Should Congress bring back earmarks?

President Trump startled fiscal hawks when he urged Congress to consider returning to the practice of “earmarks.” A ban on earmarks — provisions that members of Congress often slipped anonymously into legislation to steer taxpayer dollars to projects for their districts or favorite special interests — was imposed by former House Speaker John Boehner.

Earmarks bring to mind the “Bridge to Nowhere,” a $320 million bridge in Alaska from one tiny town to an equally tiny island.

Boehner’s ban, however, came on the heels of an earmark-related corruption scandal. A former member of Congress went to prison after he admitted putting earmarks into spending bills for defense contractors and then received cash and expensive gifts.

What prompts the president’s embrace of earmarks? He said they may be the one way to unify a fractious Congress where the two parties can’t seem to agree on anything.

Opponents blast them as a symbol of the so-called swamp that Trump campaigned against. Earmarks, they say, would reopen the door to bills loaded with pork and force lawmakers to vote for big spending bills in order to get their share.

Earmark supporters say the ban gave away some of Congress’ power to direct how taxpayer money is spent. In particular, several members of Congress point to the Army Corps of Engineers as a problem, complaining that the agency refuses to listen to their suggestions for priorities.

For today’s debate, we turn to two high-profile voices about earmarks:

U.S. Rep. Tom Rooney , an Okeechobee Republican who wants Congress to earmark money for the Corps of Engineers.

Ryan Alexander, president of Taxpayers for Common Sense.