CONGRESS IS spitting fire about China's allegedly unfair trade practices, which it blames for the enormous U.S. trade deficit. But that deficit is as much a reflection of Congress's habit of spending more than it raises in taxes, which contributes to the dearth of national savings. For the latest example of shameless congressional pork, consider a bill recently marked up in the Senate to lavish at least $10 billion on the Army Corps of Engineers.
The Corps wants this money for water infrastructure projects in the United States. Some of these -- for example, land drainage projects -- benefit private landowners who have done nothing to deserve such favors from taxpayers. Others are properly public but improperly wasteful. The bill includes $1.7 billion to expand locks on the upper Mississippi River, though independent studies have repeatedly shown that the cost of this project outweighs the benefit of faster barge traffic. The bill also raises environmental questions. Given that Congress spends millions on conserving wetlands, why should it pay the Corps to drain flood plains to build shopping centers?
_____Today's Post Editorials_____
|
| |
|
Some water infrastructure is necessary, and it would be fine to fund the Corps if it had a record of choosing projects wisely. But the Corps is so eager to oblige members of Congress who want projects in their districts that it has manipulated its own benefit-cost analyses and ignored studies from the National Academy of Sciences that pointed out its errors. The new bill does little to improve the Corps' judgment. It weakens civilian oversight, fails to create a serious peer review mechanism and allows the Corps to divert from the federal budget money generated by user fees and to use the cash for its pet projects.
The Army Corps bill sailed through the Senate's committee process this month, reflecting members' appetite for pork. Its sponsors, Sens. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) and Christopher S. Bond (R-Mo.), hope to bring the bill to the floor soon, where it will face virtuous amendments from Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russell Feingold (D-Wis.). The real question is why this bill deserves floor time at all. Doesn't the Senate leadership understand the hypocrisy of blaming foreigners for the nation's trade deficit, then fattening that deficit further by spending borrowed cash on indefensible projects?
