Earmarks and pork-barrel projects need careful vetting

THE ISSUE With Democrats in control of Congress, Hawaii's senior senator will become chairman of the defense appropriations subcommittee.

LOCAL businesses, politicians and taxpayers would hardly complain about the impressive ability of Hawaii's senior senator to bring home the bacon.

The heaps of federal dollars Daniel Inouye has harvested through his more than four decades in Washington have greatly benefited the islands and fueled a good measure of economic prosperity.

Criticizing the senator's skill in the beltway practice of earmarking money for specific projects would seem to be the grumbling of ingrates. However, the political custom that some in Congress have used as a way to reward special-interest groups, campaign contributors, and their lobbyists and friends has spun out of control.

According to the Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan group that keeps track of such matters, Inouye ranks second only to his longtime Senate buddy Ted Stevens of Alaska in wrangling political pork. Inouye secured $903.9 million this year in earmarked funds for Hawaii, or $746.05 per resident. Stevens topped that at $1.05 billion, or $1,677.27 per resident.

When Democrats take control of the chamber next year, Inouye will become chairman of the Senate defense appropriations subcommittee, which holds sway over the largest amount of discretionary spending and earmarks.

For Hawaii, Inouye's influence could open even wider the flow of federal money, and though the funds might be well used here -- most often on military-related projects -- all earmarked spending should be balanced against the needs of the nation.

During the last Congress, bribery scandals linked to political pork tainted numerous members of Congress, prompting voters to pinch their noses and throw some Republicans involved in the corruption out of office.

As a result, the new Democratic majority has promised reform, but that is not necessarily warranted, says Inouye, who told the New York Times he does not see the need for "any monumental changes" in the approach to earmarks.

"If something is wrong, we should clean house," he said, "but if they can justify it (an expenditure), I will look at it."

Inouye has worked diligently to obtain funds for Hawaii's special needs. For example, he has had to educate other members about the state's need to combat brown tree snakes, agricultural pests and invasive species that threaten our environment. He has brought in military funding for projects that have boosted the building and construction industry, adding jobs that strengthened Hawaii's economic growth. These expenditures have a broad range of beneficiaries on both the state and national levels.

But as the Iraq war continues to drain federal coffers, money for social programs, such as education and health care for the poor, have suffered, and careful allotment of tax dollars has become all the more imperative.

Though earmarks are not inherently bad, when dropped into spending bills at the last minute, as they often are, pork-barrel projects deprive Congress of the opportunity for debate and consideration of national priorities. It is a practice that breeds dishonesty and evades accountability, and the senator should welcome its correction. In his words, "We should clean house."