview — I do generally like seeing more spending decision power concentrated closer to the branch of government that's more directly accountable to constituents. Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Pat!
People say Congress doesn't focus on implementation, but people don't even look at Congress' implementation of its internal rules! Very fascinating issues. The intersection of approps and constituent engagement is very understudied.
Congress had previously attempted to get earmarks under control from ~1910-1930 by having members authorize tons of projects but letting the President pick as many as were consistent with the total appropriation. Would be interesting to compare/contrast these two episodes of earmark restraint.
I nominate you to write that article :) I would LOVE to see the WH-lobbying work from Members trying to get their projects picked...
The problem with ear marks are that the benifits are concentrated to a particular constituent but the cost are disbursed across the entire country. Hence , we continue to have ever increasing budjet spending. A counter weight to the ear mark problem could be giving the president a line item power along with budjets having singlesubject restrictions. The budjet impoundment act of 1974 needs to be over turned
True - and we definitely still see unevenness in earmark "success" rates based on seniority, committee placement, etc etc etc. But to Bill and Ed's point from the COS interview — I do generally like seeing more spending decision power concentrated closer to the branch of government that's more directly accountable to constituents. Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Pat!