Adrian Smith and Earmarks

I've working through some old news articles, seeing if anything needs to be highlighted, and I got to this article:

Kearney Hub: Is pared 'pork' more palatable? We'll see as Congress finalizes budget

A statement is made by Smith in this article regarding earmarks. Here are the highlights and what he said:

The Democrats running Congress have cut the number of "pork barrel'' spending items by about 25 percent compared with earmarks under GOP rule, but the annual feeding frenzy continues......

But many lawmakers see the earmark process as a way to help their states receive money for worthy projects that federal bureaucrats might otherwise overlook.

Rep. Lee Terry, R-Neb., recently ran a radio ad touting his opposition to earmarks....

Neither Terry nor Bush complained as much when Republicans ran the House and Senate.......

Republicans ran Congress for most of the past decade, and the number of earmarks rose from 958 in the 1996 fiscal year to a peak of 13,997 in 2005. It dipped to 9,963 in 2006, according to Citizens Against Government Waste, which opposes all the special spending items.

.....Congress may approve spending bills with a total of about 8,000 earmarks this year, estimates Citizens Against Government Waste.....

Rookie Rep. Adrian Smith, R-Neb., said he has seen little evidence of a new passion to reduce pork.

"It's hard for the Republicans to criticize at this point,'' Smith said. "I'm pleased with how far we've come, but we need to do more.''

Among items Smith has requested is $2.5 million for Royal Plastics Manufacturing Co. in Minden to develop polymer materials for advanced military fighter aircraft. Smith said he toured the company and believes the money will support national defense.

Let's recap Smith, earmarks, and his constituents.

In September, I had asked Smith's office about the earmarks he had requested:

I then asked Isom about earmarks. In a recent Lincoln Journal-Star, someone wrote in that a request had been made to all the Nebraska Representatives to get a list of the earmarks they requested. Rep. Lee Terry had not submitted any earmarks. Rep. Jeff Fortenberry and Smith had refused.

Isom also refused me when I asked, so I asked why not. He responded that it’s “office policy”......


I asked him, “Why are you not willing to disclose what you’re requesting?”

Isom said, “It’s an office policy...the earmarks we request may not become part of the final bill.”

I told him I understood that, but that didn’t explain whey they were not willing to disclose the earmarks they were requesting. Isom answered, “It’s our office policy because we don’t want to create a false sense of expectation.”

I told Isom that I thought that was a bad excuse, but that “as your voters, your taxpayers, your constituents, I believe we have a right to know what is being requested.“

Isom said, “I appreciate your opinion, but that’s our policy that we’re not going to release the earmarks requested, but only as they’re approved and passed.“

Thanks, to a group called the Taxpayers for Common Sense, we have a listing of earmarks. What did Smith request?

- $500,000 for a US Hwy 30 viaduct replacement in Columbus.
- $2,500,000 to Royal Plastics in Minden.
- $294,000 for roads in the Valentine National Wildlife Refuge.

There are no indications Smith tried to work for the Panhandle and request funds for completion of the Heartland Expressway. He says he supports it, but do we really know that?

Smith made no requests in the Agriculture, Energy & Water, or Commerce/Justice/Science approprations bills. Other earmarks were requested that benefited the Third District, but those were done by Sen. Ben Nelson. For example, funds were earmarked for the airport in Scottsbluff, located practically in Smith's backyard.



Remember what was reported previously:

...he doesn't want a push to reform "earmarks" in the budget process to impact gaining additional funds for the Heartland Expressway. Earmarks for pet projects, especially to the last transportation bill, has resulted in calls for eliminating the "add-ons" to major funding measures.

Smith told the Chamber's Government Affairs Committee there are "good earmarks and bad earmarks" and reform to eliminate wasteful spending can't be allowed to stop future funding of the multi-state highway.

By refusing to reveal requests, there is only one conclusion that can be reached: There is actually nothing to provide, and Smith didn't work to try and benefit his voters. It also appears he actually did nothing with this project.

Now here's the kicker.

Smith officially announced he was running for reelection this week (yeah, like didn't know). In one article, it stated:

Governor Dave Heineman says Smith has been a strong voice for Nebraska in Congress.

Really? When? I'd sure like some examples of that. And when I say examples, not generalities or platitudes, but real, solid examples, complete with verifiable proof. I have yet to see it.