Monday, Nov. 29, 2004 | 9:06 a.m.
A week ago last Saturday, Congress passed a $388 billion spending bill to fund most of the federal government's domestic programs for the rest of this fiscal year. But buried inside the 3,000-plus page bill was a provision that would have given Congress' appropriations committees, as part of their oversight of the IRS, the power to review the tax returns of Americans. Critically missing from the bill, however, were any criminal penalties that could be brought against committee members and their aides for misusing or leaking such confidential information. But it wasn't just the tax-return provision, which invited a dangerous invasion of privacy, that was controversial. The appropriations bill also was loaded with pork-barrel projects full of wasteful spending that belatedly came to light.
It's so far unclear how the tax-return provision made its way into the bill, but what is clear is why it and questionable pork-barrel projects can so easily become law: When members of Congress voted on the appropriations bill more than a week ago, no one really had a chance to read the bill in its entirety because it was plopped on the members' desks just hours before the roll call. The appropriations process was done in secrecy, and Democrats ripped House GOP leaders for not following the House's own rules that require members to be given at least three days to review a spending bill before a vote is cast.
Because most members of Congress had already returned to their districts after the tax-return provision was discovered by a Senate aide, Republican House leaders wanted to remove this provision by a voice vote last week before the appropriations bill was sent to President Bush for his signature. But Democratic House leaders said no, that they wanted a recorded vote. House Republican leaders relented, setting Dec. 6 as the date the House will reconvene and formally vote to remove it. The Senate is expected to do so as well.
John Feehery, a spokesman for House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., accused Democrats of playing politics because they criticized the process as being secretive and iron-fisted; House Democrats engaged in the same maneuvers when they were in power during the 1980s and early '90s, Feehery noted. Of course, Feehery failed to mention that it was Newt Gingrich and other Republicans who once pummeled House Democratic leaders for these steamrolling legislative tactics, which they then characterized as an abuse of power and which were an integral part of helping them win control of the House in 1994. The bottom line is that continuing such secrecy and strong-arm tactics will further deepen the public's cynicism that Congress isn't spending taxpayer money wisely and isn't worried about protecting our freedoms. What's different this time, however, is that it is Rep ublicans in control of Congress and who ultimately will be held accountable if they continue down this path.
archive
