WISCONSIN SUFFERS IN EARMARK RACKET

Pork Not Kosher to Feingold
but
Kohl Brings Home the Bacon

Special to the Readers of Milwaukeeworld

By Michael Horne

And the Milwaukee World Hound Dog Team

Yesterday we mentioned the new seniority rankings for Wisconsin's senators, and pointed out that both Kohl and Feingold would advance one position if Sen. Ted Stevens lost the election. Well, today comes news of the Stevens defeat, so Herb starts the 111th Congress as #24 and Russ will be in lockstep behind him at #31. Seven seats separate them, now that Larry Craig has left his stall.
We also discussed the value of seniority -- the senate still uses the system to award committee chairmanships and office space. Seniority also plays a role in earmarks and other state appropriations, although it is hardly absolute, as a glance through statistics can show.
Those statistics are much more accessible thanks a new tool launched today for tracking Earmarks, that rapidly growing and controversial area of political finance.
If you're looking for Pork, then Earmarks are the Larder.
We gave a test drive to Legistorm's Earmarks page which posts these appropriations in a nicely indexed fashion, by state, representative, amount, co-sponsors and other criteria. (Seniority is not among them.)
For sport, we tested our senators, and learned there are a few quirks to the earmark system. For example, earmarks can have solo sponsors, or can be co-sponsored. (The latter would especially apply to earmarks for, say, horse-trading, a common Congressional enterprise.)
A solo earmark, on the other hand, is probably a good determinant of an individual senator's financial clout.
So, true to form, Russ Feingold is among very few members to have $0 in solo-sponsored earmarks. But when you add the co-sponsored earmarks, Russ chimes in at a very respectable $228,000,000 level. He limited his support to study three peer-reviewed cancer projects, each of which had dozens of co-sponsors.
Herb is a different story -- he was the solo sponsor of 62 earmarks totaling $81 million, ranking him 17th in the Senate in that category. That is certainly punching above his weight, as far as seniority goes.

The leader of all senators for solo earmarks is the legendary Robert Byrd, the Senate's senior member who needed no co-sponsors to bring $390 million to West Virginia single-handedly. With a guy like that, who needs a Rockefeller? -- as in John D. Rockefeller IV, West Virginia's junior senator, who only brought in a measly $6 million in solo earmarks.
The leader for all senators for all earmarks is Hillary Clinton, who was listed as sponsor for $1,583,017,755 in earmarks. However, Hillary is practically Feingoldian when it comes to solo earmarks with only two appropriations totaling $98,000.
The leading states to receive earmark funds are Virginia, Texas, California, New York, Florida and Maryland -- all very large states, or states near the Nation's Capital.
Wisconsin ranks a disappointing 42nd, with $223 million in earmark spending, well below our population ranking, and an example of what happens when one state's senator chooses to not play the game.

THE NUMBER ONE RANK FOR SOLO-SPONSORED EARMARKS GOES TO:

George W. Bush.

The President sponsored 636 solo earmarks ranging from a $428,879,000 construction project in Ft. Belvoir, Va. to an $8,000 Nebraska investigation grant. The president's earmarks totaled in the billions, and are likely a prime source of CIA, NSA, DIA and other opaque intelligence agency and defense funding. Bush was a frequent critic of earmarks, wouldn't you know.
--Michael Horne

Once again LegiStorm has provided an excellent tool for the public dissemination of source Congressional data. This is a keeper.