Congress can now control more money, and two local lawmakers will play a big role
All of South Florida’s U.S. House members are participating in earmarks after a 10-year absence, though Republican senators Marco Rubio and Rick Scott are opposed.
Over the last decade, members of Congress have been unable to request federal funds for specific projects in their districts after Republicans banned the practice at the height of the Tea Party wave to curb what conservatives called wasteful spending.
But now the requests, called earmarks, are back. And two South Florida lawmakers will play an important role in the process, which is competitive. Not every lawmaker will get what they want.
Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Republican Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart have leadership roles in the House Appropriations Committee, the body responsible for federal spending proposals.
Wasserman Schultz is the top Democrat on the subcommittee responsible for earmarks related to military construction projects while DiazBalart is the top Republican for transportation funding requests through the appropriations process, though Democrats ultimately control the subcommittee.
“The main reason for bringing [earmarks] back is so you can lift the veil of opacity that existed for the last decade,” said Wasserman Schultz, D-Weston, who supported the return of earmarks during her unsuccessful campaign to lead the entire committee. “They just went up into the amorphous blob of the executive branch where pots of funds were allocated and nameless, faceless bureaucrats that no one had access to made decisions.”
Every U.S. House member from South Florida submitted a list of 10 projects each in their districts to receive federal funds through the annual appropriations process.
Republican-proposed projects include a $6 million plan from DiazBalart for a new wastewater treatment plant in Everglades City, $750,000 for police body cameras in Homestead from Rep. Carlos Gimenez and $3 million to improve water pipes in West Miami from
Rep. Maria Elvira Salazar.
Democratic-proposed projects include $1.8 million for drainage upgrades in Davie from Wasserman Schultz, $560,000 in additional mental health resources for the Broward Sheriff’s Office from Rep. Ted Deutch, $2.2 million for a Bahamian Museum of Arts and Culture from Rep. Frederica Wilson and $1 million to help victims of domestic abuse in Delray Beach from Rep. Lois Frankel.
The office of former Rep. Alcee Hastings was unable to participate in the process following the congressman’s death in April.
But while all seven U.S. House members from South Florida submitted earmark requests, Florida’s Republicans in Washington are divided on the practice. Only about half of
House Republicans submitted earmark requests and the state’s two Republican U.S. senators aren’t on board.
Sens. Marco Rubio and Rick Scott have vocally opposed the return of earmarks, which were banned in 2011 after Republicans took control of Congress. House Democrats kept the ban in place when they regained power in 2019, but reversed course this year after politicians from both parties argued that banning earmarks put more federal spending decisions in the hands of un-elected administrators instead of elected officials who know their districts and are held accountable by voters.
Scott and Rubio were among 19 Republican senators who signed a letter in April and filed a bill objecting to earmarks.
“We, the undersigned, stand committed to the ban on earmarks,” Scott and Rubio wrote. “We will not vote to repeal it. We will not participate in an inherently wasteful spending practice that is prone to serious abuse.”
Just six Republican senators said they plan to request earmarks, which could put states like Florida where both senators are opposed to the practice at a disadvantage. Democratic senators have vowed to keep an even money split between parties, so the Senate Republicans who opt-in could bring home more money.
VEHICLE FOR CORRUPTION
In some cases, before they were banned a decade ago, earmarks landed lawmakers in prison.
In 2006, former Re
publican Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham was charged with taking more than $2 million in bribes in exchange for earmarks. And former Alaska Republican Sen. Ted Stevens secured a $235 million earmark for the infamous “Bridge to Nowhere,” a bridge that was ultimately never built for an island with 50 people on it. Senior lawmakers from small states like Alaska and West Virginia frequently secured large earmarks for their states at the expense of more worthy projects in bigger states that happened to have less congressional seniority.
But while those scandals eventually prompted Congress to ban the practice, the Trump era curtailed the near-universal opposition to earmarks from Republicans. In 2018, former President Donald Trump backed earmarks and shied away from Republican orthodoxy against most government spending. And while Cunningham served what was once the longest prison sentence of any former member of Congress, Trump, on his last day in office, pardoned him.
To prevent corruption, Democrats instituted rules that are supposed to increase transparency. Each member’s earmark requests, which were limited to 10, are publicly available, and lawmakers attest that none of the funds will benefit themselves nor their immediate family members. The beneficiaries of earmarks must be local governments or non-profits. For-profit companies are not eligible.
The total amount of money for earmarks in the House is also limited to one percent of federal discretionary spending, which would be about $14 billion for the 2021 fiscal year.
The vast majority of lawmakers weren’t in office the last time earmarks were allowed, and many lawmakers submitted scaled-back earmark requests, far less than the $235 million “Bridge to Nowhere.” None of Deutch’s requests, for example, exceed $1 million.
The largest single project submitted by a South Florida lawmaker is a $13.5 million request from Wasserman Schultz for a particle accelerator at Florida International University, a project described by the congresswoman as “a first-of-its-kind for the state of Florida” and “a critical step towards early detection, diagnosis and treatment of multiple devastating diseases.”
LOCAL INFLUENCE
Wasserman Schultz and Diaz-Balart, who are also Florida’s longest-serving U.S. Representatives in office, will play a large role in funding requests for military construction and transportation projects.
Wasserman Schultz said her subcommittee, which is responsible for military construction and Veterans Affairs spending, is a bit different than others because earmarks aren’t allowed for VA projects and all military construction requests have preapproval from the armed forces.
“There are limitations in my [appropriations] bill. Since a military project is not a community project, it has to be on a list that the military has already submitted,” Wasserman
Schultz said. “We make those considerations based on the total needs of the military construction budget and what we have available resources for. That’s in my subcommittee, other subcommittees are going to have it shake out differently.”
Diaz-Balart is the top
Republican responsible for transportation funding requests through the appropriations process, though Democrats ultimately control the subcommittee. In past years, ranking members like Diaz-Balart had control of 40% of funds available for a specific bill while subcommittee chairs like Wasserman Schultz controlled 60% of the funds.
While Democrats in the U.S. Senate pledged to divide funds equally between both parties, Wasserman Schultz said requests in the House will be doled out “fairly and objectively, regardless of party affiliation.”
There are also additional opportunities for lawmakers to request earmarks outside the appropriations process for transportation projects. That pool of money is much smaller, though Salazar requested funds for an additional eight projects on top of her 10 appropriations earmark requests.
Wasserman Schultz said members who have gone through the process before know that funds are scarce. She said her requests prioritized projects that could not get funding elsewhere, geographic diversity and projects that will benefit a large number of people.
“What I know from my experience earmarking in the past is I want to maximize the chances that the project I’m submitting gets funding,” Wasserman Schultz said. “If your project...doesn’t effect a lot of people and it can get money elsewhere those sort of add obstacles to your path.”
Alex Daugherty: 202-383-6049, @alextdaugherty