McCain's "earmark" could be your city's sewage treatment plant

In last Friday’s post, I did not respond to Eric’s submission about the candidates’ records on earmark spending due to time and space constraints, so I’ll take care of that now. Eric is absolutely correct that McCain has a fantastic personal record of standing up against earmark spending. This is one of the aspects of the Arizona senator’s career that has reflected his integrity in politics for so long. (Or at least until recently, I would argue.) However, as I said in my last post, it is easy to rail abstractly against “wasteful spending” and “pet projects,” but one person’s pork is another person’s shelter for victims of domestic violence or rural health center clinic. These are two of the things that make up Obama’s earmark requests. By far the largest item on the bill is the $62 million requested to fund the Stratospheric Observatory For Infrared Astronomy Project, which is a new specialized aircraft fitted with a telescope and programmed to fly at 45,000, surpassing the ability of any ground-based aircraft. Oh, and the project is endorsed by, and affiliated with, NASA.

As Eric pointed out, McCain is one of five senators who don’t request earmarks. It is a shame that so many of them do, but to write off all of their requests as simply “wasteful spending” and “pet projects” oversimplifies the problem. The truth is that most Americans don’t pay much attention to how their representatives secure funding for local needs; they just want the research grant/sewage treatment facility/bridge to nowhere. In the meantime, officials should be judged both on the size of their earmark requests and the sort of programs they support. Obama’s earmark record, linked at the bottom of Eric’s previous post, is for the most part devoted to funding research initiatives, infrastructure renovation, and educational programs.

Obama and McCain were one of only 29 senators who voted to end earmark spending, making that issue a thoroughly bipartisan difficulty. If Americans truly want to change that, they’ll have to start voting for whichever candidates—Democrat, Republican, or Independent—who promises to drop the habit. Obama will not be asking for any earmarks in 2009, and this issue looks like one of those—like immigration—which the candidates largely agree upon. McCain undoubtedly will treat earmarks as a higher priority, but this alone won’t even come close to balancing the budget. McCain’s heavy tax cuts for the wealthy and continued commitment to heavy military spending on forces in Iraq will prevent that.

If that isn’t enough, most people may be anti-earmark in principle, but in practice, they’d rather get the new highway than quibble about ways and means. Reform will have to be systemic and total, and will require massive public pressure on politicians. McCain should be lauded for his stance on earmarks, but his overall economic plan remains irresponsible. McCain can just as easily lead the charge against earmarks from the senate in 2009, and spare us the consequences of his reckless plan. While he complains of “tax and spend” Democrats, he’s gearing up for a “don’t tax but still spend” fiscal policy. And that’s a mistake we don’t need to make.