320 Nelson Street, P.O. Box 778, Tiffin, OH 44883
Phone (419) 448-3200 Fax (419) 447-3274
General E-Mail: adtrib@bright.net
Newsroom E-Mail: atnews@bright.net

'Emergency' spending is inexcusable

Washington may be rolling in so much excess tax revenue that it can't figure out how to spend it all -- yet -- but that's no excuse for throwing fiscal discipline to the wind.

The House of Representatives already has passed a whopper of an "emergency" supplemental spending bill, and the Senate is poised to follow suit. Yet not one of the items included in the $12.7 billion "emergency" spending package qualifies as an emergency, even under the generous standards of the Clinton Office of Management and Budget, says a new Heritage Foundation study.

"Emergency spending has become little more than a poorly disguised mechanism for avoiding fiscal discipline," says the Heritage study. "According to the (non-partisan) Congressional Budget Office, in Fiscal Year 2000 $30.8 billion was designated as emergency funding." Yet only $18 billion of that was for one-time spending, such as disaster relief. The rest was just added spending for ongoing programs.

There are two big problems with the abuse of emergency spending procedures. First and foremost is the fact that, as The Heritage Foundation points out, such spending occurs with little public input or checks and balances, such as committee hearings. The other problem is that abuse invites suspicion of all "emergency" spending, creating cynicism that could explode upon Congress at a moment when a true emergency presents itself.

Clearly the abuse of the emergency spending process is a bipartisan affair, or else it could not happen. But Republicans, who as the majority party control the congressional agenda, cast themselves as the more fiscally responsible of the two major parties. Their hypocrisy on this issue is inexcusable.