Trimming the pork

Ever get jumped by a lot of big expenses, all at once? \nWell, the federal government can empathize. With ambitious hurricane recovery plans added to a federal budget already covering the war on terror and the ever-growing costs of Social Security and Medicare, one can almost hear the national treasury creak like a submarine plummeting toward the ocean floor.\nBut dealing with these expenditures is not easy. The need for hurricane relief strikes at the heart of why we are American citizens. If we turn our backs on each other in the midst of a crisis, what's the point of having a country? While some might want to slash defense spending, abandon the war on terror and retreat into "blessed isolationism," the lesson of this past century is that given a national identity based on democracy and individual liberties, there's always someone who wants to cave our heads in. Better to fight them on their turf than ours. \nAs for Social Security and Medicare, while we need to deal with the rising costs, every election year, the AARP shrieks that cuts will reduce desperate, starved, drug-deprived seniors to cannibalism and banditry (I might be slightly exaggerating). And they win because, unlike most readers of this column, their supporters vote. \nFinally, we could raise taxes. But taxes discourage economic growth by depressing productivity. The higher the tax burden, the lower the incentive to work, the less work gets done, the less the economy grows and the less work is available for others.\nSo what to do?\nI have no definitive answer, but cutting some federal spending on local projects (i.e. pork-barrel spending) couldn't hurt.\nThe Web site http://truthlaidbear.com has begun publicizing U.S. Congress members' commitments to reduce pork on behalf of hurricane relief. At this column's writing, there's precisely one commitment: from Nancy Pelosi, Democratic House Minority Leader. That's right: One of Congress' most liberal representatives has supported this effort, while those of the more conservative state of Indiana have not.\nIndiana is far from the greatest recipient of pork -- the state ranks 45th in pork per capita, according to watchdog group, Citizens Against Government Waste. But this state is well poised to lead by example. For instance, Gov. Mitch Daniels confronted pork-barrel spending as director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. If pork cannot be tackled here, where can it be?\nOn the Web site of IU's Center on Congress, Lee Hamilton makes a reasonable argument that not all pork is wasteful -- much goes to needed infrastructure projects. Indeed, some even goes to IU as congressional earmarks (in 2003, IU was ranked 214 out of 673 recipient schools by the Chronicle of Higher Education).\nBut we should ask what our priorities are. How much of this spending is really necessary? How much can be put off until later? We may not be able to cut all spending, but $100,000 here or there goes a long way.