House Republicans want earmarks back

NO EARMARKS, NO LITTLE PIGGIES, NO PORK SAUSAGE. What are the Republicans thinking. And those fake crocodile tears do not impress me, Mr Boehner.  They are only for show and have no impact

Mon Apr 02, 2012 at 06:53 AM PDT

by Jed LewisonFollow

The tea party's anti-earmark jihad gave House Speaker John Boehner a tear party

Shocking news! House Republicans think maybe banning earmarks wasn't such a good idea after all. Alabama Republican Mike Rogers says he made the case for bringing back earmarks in early March:

The huge federal transportation bill was in tatters in early March when Representative Mike Rogers of Alabama posed a heretical idea for breaking through gridlock in the House. In a closed-door meeting with fellow Republicans, Rogers recommended reviving a proven legislative sweetener that became politically toxic a year ago. [...]
"I just got up ... and did it because I was mad because they were talking about how we can't get 218 votes," Rogers told Reuters, referring to the minimum of 218 votes needed to pass legislation in the 435-member House.

According to Reuters, GOP Reps. Louis Gohmert and Kay Granger backed up Rogers, and Speaker John Boehner has convened a secret group to figure out how to undo the earmark ban after the next election. GOP Rep. Steve LaTourette also make the case:

Republican Representative Steven LaTourette, an 18-year House veteran, said the earmark ban "has affected discipline" within the party. "You can't get 218 votes (out of 242 Republican House members) and part of that has to be if you can't give people anything (earmarks), you can't take anything away from them."

Clearly, tea party types would go nuts if earmarks were brought back, but even though it might appear unseemly to build legislative majorities by using earmarks as sweeteners, as long as those earmarks aren't corrupt, isn't that the way the system is supposed to work?