By Marion Edwyn Harrison, Esq.
August 03, 2006

No recent Congressional scandal or appearance of scandal has equaled the drama of $ 90,000.00 all neatly rolled up in the Congressional office safe of Representative William J. Jefferson (D-LA). But scandals and grounds for scandal keep seeping into public view, rather like a sewer in need of maintenance, its disgorge erratic in filth, frequency and damage. Profligate and outrageous earmarks may be the worst. Mighty millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money are diverted to projects (worthy or otherwise) of United States Senators, and more frequently of those Representatives who exercise the necessary temerity and clout. The process is mostly unobtrusive except for bragging to constituent beneficiaries. Some private enrichments add to the list.

Two dissimilar adventures have been exposed thus far in the 109th Congress. One might not have been noticed had it not involved the Speaker of the House of Representatives, or the other had it not involved the House Appropriations Committee Chairman. They hardly are the most egregious - indeed, many are vastly worse.

Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) reaped a windfall profit in real estate. The accusation is that the Speaker in 2005 earmarked appropriations totaling some $ 207 million of Federal taxpayers’ money to construct a highway and an interchange near Plano, Illinois, in his Congressional district. All Federal highways, at least presumptively, are part of our interstate commerce system and, therefore, a Constitutionally permissible Federal expenditure. There was some local disagreement as to the worth of this particular proposed construction but that does not trigger a Constitutional question.

The question, rather, is that of the Speaker’s motivation and lack of disclosure. The Speaker and two partners in 2002 lawfully purchased some 196 acres of a largely landlocked site without major roadway access. That they did so through a trust, without public disclosure of ownership interest, may reveal motivation.

In 2005, shortly after the appropriation, the land trust of which the Speaker was an equity owner sold the land to a developer. The Speaker’s share of the gross profit apparently was about $ 1.8 million. The Speaker, so far as one can discern, violated neither a statute nor a flimsy House ethics rule. The Speaker is, of course, under the Constitution the head of the Legislative Department or Branch of the tripartite Federal Government, and by statute is second in line for the Presidency should fatal tragedy overcome the President and Vice President. Were he not Speaker likely even less attention would have been focused upon this profitable quasi-secret deal. Certainly there are worse, among Members of both parties. Meantime, the astute Speaker may be the most affluent former wrestling coach in the country.

Nickels and dimes by comparison, with no monetary benefit to Appropriations Committee Jerry Lewis (R-CA), is the $ 500,000.00 of Federal taxpayers’ money earmarked to build a swimming pool in Banning, California, in rapidly growing Riverside County. On the one hand, this misuse of non-Banning taxpayers’ money did not peculiarly benefit Mr. Lewis. On the other hand, it illustrates the Constitutional infirmity of much earmarking: There is no Constitutional or other Federal purpose in a Banning swimming pool, just a give-away by a Member of Congress of taxpayers’ money from across the country to his constituents in Banning. (There are rumors of Lewis financial monkey business - but only rumors.)

The foregoing two incidents also dramatize the decline in propriety of Congressional appropriations sponsored by many Republicans in Congress. In the 80th Congress (1947 - 1948) all of Riverside, Imperial and Orange Counties comprised a single Congressional district. Population explosion now has expanded that one district into almost ten. It was represented by the late John Phillips, who lived in Banning. “JP,” as he chose a few of us to call him, honored this writer by appointing him a House page. JP was Chairman of the Independent Offices Subcommittee of Appropriations - the largest appropriations jurisdiction outside national defense. JP prided himself upon the extent to which he successfully cut appropriations requests from the Harry S. Truman White House (although, a strong conservative, JP and his wife did not dislike the Trumans and the wives liked one another). The evil of earmarks as we know them had not been invented. If there were sufficient JP equivalents in Congress today there would be few, if any, earmarks. Likewise, if the likes of the late John Taber, of Auburn, New York, were Chairman of the full Appropriations Committee, JP equivalents would chair the subcommittees and the House, which originates all appropriations bills, would be reducing Federal expenditures - not uncontrollably, and sometimes unethically, raising them.

To too many Members of Congress it seems naively restrictive to appropriate Federal taxpayers’ money only under tight Constitutional limitations, thus eliminating a huge number of earmarks, or to appropriate money only when no Senator or Representative might share in the related dollar largess.

Many Members of Congress, of course, do not participate or benefit. We shall learn if it would be too much to hope that the Republicans returning in the Second Session of the present profligate Congress, perhaps with an eye on the November elections, would return to at least a modicum of fiscal responsibility.

Democrats, in general, never have been much on fiscal responsibility. However, one must not be surprised if a certain Senator, after re-election in New York, reminds voters that her husband was not, relatively speaking, a big spender; denounces the Republicans for their profligacy (while, of course, shielding Democrats); and runs on a platform that includes fiscal responsibility. The lady appears to be as politically versatile as some Republicans are politically spendthrift.

Meantime, we need more John Taber and John Phillips Constitutional respect and pragmatic parsimony. It is Federal taxpayers’ dollars with which, or by means of which, some incumbents are enriching themselves or, not unlike the Gracchi of Rome, handing out other people’s goodies to their constituents.

Marion Edwyn Harrison, Esq. is President of, and Counsel to, the Free Congress Foundation.