In a recent article in the
Indianapolis Star, the amount of federal funding requests by Indiana's federal representatives was finally made public. While Congressman Visclosky and Burton were able to secure huge multi-million dollar requests in various House spending bills, the rest of Indiana's delegation was also quite successful in the "earmarking" process.
As EW has highlighted in the past, most of Indiana's delegation made campaign promises to publicize their "earmark" requests to shed light on this process. After all, the Democrat pledge of "changing the culture of Washington, DC" filled the air waves leading up to election day. Congressman Ellsworth was one of those individuals that has broke that promise and still refuses to make his request list public.
However, we have to give the Indy Star credit for the article, specifically one paragraph that highlights the problems surrounding the "earmark" process in the US Congress:
Although recent influence-peddling scandals have focused more attention on funding for special projects, the fundamental nature of earmarks hasn't changed. They are distributed based more on clout -- including lawmakers' committee assignments, whether their party is in the majority and whether they face a competitive re-election bid -- than on comparative merit. And those in the best position to get earmarks are magnets for campaign contributions
It looks like it is business as usual in the US Congress. So much for the "change" promises from the last election...