Congressional Earmarks Research Articles

Presidential Initiatives as a Tool to Manage U.S. Foreign Assistance Policies in the XXI Century: From George W. Bush Jr. to Joseph R. Biden

Exploration of bibliography on the U.S. foreign policy reveals a striking and inexplicable lack of scholarly attention to such an interesting phenomenon, as presidential foreign aid initiatives. Such initiatives are studied exclusively in the context of a given administration’ policy but not as an element of the U.S. national system of foreign aid management. This paper is meant to fill this gaping niche. The first section defines a place of such initiatives among the presidential tools to influence foreign aid policies and the reasons behind their proliferation. The second section compares a dozen of the most prominent presidential initiatives of the XXI century — with a special focus on the differences between the most recent Presidential Initiative for Democratic Renewal, launched by Joseph Biden at the Summit for Democracy, and the initiatives of his predecessors. The conclusion is drawn that presidential initiatives have gained in significance over the last two decades due to objective as well as subjective factors. On the one hand, U.S. presidents sought to expand the room for maneuver in foreign aid programming and budgeting, which had been very limited from the very beginning due to the legal constraints and which had contracted even further because of a quick proliferation of Congressional earmarks and directives. On the other hand, one should not underestimate the impact of an unprecedented activism of the George W. Bush that the last three U.S. presidents had to keep in mind in their own aid policies. However, the launch of each initiative was determined by a unique combination of factors operating at the individual, domestic and structural levels. This explains a great variety in circumstances surrounding their launch, documentary and institutional formalization, which did not preclude a number of key similarities: 1) determining the funding volume; 2) providing a long-term perspective; 3) supporting the initiative through authorization acts, presidential orders, memoranda/directives or strategic planning documents issued by the White House; 4) establishing new coordination units. The higher the status of these units and the clearer their mandates were, the more effectively the implementation process went. The launch of the Joseph Biden’s Presidential Initiative for Democratic Renewal — which combines diplomacy and development tools — at the end of his first year in office illustrates the role of the aforementioned factors. His intent to solidify his legacy predetermined the choice of a thematic profile for the first presidential initiative which would reflect his personal ideas and considerations about a pivotal confrontation of the epoch in the most explicit way. However, at least for the time being the Joseph Biden’s initiative stands out in all three main dimensions, which raises doubts about its potential to exert a systemic and long-term influence on the U.S. foreign assistance policies.

Limited Time, Limited Resources: Trade-Offs in Congressional Earmarking and Policymaking

Earmarks are an important tool of a legislators’ reelection strategy, as they provide a prime opportunity to benefit their district and increase their chances at reelection. Yet, some legislators secure substantially more earmarks than others. Our study offers a new explanation for why this occurs. With limited legislative resources at their disposal, members of Congress are forced to make trade-offs in how they allocate their resources among legislative activities. In a world with resource constraints, members less engaged in earmarking are likely engaged in policymaking activities. We take advantage of new earmark and policymaking data to explore this hypothesized negative relationship between earmarking and policymaking effort. We find that legislators who exert greater effort on policymaking secure significantly fewer earmark dollars.

Patrimony for Peace:

Patrimony for Peace:

The Effect of Political Dynasties on Effective Democratic Governance: Evidence From the Philippines

What is the effect of political dynasties on effective governance? To determine whether dynastic presence has a positive or detrimental effect on good governance, we examined the Philippine House of Representatives, an institution where more than 60% of its members have been dominated by such clans since the restoration of democracy in 1987. Specifically, we test whether provinces dominated by such established families are more likely to bring higher levels of pork barrel allocations to their provinces. The findings show how provinces dominated by family clans are less likely to experience good governance in terms of (a) infrastructure development, (b) spending on health, (c) the prevalence of criminality, (d) full employment, and (e) the overall quality of government. The implications of the empirical analyses convey that political dynasties have deleterious effects in terms of the allocation of public goods, even if their presence induces higher levels of congressional earmarks.

Planning for Unplanned Pork

Congressional earmarks can fund projects irrespective of carefully crafted metropolitan plans, potentially undermining years of analysis and negotiation. Yet, while earmarking of federal transport funds expanded significantly around the turn of the century, the planning literature has not considered whether or how this affected regionally scaled planning. To address that gap, this study examines how congressional earmarking and metropolitan planning interact, especially as competing paths for transportation investments. By analyzing transportation spending bills, other archival materials and conducting original interviews with federal, state and local agencies, transport policy organizations, and lobbyists, this article uncovers several unforeseen planning, financial, and administrative challenges associated with congressional earmarks. Second, it reveals how metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) manage such earmarks post hoc, creatively improving earmarking outcomes and strengthening planning in the process. These findings underscore the pivotal role of federal policies that institutionalize regional planning and that can enable flexible and assertive MPO responses. To successfully shape congressional intervention in regional investment programs and outcomes, planners and officials involved in metropolitan transportation must be sharply attuned to the politics of earmarking in addition to being exceptionally knowledgeable about the formal and informal rules that govern regional planning. With this dual awareness, of politics and process, they stand to more effectively influence congressional actions, enhancing their planning functions even when subject to uncertainty and conflict.

Financing congressional earmarks: Implications for transport policy and planning

This research documents the primary strategies used by the US Congress to fund transportation earmarks from the early 1990s to the mid-2000s. It draws on careful analysis of funding bills and primary and secondary sources including government reports, industry and policy newsletters, scholarly articles, and publicly available data on earmarks. It is also informed by interviews with transportation stakeholders involved with earmarks at federal, state, and regional levels. By detailing how Congress pays for earmarks, I show that earmarks do more to redistribute than add to existing transportation resources, and that the intricacy of Congressional funding maneuvers can make earmarks’ fiscal impacts hard to discern. Several implications follow for transportation policy and practice. First, critiques that earmarks increase federal transportation spending are misplaced. While such claims make it easy to discredit national investment in transportation, skepticism is in order when earmarks are invoked to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Second, earmarks’ true costs are related not to increased deficits but rather to opportunity costs incurred when unplanned earmarks replace other investments, particularly projects identified through regional and state planning or competitive selection by an executive agency. Finally, this work suggests productive directions for future earmark reform, such as limiting earmarks to projects in regional or state plans and making explicit for any earmarks in a bill the funding mechanisms that support them. Such steps could lessen the opportunity costs (and administrative inefficiencies) of earmarks, increase transparency in earmarking, and potentially make the practice less objectionable if used to facilitate passage of the long overdue surface transportation authorization bill.

Peering Inside the Pork Barrel

This article documents Congressional transportation earmarking practice in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, analyzing how Congress earmarks funds for projects and how earmark features determine beneficiaries. First, it illuminates the Congressional process for earmarking in a bill: Committees solicit requests, leadership structures the terms for earmarking, and members identify final priorities. Second, it distinguishes between authorization and appropriation earmarks, and among demonstration, discretionary, and stand-alone earmarks. Finally, it shows how statutory, nonstatutory, and hybrid earmarks vary in legal significance, with implications for federal, state, and other agencies’ ability to change or challenge a congressionally directed project. Major themes emerge. Increases in earmarking, technological advances, and earmarking reforms have made some stages of the process more formal and visible, although key stages remain opaque. In addition, Congressional earmarking is dynamic, evolving in response to situational opportunities and challenges. Concluding observations discuss how future earmarking could be made more transparent and effective.

The Heartland Intermodal Corridor: public private partnerships and the transformation of institutional settings

This paper examines the development process of the Heartland Intermodal Corridor from Norfolk, Virginia to Columbus, Ohio in the United States, opened in September 2010. The aim of the project was to decrease transport costs and increase competitiveness for peripheral regions such as West Virginia by upgrading existing branch lines to double-stack capacity and building new intermodal terminals.The paper develops a theoretical framework for institutional analysis, combining the overall institutional setting with the roles of individual actors confronting a collective action problem. Results suggest that the project represents an observable trend in freight funding policy in the United States, moving away from congressional earmarks which have been criticised in the past for their subjective nature, and towards a more transparent, bid-based system. Findings from the research demonstrate that the institutional setting has been transformed, moving towards a reconciliation between top-down planning approaches and market-driven private sector development. Furthermore, encouragement of multi-state public–private consortia will potentially make it easier to develop national corridors that can support new markets, while generating both public and private benefits.

The importance of federal earmarks to state coffers: An examination of distribution trends over the decade

Earmarks have long been the subject of controversy, touted by pundits and politicians on one hand as the means for bringing home the bacon and on the other as pork-barrel spending. In relation to federal spending, the amount of annual earmarked dollars is insignificant; at its zenith in FY 2005 earmarked spending comprised only 6 percent of the year’s total appropriations. Yet preliminary research indicates that earmarks are an increasingly important source of funding for essential state services, such as infrastructure, social services, and economic development. Especially in times of fiscal stress, earmarks save state governments hundreds of millions of dollars in agency program funds and intergovernmental transfers. This study examines the congressional earmarks contained in appropriations legislation for FY 2000 through 2009 to assess trends in categorical distributions across and within the states during the period. The data illustrate a shift in allocations over the decade, from infrastructure, community development and environmental priorities to social and emergency services, higher education and energy needs.

Moving USAID Forward

R. Shah's powerful editorial “Breakthroughs for development” (22 July, p. [385][1]) underscores the proud history of America's scientific and engineering contributions to development around the world. Many were privately funded and led; many were stimulated by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). Yet USAID has drifted from its past strengths. Shah bluntly states that “budget cuts and shifting mandates pulled the agency's focus away from emphasizing science and technology.” He implicitly refers to blizzards of congressional earmarks and to USAID's deliberate and consistent de-emphasis on science over the past 30 years. Observers have repeatedly criticized these trends and recommended exactly what Shah now sees as a priority. For example, 20 years ago, in 1992, the Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government argued for a new strategy for USAID and advocated “critical roles for science and technology” ([ 1 ][2]). Just 5 years ago, in 2007, the Bipartisan Congressional-Presidential HELP Commission called for a new unit in USAID, similar to the creative projects of the Defense Department's Advanced Research Projects Agency, that would invest $50 million per year of “patient capital”—i.e., federal government funding for innovative long-range research (dubbed “patient” because it may not yield immediate results) ([ 2 ][3]). The reports sat on shelves. No administration took the initiative. Little changed, and the defects Shah cites became worse. One objection to vigorous U.S. science and technology cooperation is that developing countries such as China and India become competitors as they flourish with economic growth powered by science. However, such countries also become larger markets for U.S. exports and more capable partners in global goals, such as protecting public health. As the Congress weighs paths to prudent austerity in the overall federal budget, the scientific, medical, and engineering foundations of programs in foreign assistance are as important as such foundations are in defense. Let us move USAID out of its late-20th-century ruts and into the 21st century's frontiers. Shah deserves our help. 1. [↵][4] Carnegie Commission on Science, Technology, and Government, “Partnerships for global development: The clearing horizon” (Carnegie Corporation of New York, New York, 1992). 2. [↵][5] 1. M. K. Bush, 2. C. Adelman, 3. L. Hindery , “Beyond assistance: The HELP commission report on foreign assistance reform” (HELP Commission Act PL 108-199, Washington, DC, 2007). [1]: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/333/6041/385.short [2]: #ref-1 [3]: #ref-2 [4]: #xref-ref-1-1 View reference 1 in text [5]: #xref-ref-2-1 View reference 2 in text

Ending Earmarks Also Means the End Of Many Research Projects

The last pillar supporting congressional earmarks crumbled last week, dooming the controversial practice for at least the next 2 years. Turning off the spigot will have a dramatic impact on scientists who receive the money and perhaps also on the societal problems they are tackling.

Real Reform or Change for Chumps: Earmark Policy Developments, 2006-2010

In response to widespread perceptions of problems associated with congressional earmarks, reform efforts began in late 2006 and continued through 2010. This essay summarizes those problems, explains the distribution of earmarks within Congress, and documents their rise and relative fall between 1991 and 2010 using government and public interest group databases. The author explains and critiques earmark reform policies, including congressional rules, initiatives taken by the congressional appropriations committees, and reforms pursued by the George W. Bush and Barack Obama administrations. Congressional rules and committee-initiated reforms have been most effective, resulting in significant improvements in earmark transparency and accountability. The number and dollar value of earmarks first dropped noticeably in fiscal year 2007 after an earmark moratorium, and then stabilized as reforms were implemented. It is premature to conclude that these levels will continue or that reforms will alter the policy content of earmarks or their distribution among members of Congress.

Assessing the Allocation of Pork: Evidence From Congressional Earmarks

Distributive politics represents one of the most important and controversial aspects of legislative policymaking. In the U.S. Congress, controversies over distributive politics are most evident in the area of legislative earmarking. In this article, we employ a unique set of data matching earmarks to their legislative sponsors to assess the leading explanations of distributive politics. We find that members of the majority party do considerably better than equally situated members of the minority. Moreover, party leaders target earmarks to those holding pivotal agenda-setting positions and to electorally vulnerable members. These findings have direct implications for both the extensive political science literature on distributive politics and the practical politics of earmarking reform.

Recipes for Pork and Other Delicious Offerings for the New Administration

Is pork produced by feeble budgetary processes? By fixing weak budgetary procedures, can wasteful spending and opportunities for corruption be reduced? This essay looks at three varieties of pork: earmarked, ad hoc, and presidential. What can be done to curb the excesses of each one? By examining the problem of congressional earmarking, this timely article proposes a new process for controlling “earmarked” pork by supporting a new (constitutional) presidential line‐item veto/reprogramming. “Ad hoc pork,” generated by emergency or stimulus bills, is also analyzed. Its downsides can be fixed, according to the essay, by creating a preapproved roadmap for the appropriations process, thereby enhancing the quality of spending oversight. Finally, “presidential pork” derives from chief executives rewarding congressional allies and from government agencies allocating program resources so as to engender support from congressional members. This third variety of pork can be controlled if agencies improve their operational transparency plus strengthen their procedures for selecting projects. What happens when you put good people in a bad place, good apples in a bad barrel? Do the apples change the barrel, or does the barrel change the apples? —Philip Zimbardo, 2008

Incorporation of research plan results into regulatory policy

Because research can be an important element in the development of national drinking water regulations, research planning is essential to ensure timely and efficient regulatory development activities. Several research approaches have supported rulemaking, including research councils, research partnerships, congressional earmarks, regulated occurrence data research, and utility survey approaches. Although research plans have been specifically developed and executed to support regulatory development, the extent to which plan results and objectives have been incorporated into final rules has not been analyzed. The authors conducted retrospective analyses on the use of research results and objectives in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's regulatory development processes. Study findings led to two recommendations for research plans in support of future rule development. First, research plan tasks should focus on rule development needs; and second, research plan tasks should be constrained by available funding and timing. These suggestions will help future research planners prioritize research tasks and allocate resources more effectively to meet rule development objectives.

The Administrative Costs of Congressional Earmarking: The Case of the Office of Naval Research

Discussions about congressional earmarking often focus on their direct costs in the federal government's appropriations bills. This article shows that this conventional view neglects the administrative costs of earmarking by examining the extensive transaction and opportunity costs that come with the political, budgetary, and programmatic management of these earmarked projects in Congress and in the Office of Naval Research. One policy conclusion from this study is that the executive branch should make these costs transparent, as they remain largely hidden from public discussion and the consideration of the federal budget.

Determinants of the distribution of congressional earmarks across states

This paper examines pork-barrel spending within states and finds that per capita earmarked funding is correlated with the inverse of a state's population, the presence of a Republican Congressional delegation, and the tenure of a state's senior Senator.

Perception and Reality in Congressional Earmarks

Earmarks added to appropriations bills have generated a considerable amount of attention from the media, politicians, and fiscal watchdog groups. Taken as a whole, three “truths" about earmarks are frequently discussed: 1) earmarks are the reason for large budget deficits, 2) using omnibus legislation instead of regular order leads to more earmarks, and 3) “airdropped" earmarks added at the conference stage compound the problem of pork. In this paper, we examine these “truths" and find the conventional wisdom does not stand up to empirical tests. Finally, we show how Congress easily worked around new rules concerning the addition of earmarks at the conference stage.

What Explains the Quantity and Quality of Local Inventive Activity?

We geocode a data set of patents and their citation counts, including citations from abroad. This allows us to examine both the quantity and quality of local inventions. We also refine our data on local academic R&D to explore effectsnfrom different fields of science and sources of R&D funding. Finally, we incorporate data on congressional earmarks of funds for academic R&D. With one important exception, results using citation weighted patents are similar to those using unweighted patents. For example, estimates of the returns to density (jobs per square mile) are only slightly changed when using citation weighted patents as the dependent variable. But stimates of returns to city size (urbanization effects) are quite sensitive to the choice of dependent variable. Local human capital is the most important determinant of per capita rates of patenting. A 1 percent increase in the adult population with a college degree increases the local patenting rate by about 1 percent. With few exceptions, there is little variation across fields of science in them contribution of academic R&D to patenting rates. The exceptions are computer and life sciences, where the effects are smaller. There is greater variation in the contribution of R&D funded by different sources - academic R&D funded by the federal government generates smaller increases in patenting rates than R&D funded by the university itself. This effect is somewhat stronger for federally funded applied R&D than for basic R&D. We also find small negative effects for cities with greater exposure to academic R&D allocated by congressional earmarks. We discuss the implications of these results for policy and future research.

Congressional Earmarks and Telemedicine in the United States

Telemedicine and e-HealthVol. 14, No. 8 EDITORIALCongressional Earmarks and Telemedicine in the United StatesRonald C. Merrell and Charles R. DoarnRonald C. MerrellSearch for more papers by this author and Charles R. DoarnSearch for more papers by this authorPublished Online:27 Oct 2008https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2008.8486AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail "Congressional Earmarks and Telemedicine in the United States." , 14(8), pp. 731–732FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails Volume 14Issue 8Oct 2008 InformationCopyright 2008, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.To cite this article:Ronald C. Merrell and Charles R. Doarn.Congressional Earmarks and Telemedicine in the United States.Telemedicine and e-Health.Oct 2008.731-732.http://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2008.8486Published in Volume: 14 Issue 8: October 27, 2008PDF download