On the recordFebruary 17, 2011
the Appropriations Committee will not oppose this amendment not because we think it is a good idea--it is not--but because this amendment does nothing that is not already covered by title X of the bill. Sadly, this is the kind of amendment that took up far too much of the Senate's time and effort in the last session, and none of it with any discernable value to the American people. Specifically, we asked CBO to score this amendment and they said they could not. They pointed out that the definition provided in the amendment did not exist 9 years ago; consequently, there are no earmarks older than 9 years that meet this definition. So any claims that this amendment saves the American taxpayer money is simply not substantiated by CBO. Mr. President, we took the further step of asking agencies across the Federal Government if they could tell us what is out there that could possibly meet the Coburn standard. There are indeed a few projects at the Department of Transportation, but they are already covered by title X of the underlying bill. Outside of the Department of Transportation, we discovered that there are a few sewer grants still on the books, but they total less than $5 million. And outside of those two agencies, there may be anecdotal evidence of an earmark here or an earmark there, but that is it. Meanwhile, I note that this amendment as well as title X may well end up costing the American taxpayer more than the amendment claims to save.
