Printer-Friendly Version

Notice of Earmark Process for Transportation Reauthorization 2009

Any earmark, or High Priority Project (HPP), request submitted to my office for consideration must comply with the following standards:

• Requestor must not seek funding on behalf of “fronts” or “pass-through” entities that mask the true recipient of the funding.  Funding may not be passed through to another entity for activities other than support or procurement.  The primary purpose of any request may NOT be to secure funds for other entities.

• Requestor must show proof of a commitment of state and/or local matching funds.

• Requestor must put forth a detailed finance plan showing exactly how the money requested will be spent, through completion of project.  Plan must include: (1) anticipated sources of funding for duration of the project; (2) the percent and source of required matching funds; (3) the percent of funds for the project requested that will come from non-governmental sources, if any; (4) the percent of funds for the requested project that will be disbursed to other private or public entities, if any; and (5) justification for use of federal taxpayer dollars.

• Requestor must agree to public disclosure of any HPP request, HPP application and/or any information provided in support of a request.

• Requestor must address whether a project serves a federal interest and/or has a federal nexus.

• All projects must be eligible under Title 23 (Highways) of members’ requests for Chapter 53 of Title 49 (Public Transit) of the United States Code to ensure HPP complies with highway and transit program objectives.

• Requestor must provide at least one letter of support for the project from the State Department of Transportation or affected local government or governmental agency.  Letter must include the process that will be followed to provide an opportunity for public comment (such as the Environmental Impact Statement or other permitting process that requires public review) on the project, and letter must identify other Federal, state, local or private funding sources that may be used to advance the project.

Any request submitted to my office that does not adequately comply with these standards WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED FOR FUNDING.

Requestors should know that I may not make any HPP requests of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for the Transportation Reauthorization of 2009.  I also retain the right to withdraw any request from the committee’s consideration at any time and for any reason.

Additionally, I personally commit to the following:

• I will post a list of all projects requested of the committee by me, as well as a list of all final projects funded at my request on my website.  I will not request a project on behalf of a requestor that does not agree to this disclosure as I believe the earmark process should be transparent.

• I will continue to support recent steps made toward openness and transparency of the earmark process as well as propose and advocate new standards and guidelines for additional accountability and evaluation.

• I will not attempt to circumvent transparency by “airdropping” an earmark into a bill in conference which was not vetted on the House floor as I believe the process by which Congress spends the American people’s money should be transparent.

• I will request of the committee that any earmark secured by me be included in the text of the relevant bill.

• If funding is secured in a bill for one of my requests, it is my intent to place a plan into the Congressional Record detailing how the funds will be spent and justifying the use of taxpayer funds in advance of floor votes so that other Members will have the opportunity to evaluate my funded projects before voting.

• I will not use taxpayer money to fund a project named after myself or any other sitting Member of Congress.  Any exception for a previously name project would be fully justified.

• I will hold present and future Administrations accountable for the way in which taxpayer funded earmarks are used.  The executive branch asks for earmarks, too, and has done so under Democratic and Republican administrations, alike.

Any application submitted for a project that does not comply with these standards will not be considered for submission by my office to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.  Upon receipt of a timely application, the request will be evaluated for compliance with these standards and for merit.  Points of merit that will be considered by my office include:

• Homeland Security
• Public Safety
• Critical Infrastructure
• Economic Development 

Regretfully, the earmark process remains a symbol of a broken Washington.  I believe the time for earmark change and reform is long overdue.  I am committed to being a vigilant guardian of the taxpayers’ money, helping to expose and eliminate wasteful or questionable spending, and I welcome my colleagues on both sides of the aisle – Republican and Democrat alike – to also embrace the standards I have committed to above.

                                                            Sincerely,

                                                            Jo Bonner

                                                            Member of Congress

For a list of Congressman Bonner’s Transportation Reauthorization 2009 requests, please click here.