Defense Funds Diverted to Pet Projects

The Washington Times reported October 15 that members of the Senate diverted more than $2.5 billion in defense money to lawmakers' pet projects. The story reports that the funds were taken from military accounts that provide money for fuel, ammunition and the training of troops.

Some of the more notable projects (there were nearly 800 of them) include $25 million for a new World War II museum to be located at the University of New Orleans and $20 million for an educational institute that will be named for the recently deceased Senator Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts. The pet projects were designated by Senators of both parties. The money for the museum in New Orleans was sought by Democratic Senator Mary Landrieu and Republican Senator David Vitter, both of Louisiana, while the money for the Kennedy Institute was sought by Senator Inouye of Hawaii and Senator Kerry of Massachusetts.

The Times quotes Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma as saying, "The Senate is putting favorable headlines back home above our men and women fighting on the front lines." Coburn described the transfer of funds from military accounts to pet projects as a disgrace.

Also included in the defense bill was an earmark of $25 million for the Hawaii Federal Health Care Network, supported by Hawaii Democratic Senator Inouye. Laura Peterson of Taxpayers for Common Sense is quoted as saying, "Earmarks like these take money away from other defense programs that the Defense Department actually wants."

Senator Inouye's earmarks totaled more than $200 million, as did the earmarks for Mississippi Republican Senator Thad Cochran. Cochran responded by saying, "I am not ready to cede the power of the purse to any administration. It is vested by the Constitution in the Congress." Senator Coburn, in his criticism of the diversion of funds, is cited by The Times as saying that last year the Navy had to cut at-sea training and flying due to inadequate operations and maintenance funding.

The White House Office of Management and Budget is quoted as adding that "These reductions would hurt force readiness and increase stress on military people and equipment." OMB has called on Senators to restore the funding taken from the defense accounts. Of course, it is highly doubtful that any of the criticism will matter. If it's one thing Congress is good at, it's steering money to areas and projects that enhance the likelihood of re-election. There's no reason to believe Senator Coburn, Taxpayers for Common Sense, or the OMB can change that.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/oct/15/troop-funds-diverted-to-pet-projects/?feat=home_top5_shared#