In watching the news shows over the weekend, I was struck by the difference between the stances of Republican senator Richard Shelby and Democratic senator Evan Bayh on the spending bill before Congress. While nobody thinks the bill is perfect, one said he would support the bill and defended the practice of adding earmarks. The other had concerns about how much was being spent and was not comfortable with the earmark process.
So, you say, what’s new? Well, the defender of earmarks and the spending bill is Shelby. He has as many or more earmarks in the bill as any other senator. He obviously subscribes to the part of the conservative school that says we should never change the way we operate. Earmarks are a long tradition and provide value to the states who are, after all, participating in representative government. And after all, earmarks are only 2% of the spending bill, I mean, who really cares when the other numbers are so big.
Hmmm…. My head is spinning. Evan Bayh was very practical and really a bit conservative in his comments. He was not happy with the Democrats seeming to jump on the spending wagon simply because of pent-up demand. And he says he would like to see the earmark process reformed to include more transparency and oversight. Of course, Obama has said something similar and McCain banked a lot of his campaign on the disgust the average citizen feels when a bill gathers completely unrelated baggage that gets appended after hours with no debate in virtual secrecy.
But then I guess it does make a certain amount of sense. Conservative can mean unlikely to change, and pork is a time-honored (if not people-honored) tradition. So being willing to challenge this type of tradition is a Progressive trait.
Maybe I am not really a conservative at heart after all.
Â
