What can/should be done about earmarks?

[skipos]

I posted a thread about Murtha leading the pack in earmarks in a recent bill.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2202194&mesg_id=2202194

I am unsure what should be done about earmarks. They aren't all bad, as far as I can tell. But they certainly aren't good. Is there a better method?

[Bonhomme Richard]

1. They are not all bad.

I know of a small company that manufactures a item that solves some environmental issues, saves the taxpayers millions of dollars, is fairly inexpensive, and has proven benefits for the military yet it is not sexy therefore funds are constantly hard to come by.
There are circumstances where earmarks can be very effective. Unfortunately it has become a simple means of payback to political donors. A step in the right direction is having to attach a congressman's name to it and that "theoretically" puts that person on the hot seat defending the request for funds.

[rurallib]

2. As you stated sometimes they are good

Sometimes even necessary to make sure that appropriated money goes specifically where it is needed, not into the pocket of some crony in an area that doesn't need say a new bridge.
I have pondered this problem and have no solution. Like campaign finance reform, the ones who must change it (congress) are the ones who derive benefit from the current situation.
One proposal put forward is the line-item veto for the president. I find this solution to be even more onerous than the problem. Why would we need congress if the president (eg W) can pick and choose what gets funded? We already have that problem to a degree and of course had that problem in a bad way with Nixon.

[zalinda]

3. The problem with earmarks is that they are buried

within a ream of paper, some earmarks, good, some earmarks, bad. First of all, each bill should be limited to how many pages it can run, so all reps can read them. Second, earmarks should be put at the end of a bill, so they are all out in the open for everyone to see.

zalinda

[Igel]

4. Limit each legislator to 2.

They must be announced publicly 90 days before a vote. They may not be increased in conference committee without a new 90-day notice.

The 90-day notice must include all non-classified details, including any donations to the sponsoring Congressfolk and lobbying activity by the company and its top officers, including reimbursed or below-market-rate campaign assistance, as well as donations to the sponsoring congressfolks' state and national campaign committes or central party campaign funds. Any private financial connection between the congressfolk, their immediate families, or close personal connections (friends, prior employment) must also be noted.

Each earmark that avoids competitive bidding or goes to a specific NGO must also come with a justification as to why that and only that corporation or company should do the work, showing--not just suggesting--that either no other corporation/company can do it or others would be more expensive/too slow/etc. It must also show that no program or purchase of greater national importance is being defunded or not funded.