The Race for Republican Majority Leader

There is an important, upcoming political decision where Rhode Islanders will have no voice. It is the election of a new Majority Leader in the House of Representatives. The outcome of the this election will significantly impact Republican prospects for maintaining their national governing majority. If the new leader cannot convince the public that Republicans are serious about bringing spending under control, Republicans may lose control of Congress to the Democrats within the next two or three election cycles.

Two of the three leading contenders for the Majority Leader position published op-eds on the OpininonJournal.com website this week. Both sounded at least one common theme – the Republican party must reduce pork spending if it is to stay true to its principles and maintain the credibility it needs to govern effectively. (By the way, is anyone still arguing that reducing pork-spending is not a viable political issue?)

Congressman John Boehner of Ohio, considered one of the two frontrunners for Majority Leader, devoted an extensive part of his op-ed to discussing specific pork-spending reforms…

To rebuild trust in the [House of Representatives] and our commitment to governing, we need to recognize that most of the current ethical problems arise from one basic fact: Government is too big and controls too much money. If you want to dismantle the culture that produced an Abramoff or a Scanlon, you need to reform how Congress exerts power.

We must start by addressing the growing practice of unauthorized earmarks--language in spending bills that directs federal dollars to private entities for projects that are not tied to an existing federal program or purpose. The public knows the practice better by a different name--pork-barreling. Unauthorized earmarks squander taxpayer dollars and lack transparency. They feed public cynicism. They've been a driving force in the ongoing growth of our already gargantuan federal government, and a major factor in government's increasing detachment from the priorities of individual Americans….

Many pork-barrel provisions are inserted into legislation at the last minute to ensure passage, and relatively few members get a chance to see them before actually voting. My Republican colleague, Jeff Flake of Arizona, has bold ideas to solve this problem. He proposes that the earmarking process be transparent: All earmarks should be included in the actual text of legislation, so members can see them before they vote….

We need to establish some clear standards by which worthy projects can be distinguished from worthless pork, so that pork projects can be halted in their tracks as soon as they are identified. For example, earmarks should meet the specific purpose of the authorizing statute. They should not give a private entity a competitive edge unless it is in the immediate national security interest of the country. They should not be a substitute for state and local fiscal responsibility. They should be used sparingly, and ideally, they should be a one-time appropriation for a specific national need.

Yesterday John Boehner wrote on this page about a proposal to reform the earmark process offered by Rep. Jeff Flake. While Mr. Boehner is suddenly talking about this idea, I was one of the first co-sponsors when it was introduced last spring.

We need sunshine in the earmark process, and an end to secret, backroom deals. According to Citizens Against Government Waste, the total number of earmarks in 2005 was nearly 14,000--compared with only 1,439 in 1995. Earmarked money is often spent without the oversight and consideration in the regular appropriations process, so waste, abuse or even fraud is more likely. Congress should base decisions on what is good for America, not what is good for the lobbyist friends of a few.

Every year Congress adopts a budget, and every year we exceed it. Cheats and dodges--supplemental spending without offsets, "off budget" spending--hide this expenditure, but it is added to our national debt, a legacy of irresponsibility to burden future generations. We are still using a budget process that dates from 1974, when Democrats ruled the House and the government was a fraction of its current size. We need reforms in our budget rules to force Congress to stay within the budget it adopts.

Alas, as Rhode Island has no Republican Representatives in Congress, Rhode Island will have no vote in this matter. However, the mood for reform does provide a more-interesting-than-usual opening for Republican candidates interested in running in Rhode Island’s 2006 Congressional elections. There is an opportunity for an up-and-coming Republican politician to discuss his-or-her party’s principled stand on a popular and relevant issue and attach him-or-herself to the national party in a positive way. Anybody in the party interested in keeping our incumbent Representatives honest and building some statewide name recognition, all while doing the right thing?

UPDATE: (January 19, 2006)

As Marc points out in the comments, Congressman Roy Blunt of Missouri, the current Majority Whip and the other frontrunner in the election, makes his case for becomming Majority Leader at OpinionJournal.com today. It includes a section on pork-reform...

We must also reform the earmark and federal grant-making processes. Specifically, earmarks should be identified with the member who is requesting them, and accompanied by a justification for how the expenditure serves a public purpose. Grants made by federal agencies should be open to more scrutiny with the creation of a public database of all those receiving grants, along with a justification for how the grant serves the public interest.