Cities sweat funding as Congress picks at 'earmarks'

Enlarge By Mark Wilson, Getty Images Congressional pet projects have come under intense scrutiny in recent months from members of both parties. House Republicans have extended an earmark ban, but the future of the practice is less clear in the Senate.

');

'; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='
• Share
'; sclListTop +='
'; sclListTop +='
•  Add to Mixx
'; sclListTop +='
•  Facebook
'; sclListTop +='
•  Twitter
'; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='

'; sclListTop +='
• More'; sclListTop +='
  '; sclListTop +='
  •  
    '; sclListTop +='

    '; sclListTop +='
  • Subscribe
  '; sclListTop +='
  •  
    By John Fritze, USA TODAY
    WASHINGTON — Cities are bracing to lose millions of dollars in funding for transportation and community projects, from subway lines to youth centers, because of a renewed push in Congress to ban lawmaker-directed spending known as "earmarks."

    With the incoming Republican majority in the House of Representatives committed to ending the practice and the Senate facing a vote to ban earmarks today, local officials are scrambling to find ways to pay for projects in case the federal funding never arrives.

    Spending bills in the House for the 2011 fiscal year include more than 3,000 earmarks worth $3 billion, according to the budget watchdog Taxpayers for Common Sense — from $2.5 million for a transportation center in Rochester, N.Y., to $250,000 for park upgrades in Gonzales, La.

    It's not clear whether Congress will approve any of those in the year-end session underway. And after several candidates successfully raised the spending as an issue in the midterm elections, some local leaders say they're worried about the chances in 2011.

    "We're hopeful that they don't close the door on us," said Hilliard Hampton, mayor of Inkster, Mich., a city west of Detroit that is in line for $1 million to build a senior center that would provide health care.

    Congressional pet projects have come under intense scrutiny in recent months from members of both parties, including Senate GOP leader Mitch McConnell and President Obama. House Republicans have extended an earmark ban, but the future of the practice is less clear in the Senate.

    Lawmakers will debate the issue again today thanks to an earmark ban proposed by Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla. The measure, which Coburn hopes to amend to a food-safety bill, needs 67 votes to pass — a tall order. The vote on the bill was delayed from Monday. "Senate Democrats have to do something," said Steve Ellis with Taxpayers for Common Sense. "They can't simply plow ahead ... or they're going to run into a buzz saw."

    A handful of Democrats, such as Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., support the ban. Others, such as Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, note the spending represents a tiny fraction of the budget and say the money would be spent by federal agencies even if lawmakers gave up the earmarks.

    The debate has left local governments unsure about whether they will receive any money. In La Joya, Texas, city Administrator Mike Alaniz said leaders have been trying to build a youth center for nearly 20 years. "Nothing fancy," he said. "A big activity room and some lockers."

    To finish the project, the city is looking to Congress for $500,000.

    Texas Democratic Rep. Henry Cuellar requested the spending and defended the project. "Earmarks have just become a political football," he said. Cuellar said supporters of the center are looking for other sources for money.

    Longtime earmark critic Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., said he doesn't doubt some of the requests are worthwhile, but said they should be judged fairly against other projects: "They ought to compete like everybody else."

    '; sclListBottom +='

    '; sclListBottom +='

    '; sclListBottom +='

    '; sclListBottom +='

    '; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=' Mixx'; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=' '; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=' '; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=' '; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=' '; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=' '; sclListBottom +=''; //new additions sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=' '; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=' '; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=''; sclListBottom +=' '; sclListBottom +='
  '; sclListBottom +='

'; sclListBottom +='

'; sclListBottom +='

Posted
Updated		E-mail | Save | Print | '); } //-->
To report corrections and clarifications, contact Standards Editor Brent Jones. For publication consideration in the newspaper, send comments to letters@usatoday.com. Include name, phone number, city and state for verification. To view our corrections, go to corrections.usatoday.com.

Guidelines: You share in the USA TODAY community, so please keep your comments smart and civil. Don't attack other readers personally, and keep your language decent. Use the "Report Abuse" button to make a difference. Read more.

via usatoday.com

Posted via email from Brian's posterous