Excessive earmarks criticized

WASHINGTON -- To earmark or not to earmark, that is the question.

For Southern Nevada members of Congress, the answer is to continue adding thousands and in some cases millions of dollars into bills for hometown projects.

To critics, earmarks are wasteful "pork barrel," signs of congressional overspending symbolized by excesses like the $223 million "bridge to nowhere" in Ketchikan, Alaska.

While acknowledging there are abuses, Nevadans said they regard it a duty and not a sin to target spending back to the state, even as President Bush and House Republican leaders step up pressure for further curbs and a temporary "moratorium" on earmarks.

"I look at the appropriations process as my responsibility," said Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., splitting from the GOP leadership. "My responsibility is to capture as much Nevada money as I can."

"I love earmarks," said Rep. Shelley Berkley, D-Nev. "I want the entire world to know what I have been able to achieve, especially in challenging times like these."

In 2006, Nevada ranked eighth per capita in earmarks, according to Citizens Against Government Waste. For that year, $167 million in earmarks amounted to $69.15 per Nevadan. The national average was $30.55.

Working separately for the most part, Porter's and Berkley's earmarks in 2007 included $6.95 million toward Las Vegas Beltway interchanges, a downtown bus terminal, Blue Diamond highway widening and other transportation projects.

Another $11 million was directed to Southern Nevada governments, the Clark County School District, the Nevada Cancer Institute and other local entities.

In July the lawmakers were called on to defend a $200,000 grant to the Andre Agassi College Preparatory Academy, after conservatives complained the former tennis star and philanthropist should not get federal aid.

In his State of the Union speech this week, Bush threatened to veto bills that do not cut the number and cost of earmarks in half.

On Capitol Hill, around 18 House Republicans declared they either will not seek earmarks or will temper their requests. Republican leaders have urged Democrats to adopt an earmark "moratorium."

Berkley said the Republican anti-earmark campaign is mere hype. Democrats last year acted to turn down the spigot, although not all the way.

"It was farcical for the president whose administration signed into law every piece of legislation and never vetoed a single bill that increased federal spending by billions of dollars and most of it went to earmarks for Republican legislators," Berkley said.

The Politico Web site reported Porter stood up at a Republican retreat last week and said that a blanket "no earmark" pledge being pushed by a party faction could hurt GOP candidates in the fall.

Porter, who is expected to face a tough re-election race, said in an interview his point was that as a "member of the fastest growing (congressional) district in the country, my ability to capture money would be hindered greatly by an outright moratorium."

Formulas used to distribute federal money fail to keep pace with Southern Nevada growth, robbing the region of benefits "that are rightly ours," he said.

Sen. Harry Reid, D-Nev., long has defended the prerogative of the legislative branch to spend money as its deems appropriate.

"I believe Congress has an obligation -- not just a right but an obligation -- to make sure that members of Congress as a separate and equal branch of government take care of their constituents," Reid said in a call with reporters this week.

Earmarks by Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., "are worthy and defendable on the Senate floor," spokesman Tory Mazzola said. "Senator Ensign requests a very limited number of projects."

An aide said Rep. Dean Heller, R-Nev., was traveling and not available to talk about whether he will seek earmarks for his district after obtaining several in 2007, including $1 million for the Carson City freeway project. Heller, in a letter sent to the Review-Journal on Jan. 23, said he was one of 16 House members who voted for every earmark-killing amendment debated last year, according to a rating by the Club for Growth, an anti-tax organization based in Washington.

Contact Stephens Washington Bureau Chief Steve Tetreault at stetreault@ stephensmedia.com or (202) 783-1760.