• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Congressional Earmark Reform Website Comes Under Fire

    A congressionally approved website devoted to earmark reform is on the verge of falling victim to a petty political fight on Capitol Hill. The House’s chief administrative officer, Dan Beard, today told Minority Leader John Boehner that the site, earmarkreform.house.gov, would have to come down because it doesn’t comply with House Administration Committee rules regulating congressional websites.

    Boehner is protesting the decision, questioning the timing of Beard’s decision and complaining that it amounts to a “gag order.” The site launched on Feb. 12, just weeks after a united House Republican Conference asked Democrats to join them by immediately placing a moratorium on earmarks until the process could be reformed. Speaker Nancy Pelosi rejected the offer; so far, only Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) agreed to the terms of the deal.

    Earmarks have continued to embarrass the congressional majority, just as they did when Republicans controlled Congress. Citizens Against Government Waste this week named Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) its “Porker of the Year.” And one week ago, National Journal’s CongressDaily reported that data from Taxpayers for Common Sense revealed House freshmen accounted for $263 million in earmarks; Democrat freshmen accounted for 90% of those pet projects.

    Beard’s letter reverses a previous position issued by his office in August 2007, when the chief administrative officer gave Boehner’s staff permission to use the domain name. Roll Call contacted Beard’s office for an explanation.

    A Beard spokesman confirmed that the CAO’s House Information Resources office did authorize the Web site domain name. But it has since been discovered that the domain name is not in compliance with a House Administration Committee regulation passed in 1999, according to spokesman Jeff Ventura.

    House Administration regulations state that house.gov domains must “be recognizably derivative or representative of the name of the Member of the name of the office sponsoring the website.” The name of an official House.gov Web site also must not be a slogan or imply in any way that the House endorses a specific commercial product, commodity or service, the regulations state.

    “It was determined the website in question was not compliant with the aforementioned rule and Mr. Boehner was asked to transition the content to another URL,” Ventura wrote in an e-mail. “The CAO is now initiating a review of all House URL’s to ensure compliance with traditional formatting.”

    Aside from the partisan fighting over earmark reform, the conflict also focuses attention once again on Congress’ outdated policies on technology. Last year The Heritage Foundation, as well as Pelosi and Boehner, supported the Open House Project, which noted in its report:

    Regulations governing members’ use of Web sites and e-mail should be updated to reflect the current nature of Internet use, taking into account the differences between old and new forms of communication, not just their similarities. The Committee on House Administration should convene a special, bipartisan task force composed of members of Congress, congressional staff on the Committee on House Administration and citizens, to better identify the intent of rules and regulations that are effectively prohibiting smarter use of technology on Capitol Hill. They should establish a new process, specific rules and new standards governing members’ use of the Internet.

    These steps make perfect sense and are long overdue. The conflict over earmarkreform.house.gov gives lawmakers a perfect opening to start a dialog so these situations can be avoided in the future.

    Posted in Ongoing Priorities, Scribe [slideshow_deploy]

    8 Responses to Congressional Earmark Reform Website Comes Under Fire

    1. Melissa says:

      Very good site! I like it! Thanks!

    2. Ron says:

      Looking for information and found it at this great site…

    3. Kathy says:

      Thanks for your project. I like this site. KEEP IT UP…

    4. Robert says:

      I enjoy your site very much! THANK YOU

    5. Dan says:

      Thanks so very much for taking your time to create this very useful and informative site. I have learned a lot from your site. Thanks!!

    6. Dan says:

      The site''s very professional! Keep up the good work! Oh yes, one extra comment – maybe you could add more pictures too! So, good luck to your team!w

    7. Melissa says:

      huyak)

    8. Dr. Paul Anderson ( says:

      Embarrassed or not, Congress has run amuck, due to it's obvious lack of accountability, to the American people. Accountability demands answers, as to why tax payer dollars are being wasted on special interest projects, in the form of "Ear-Marks".

      Speaking of "Special Interests", the mortgage crisis is the dirrect result of legislation ( fair housing & fair lending laws )enacted by Congress, which "forced" lending institutions to write sub-prime variable interest mortgage loans. Those that resisted, fines were levied, as a result of violating Federal Discrimination Laws. A prime example of "spreading the wealth", or taking money from those who have, and giving it to those who don't have. Like it or not, this practice is outlined in the "ten-planks" of Communism.

      England is under Socialist rule. Their citizens are allowed to make 25,000 per year. Anything over 25,000 is taxed 90%. Many refuse to work after earning 25,000, which has a dirrect effect on their economy. II Thessalonians 3:10 "If any would not work, neither should he eat".

      I dare say, if this Democrat controlled Congress, ends up with a Democrat in the White House, the freedoms that our fore-fathers fought for, in the process of establishing the Constitution, will be lost, under a Socialist Democrat goverment.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×