Despite earmark reforms, LaHood still bringing home the pork

Congress is expected to approve a $448 billion defense-spending bill that includes $1.6 million to Springfield’s Memorial Medical Center for reasons that have nothing whatsoever to do with national defense:

The money will be used buy computerized intravenous pumps designed to reduce medication errors. A hospital spokesman was quoted as saying that the equipment is considered so vital — they wouldn’t even consider buying it without the government handout.

It wasn’t clear Thursday why the funding is coming through a defense-spending bill.

[Memorial spokesman Michael] Leathers wouldn’t comment on that but said, “Recognizing the many and ongoing needs to acquire advanced and improved technology, it is very unlikely that Memorial Medical Center would purchase these advanced IV pumps in the foreseeable future without this funding.”

[snip]

While Durbin and Rep. Ray LaHood, R-Peoria, have repeatedly defended the use of earmarks as a way to benefit their constituents, critics say the earmarking process directs funds for political purposes rather than national priorities.

“Lawmakers are ready to split town with their bags stuffed with projects that do not reflect smart spending for a nation at war,” complained Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a group that monitors federal spending.

LaHood said recently that “people in central Illinois like earmarks because they know that it benefits programs and helps people.”

More than 2,000 earmarks are estimated to be in the defense-funding bill, but they are difficult to find unless the sponsors choose to disclose them, said Ellis, who is still reviewing the 314-page conference agreement.

Although the House recently passed new rules that would require disclosure of sponsors of certain earmarks, Ellis noted that no sponsors were named in the defense bill because of “loopholes” in the rule. The new rule exempts earmarks that go to federal entities and those inserted for the first time during the House-Senate conference.

Most earmarks designate funding for federal agencies or programs, such as the Army’s research and development program, that would ultimately benefit local initiatives or firms, he said.

While there appear to be more earmarks than previous years, the amounts are smaller, Ellis said.

“It appears they are spreading the dollars farther and thinner with the elections coming up,” he said.

No matter what we do to make these guys be honest and upfront about how they spend our money, guys like LaHood and Durbin invent new ways to make it easy for them to spread the gravy around and get re-elected.

UPDATE: The Journal Star’s version of this article has more details about the corporate welfare-style earmarks LaHood got inserted into this “defense spending” bill:

Other earmarks requested by LaHood and included in the House-Senate agreement are:

- $3.25 million for Firefly Energy, an offshoot of Caterpillar, which is developing a longer-lasting and lighter-weight battery that it hopes to sell to the Army. The fledgling firm had received $5 million earlier in the House bill but nothing in the Senate bill. At LaHood’s request, Firefly received $2.5 million this year.

- $2 million for the 182nd Airlift Wing in Peoria for a secure computer system. The same amount was provided by both the House and Senate. [I have no argument with this -- B.D.]

- $1 million for PeoriaNext for a robotics program, which was the same amount included in the House bill. Nothing was included in the Senate bill.

Hmmmm … how many Iraq war vets aren’t getting all the medical services they need? How many now serving don’t have adequate vehicle armor?

Ray LaHood,Dick Durbin,pork,earmarks,federal spending