Learn more about our policy experts.

Media Contacts

Angela Bradbery, Director of Communications
w. (202) 588-7741
c. (202) 503-6768
abradbery@citizen.org, Twitter

Barbara Holzer, Broadcast Manager
w. (202) 588-7716
bholzer@citizen.org

Karilyn Gower, Press Officer
w. (202) 588-7779
kgower@citizen.org

Symone Sanders, Communications Officer, Global Trade Watch division
w. (202) 454-5108
ssanders@citizen.org

Other Important Links

Press Release Database
Citizen Vox blog
Texas Vox blog
Consumer Law and Policy blog
Energy Vox blog
Eyes on Trade blog
Facebook/publiccitizen

Follow us on Twitter

 

Sept. 13, 2006

House GOP Leaders Apparently Not Serious About Earmark Reform

Congress Again Fails to Address Corruption, Lobbying Abuses

WASHINGTON, D.C. –   Public Citizen today sent a letter of protest to the Hill condemning a new, woefully inadequate proposal by House Republican leaders to rein in earmark abuse. The proposal, spearheaded by Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), merely calls for tacking the name of lawmakers onto each earmark. It does not, but should, allow any member to demand a floor vote on a secret earmark added to a bill by a manager’s amendment or in conference committee.

“In what has become a very disappointing repeat performance, House Republican leaders once again talk big on reform, but in the end act small with a do-little proposal to address earmark abuse,” said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen.

The earmark proposal is no replacement for a real lobbying and ethics reform package.  The current ethics and lobbying proposals were severely watered down as they moved through congressional committees and floor votes. What began in January as sweeping, bold legislative proposals to clean up Washington became a whimper, resulting in simplistic and inadequate disclosure bills (H.R. 4975 and S. 2349). Even these embarrassingly weak bills have now perished in conference committee.

“It is tragic that Congress is failing to address in any meaningful way the corruption sweeping Capitol Hill in recent years,” said Laura MacCleery, director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. “One member of Congress has already gone to prison; several others are under criminal investigation. Turning a blind eye to lobbying abuses on the Hill is a trademark of this Congress.”

Earmark reform – though no solution to the lobbying and ethics scandals wreaking havoc upon public confidence in government – is long overdue in its own right. Over the past 10 years, earmarks increased by 285 percent in number and 60 percent in cost to taxpayers. Many of these earmarks are for costly boondoggles promoted by lobbyists on behalf of special interest groups or campaign contributors seeking to further pet projects.

In the letter, Public Citizen told lawmakers that to rein in this pork and the abuse of the public trust, meaningful earmark reform must:

● Require all earmarks to be written into the bills, rather than surreptitiously written into committee reports, thus permitting legislative debate and a vote on each one.

● Identify the lawmaker who sponsored each earmark, along with a brief description of it.

● Subject any secret earmarks added by a manager’s amendment or in conference committee and not voted upon earlier to a demand for a floor vote requiring a majority vote to retain it.

“Serious earmark reform is indeed needed on Capitol Hill, but this isn’t serious reform,” said Craig Holman, legislative representative for Public Citizen. “Even a robust plan for earmark reform would be no substitute for new, meaningful restrictions on the gravest sources of dishonesty on the Hill – the potentially corrupting nexus connecting lobbyists, campaign money and lawmakers. Substantial lobbying reform, combined with the public funding of elections, is the real solution to these assaults on democracy.”

To view the letter, click here. 

###

Copyright © 2014 Public Citizen. Some rights reserved. Non-commercial use of text and images in which Public Citizen holds the copyright is permitted, with attribution, under the terms and conditions of a Creative Commons License. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.


Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation

 

Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen.

Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site.

You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible.

 

To become a member of Public Citizen, click here.
To become a member and make an additional tax-deductible donation to Public Citizen Foundation, click here.