Like Causes?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 4818

Pulled Pork Act: Should Congress be Prohibited From Bringing Back Earmarks?

Argument in favor

Congress was right to get rid of earmarks as they encouraged the wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars and bred corruption. They should be banned, and agencies should block and report on any attempted backdoor earmarks.

Caroline's Opinion
···
02/02/2018
Definitely, cut the waste out. If the “wall” ever gets funding that will be a total waste, and outdated before the first shovel of dirt is turned over. We have major REAL needs that are not being funded fully now, e.g., Medicaid, ACA, Medicare, Social Security, CHIP, education, EPA, climate change, UN, interstate infrastructure, etc.
Like (86)
Follow
Share
John's Opinion
···
02/02/2018
Stop the bribery! Vote on a bill on it’s merit and not on side-deal pay-offs.
Like (58)
Follow
Share
Rain's Opinion
···
02/02/2018
I think they should deliver clean bills without poison and money for entirely different projects built in.
Like (35)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

It would be easier for Congress to pass legislation that significantly impacts the American people if they were able to cut deals involving earmarks that benefit reluctant members’ home districts.

Frank's Opinion
···
02/02/2018
Anyone else notice how, the instant earmarks were curtailed, political gridlock and animosity skyrocketed? It’s more than a coincidence.
Like (34)
Follow
Share
Willow66's Opinion
···
02/02/2018
Blanket spending bills without detail as to where the money is being spent is wrong. Earmarks aren't necessarily a bad thing, it's the abuse by Congress that is the real issue. Taxpayers should be able to look at the budget and see where the money is going.
Like (19)
Follow
Share
Matthew's Opinion
···
02/02/2018
I don’t understand how we ever got to the point where the very point of a congressional representative is moot. The concept of bringing back earmarks is how a congress person represents their district. Earmarks create jobs, help make sure the district’s infrastructure is in shape, etc. If I elect someone I don’t want them just sitting there doing nothing.
Like (15)
Follow
Share

What is House Bill H.R. 4818?

This bill — known as the Pulled Pork Act — would prohibit Congress from using earmarks to allocate federal spending to a specific state, locality, or congressional district in a way other than through a formula-driven or competitive award process. Earmarks have been banned in Congress since 2011 by conference rules but those can be changed by each chamber at its discretion. This bill would also require federal agencies to submit an annual report to the Office of Management and Budget detailing attempted earmarks that were ineligible for funding, along with the total annual savings from denying those attempted earmarks.

Impact

Federal agencies, including the OMB; and Congress.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 4818

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Jacky Rosen (D-NV) introduced this bill to prohibit Congress from using earmarks to spend taxpayer dollars:

“Congress made the right decision when it ended the practice of earmarks. Earmarks represent a return to political favoritism, unethical practices, and wasteful government spending. Our constituents deserve better and I believe that compromise, not pork barrel projects, is how we cut through partisan gridlock.”

Original cosponsor Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) added:

“For years, earmarks wrought corruption and ballooned the national deficit. That is why they were banned by the House of Representatives and Senate in 2011. We mustn’t return to this wasteful manner of spending. We must remain resolute in our ethical governance.”

A recent House hearing on the potential return of earmarks to Congress brought proponents from both sides of the aisle who praised earmarks as a dealmaking tool.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: malerapaso / iStock)

AKA

Pulled Pork Act

Official Title

To prohibit the use of Federal funds made available in the form of an earmark, and for other purposes.

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on Appropriations
      Committee on Oversight and Reform
    IntroducedJanuary 17th, 2018
    Definitely, cut the waste out. If the “wall” ever gets funding that will be a total waste, and outdated before the first shovel of dirt is turned over. We have major REAL needs that are not being funded fully now, e.g., Medicaid, ACA, Medicare, Social Security, CHIP, education, EPA, climate change, UN, interstate infrastructure, etc.
    Like (86)
    Follow
    Share
    Anyone else notice how, the instant earmarks were curtailed, political gridlock and animosity skyrocketed? It’s more than a coincidence.
    Like (34)
    Follow
    Share
    Stop the bribery! Vote on a bill on it’s merit and not on side-deal pay-offs.
    Like (58)
    Follow
    Share
    I think they should deliver clean bills without poison and money for entirely different projects built in.
    Like (35)
    Follow
    Share
    Banned in 2011 and no reason to bring it back..wish we could ban republicans
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Blanket spending bills without detail as to where the money is being spent is wrong. Earmarks aren't necessarily a bad thing, it's the abuse by Congress that is the real issue. Taxpayers should be able to look at the budget and see where the money is going.
    Like (19)
    Follow
    Share
    What is wrong with voting on a single issue without the need for legalized bribes to get votes?
    Like (19)
    Follow
    Share
    No Pork! Why can’t you greedy Congressional members get that?
    Like (18)
    Follow
    Share
    I don’t understand how we ever got to the point where the very point of a congressional representative is moot. The concept of bringing back earmarks is how a congress person represents their district. Earmarks create jobs, help make sure the district’s infrastructure is in shape, etc. If I elect someone I don’t want them just sitting there doing nothing.
    Like (15)
    Follow
    Share
    Earmarks are just a way to the buy the vote of a Congressperson for a bill that they otherwise wouldn’t vote for. It’s akin to bribery. Keep them banned!
    Like (13)
    Follow
    Share
    Earmarks are an invitation for abuse in spending. Bringing it back would only increase the corruption in our already corrupt government.
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    We don’t need the government to waste anymore of our taxpayers money then they already do! What good would a new bridge to nowhere accomplish!!
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    Stop the bribery
    Like (11)
    Follow
    Share
    I can’t believe anyone would agree to pork barrel spending. It would be like getting your family’s shopping list ready and then letting the kid come along and add any treats they would like; whether or not it is healthy or in the family budget.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Been there. Done that. No reason to think it would be any better on another go-round, ESPECIALLY in this incredibly dysfunctional political climate.
    Like (9)
    Follow
    Share
    Keep bills clean. Earmarks are special interest only. Stop the BS!
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    It's ridiculous this is even a thing
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Earmarks are nothing more than legalized bribery.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    At a time where faith and approval in all three branches of government is so low, it makes absolutely no sense to bring back this tradition of flagrant, undiagnosed corruption and cronyism.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Yes...didn’t we already decide this? No pork, earmarks, special interest tag on’s. Clean up your act congress. No one sent you to DC to satisfy lobbyists.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE