Pork barrel: Difference between revisions
Cwmhiraeth (talk | contribs) Revision deletion completed |
Davide King (talk | contribs) ce |
||
(38 intermediate revisions by 30 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Short description|Political tactic}} |
|||
{{Distinguish|pork belly}}{{italic title}} |
|||
{{Use American English|date=June 2024}} |
|||
{{Short description|Politician using wider public funds on local projects to gain favour with local electorate}} |
|||
{{Distinguish|Pork belly}} |
|||
[[File:Pork barrel cartoon.jpg|thumb|1917 cartoon from the [[New York World]]]] |
|||
[[File:Pork barrel cartoon.jpg|thumb|1917 cartoon from the ''[[New York World]]'']] |
|||
'''''Pork barrel''''', or simply '''''pork''''', is a [[metaphor]] for the [[Appropriation (law)|appropriation]] of government spending for localized projects secured solely or primarily to bring money to a representative's [[district]]. The usage originated in [[American English]].<ref>{{cite web |last=Drudge |first=Michael W. Special Correspondent |title="Pork Barrel" Spending Emerging as Presidential Campaign Issue |url=http://www.america.gov/st/elections08-english/2008/August/20080801181504lcnirellep0.1261713.html |website=America.gov |publisher=[[United States Department of State]] |date=1 August 2008 |access-date=14 August 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080908001417/http://www.america.gov/st/elections08-english/2008/August/20080801181504lcnirellep0.1261713.html |archive-date=8 September 2008 }}</ref> Scholars use it as a technical term regarding legislative control of local appropriations.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Bickers|first1=Kenneth N.|last2=Stein|first2=Robert M.|year=2008|title=The Congressional Pork Barrel in a Republican Era|journal=The Journal of Politics|volume=62|issue=4|pages=1070–1086|doi=10.1111/0022-3816.00046|jstor=2647865|s2cid=154556676}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Shepsle|first1=Kenneth A.|last2=Weingast|first2=Barry R.|year=1981|title=Political Preferences for the Pork Barrel: A Generalization|journal=American Journal of Political Science|volume=25|issue=1|pages=96–111|doi=10.2307/2110914|jstor=2110914}}</ref> In election campaigns, the term is used in derogatory fashion to attack opponents. |
|||
'''''Pork barrel''''', or simply '''''pork''''', is a [[metaphor]] for the [[Appropriation (law)|appropriation]] of government spending for localized projects secured solely or primarily to direct expenditures to a representative's [[district]]. The usage originated in [[American English]], and it indicates a negotiated way of [[political particularism]]. |
|||
Typically, "pork" involves national funding for government programs whose [[Economy|economic]] or service benefits are concentrated in a particular area but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. [[Public works]] projects, certain national defense spending projects, and [[Agricultural subsidy|agricultural subsidies]] are the most commonly cited examples. |
|||
[[Citizens Against Government Waste]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_pigbook2006|title=Citizens Against Government Waste|year=2006|publisher=Cagw.org|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080714103840/http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_pigbook2006|archive-date=July 14, 2008|url-status=dead}}</ref> outlines seven criteria by which spending in the United States can be classified as "pork": |
|||
==Political science== |
|||
Scholars use it as a technical term regarding legislative control of local appropriations.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Bickers|first1=Kenneth N.|last2=Stein|first2=Robert M.|year=2008|title=The Congressional Pork Barrel in a Republican Era|journal=The Journal of Politics|volume=62|issue=4|pages=1070–1086|doi=10.1111/0022-3816.00046|jstor=2647865|s2cid=154556676}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Shepsle|first1=Kenneth A.|last2=Weingast|first2=Barry R.|year=1981|title=Political Preferences for the Pork Barrel: A Generalization|journal=American Journal of Political Science|volume=25|issue=1|pages=96–111|doi=10.2307/2110914|jstor=2110914}}</ref> In election campaigns, the term is used in derogatory fashion to attack opponents. Typically, "pork" involves national funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated in a particular area but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. [[Public works]] projects, certain national defense spending projects, and [[agricultural subsidies]] are the most commonly cited examples. [[Citizens Against Government Waste]] outlines seven criteria by which spending in the United States can be classified as "pork":<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_pigbook2006|title=Citizens Against Government Waste|year=2006|publisher=Cagw.org|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080714103840/http://www.cagw.org/site/PageServer?pagename=reports_pigbook2006|archive-date=July 14, 2008|url-status=dead}}</ref> |
|||
# Requested by only one chamber of Congress |
# Requested by only one chamber of Congress |
||
# Not specifically authorized |
# Not specifically authorized |
||
Line 17: | Line 16: | ||
==History and etymology== |
==History and etymology== |
||
The term ''pork barrel politics'' originated in [[American English]],<ref>{{cite web |last=Drudge |first=Michael W.<!--Special Correspondent--> |date=1 August 2008 |title='Pork Barrel' Spending Emerging as Presidential Campaign Issue |url=http://www.america.gov/st/elections08-english/2008/August/20080801181504lcnirellep0.1261713.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080908001417/http://www.america.gov/st/elections08-english/2008/August/20080801181504lcnirellep0.1261713.html |archive-date=8 September 2008 |access-date=14 August 2010 |website=America.gov |publisher=[[United States Department of State]]}}</ref> and usually refers to spending intended to benefit a [[Electoral district|constituents]] of a [[politician]] in return for their political support, either in the form of [[Campaign finance|campaign contributions]] or votes. In the popular 1863 story "The Children of the Public", [[Edward Everett Hale]] used the term ''pork barrel'' as a homely metaphor for any form of public spending to the citizenry;<ref>The story first appeared in ''[[Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper]],'' Jan. 24 and Jan. 31, 1863. {{Cite journal | last = Hale | first = Edward Everett | author-link = Edward Everett Hale | title = The Children of the Public | volume = The Man without a Country and Other Tales | pages = 97–175 | year = 1910 | publisher = Macmillan}}</ref> however, after the [[American Civil War]], the term came to be used in a derogatory sense. The ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]'' dates the modern sense of the term from 1873.<ref>[http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50184318?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=pork+barrel&first=1&max_to_show=10 Oxford English Dictionary]{{dead link|date=November 2016 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}, ''pork barrel,'' draft revision June 2008. Retrieved October 22, 2008.</ref> |
|||
The term ''pork barrel politics'' usually refers to spending which is intended to benefit [[Electoral district|constituents]] of a [[politician]] in return for their political support, either in the form of [[Campaign finance|campaign contributions]] or votes.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Sharma|first=Chanchal Kumar|date=2017-01-02|title=A situational theory of pork-barrel politics: The shifting logic of discretionary allocations in India|journal=India Review|volume=16|issue=1|pages=14–41|doi=10.1080/14736489.2017.1279922|issn=1473-6489|hdl=10419/156103|s2cid=55173537|url=https://www.giga-hamburg.de/en/system/files/publications/wp298_sharma.pdf|hdl-access=free}}</ref> |
|||
Pork barrels originally came from storing meat.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Dictionary and Thesaurus |url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pork%20barrel |access-date=2016-04-15 |website=Merriam-Webster}}</ref> By the 1870s, references to "pork" were common in Congress, and the term was further popularized by a 1919 article by Chester Collins Maxey in the ''National Municipal Review'', which reported on certain legislative acts known to members of Congress as "pork barrel bills". He claimed that the phrase originated in a pre-Civil War practice of giving enslaved people a barrel of salt pork as a reward and requiring them to compete among themselves to get their share of the handout.<ref> |
|||
In the popular 1863 story "The Children of the Public", [[Edward Everett Hale]] used the term ''pork barrel'' as a homely metaphor for any form of public spending to the citizenry.<ref>The story first appeared in ''[[Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper]],'' Jan. 24 and Jan. 31, 1863. {{Cite journal | last = Hale | first = Edward Everett | author-link = Edward Everett Hale | title = The Children of the Public | volume = The Man without a Country and Other Tales | pages = 97–175 | year = 1910 | publisher = Macmillan}}</ref> However, after the [[American Civil War]], the term came to be used in a derogatory sense. The ''[[Oxford English Dictionary]]'' dates the modern sense of the term from 1873.<ref>[http://dictionary.oed.com/cgi/entry/50184318?single=1&query_type=word&queryword=pork+barrel&first=1&max_to_show=10 Oxford English Dictionary]{{dead link|date=November 2016 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}, ''pork barrel,'' draft revision June 2008. Retrieved October 22, 2008.</ref> |
|||
{{Cite journal |last=Maxey |first=Chester Collins |year=1919 |title=A Little History of Pork |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IVEJAAAAIAAJ&pg=RA1-PA694 |journal=National Municipal Review |volume=8 |issue=10 |pages=691–705 |doi=10.1002/ncr.4110081006}}</ref> More generally, a barrel of [[salt pork]] was a common [[larder]] item in 19th-century households and could be used as a measure of the family's financial well-being. For example, in his 1845 novel ''The Chainbearer'', [[James Fenimore Cooper]] wrote: "I hold a family to be in a desperate way when the mother can see the bottom of the pork barrel."<ref> |
|||
Quoted in: {{Cite book |last1=Volo |first1=James M. |title=The Antebellum Period |last2=Volo |first2=Dorothy Denneen |publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group |year=2004 |isbn=978-0-313-32518-2 |page=170}}</ref> |
|||
Pork barrel originally came from storing meat.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/pork%2520barrel|title=Dictionary and Thesaurus {{!}} Merriam-Webster|website=www.merriam-webster.com|access-date=2016-04-15}}</ref> By the 1870s, references to "pork" were common in Congress, and the term was further popularized by a 1919 article by Chester Collins Maxey in the ''National Municipal Review'', which reported on certain legislative acts known to members of Congress as "pork barrel bills". He claimed that the phrase originated in a pre-Civil War practice of giving slaves a barrel of salt pork as a reward and requiring them to compete among themselves to get their share of the handout.<ref> |
|||
{{Cite journal |
|||
| last = Maxey |
|||
| first = Chester Collins |
|||
| journal = National Municipal Review |
|||
| volume = 8 |
|||
| issue = 10 |
|||
|title=A Little History of Pork |
|||
| year = 1919 |
|||
| pages = 691–705 |
|||
| url = https://books.google.com/books?id=IVEJAAAAIAAJ&pg=RA1-PA694 |
|||
| doi = 10.1002/ncr.4110081006 |
|||
}}</ref> |
|||
More generally, a barrel of [[salt pork]] was a common [[larder]] item in 19th-century households, and could be used as a measure of the family's financial well-being. For example, in his 1845 novel ''The Chainbearer'', [[James Fenimore Cooper]] wrote: "I hold a family to be in a desperate way, when the mother can see the bottom of the pork barrel."<ref> |
|||
Quoted in: |
|||
{{Cite book |
|||
| last1 = Volo |
|||
| first1 = James M. |
|||
| last2 = Volo |
|||
| first2 = Dorothy Denneen |
|||
| title = The Antebellum Period |
|||
| publisher = Greenwood Publishing Group |
|||
| year = 2004 |
|||
| page = 170 |
|||
| isbn = 978-0-313-32518-2}}</ref> |
|||
==Examples== |
==Examples== |
||
An early example of pork barrel politics in the United States was the [[Bonus Bill of 1817]], which was introduced by Democrat [[John C. Calhoun]] to construct [[highway]]s linking the Eastern and Southern United States to its [[ |
An early example of pork barrel politics in the United States was the [[Bonus Bill of 1817]], which was introduced by Democrat [[John C. Calhoun]] to construct [[highway]]s linking the Eastern and Southern United States to its [[American frontier|Western frontier]] using the earnings bonus from the [[Second Bank of the United States]]. Calhoun argued for it using general welfare and post-roads clauses of the [[United States Constitution]]. Although he approved of the economic development goal, President [[James Madison]] vetoed the bill as [[Constitutionality|unconstitutional]]. One of the most famous alleged pork-barrel projects was the [[Big Dig]] in [[Boston]], [[Massachusetts]]. The Big Dig was a project to relocate an existing {{convert|3.5|mi|adj=on}} section of the [[Interstate Highway System]] underground. The official planning phase started in 1982; the construction was done between 1991 and 2006, and the project concluded on December 31, 2007. It ended up costing US$14.6 [[1,000,000,000 (number)|billion]], or over US$4 billion per mile.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/08/06/big_dig_failures_threaten_federal_funding/ | work=The Boston Globe | title=Big Dig failures threaten federal funding | date=August 6, 2006 | first1=Rick | last1=Klein}}</ref> [[Tip O'Neill]] (D-Mass), after whom one of the Big Dig tunnels was named, pushed to have the Big Dig funded by the federal government while he was the [[speaker of the United States House of Representatives]].<ref>{{cite news|last=Rimer | first = Sara |url=http://travel.nytimes.com/2010/01/01/travel/escapes/01boston.html |title=In Boston, Where Change Is in the Winter Air |work=New York Times |date= 30 December 2009 |access-date=17 November 2010 }}</ref> |
||
One of the most famous alleged pork-barrel projects was the [[Big Dig]] in [[Boston]], [[Massachusetts]]. The Big Dig was a project to relocate an existing {{convert|3.5|mi|adj=on}} section of the [[Interstate Highway System]] underground. The official planning phase started in 1982; the construction work was done between 1991 and 2006; and the project concluded on December 31, 2007. It ended up costing US$14.6 [[1,000,000,000 (number)|billion]], or over US$4 billion per mile.<ref>{{cite news| url=http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2006/08/06/big_dig_failures_threaten_federal_funding/ | work=The Boston Globe | title=Big Dig failures threaten federal funding | date=August 6, 2006 | first1=Rick | last1=Klein}}</ref> [[Tip O'Neill]] (D-Mass), after whom one of the Big Dig tunnels was named, pushed to have the Big Dig funded by the federal government while he was the [[Speaker of the United States House of Representatives]].<ref>{{cite news|last=Rimer | first = Sara |url=http://travel.nytimes.com/2010/01/01/travel/escapes/01boston.html |title=In Boston, Where Change Is in the Winter Air |work=New York Times |date= 30 December 2009 |access-date=17 November 2010 }}</ref> |
|||
During the [[2008 United States presidential election|2008 U.S. presidential campaign]], the [[Gravina Island Bridge]] (also known as the "Bridge to Nowhere") in Alaska was cited as an example of pork barrel spending. The bridge, pushed for by Republican Senator [[Ted Stevens]], was projected to cost $398 million and would connect the island's 50 residents and the [[Ketchikan International Airport]] to [[Revillagigedo Island]] and [[Ketchikan]].<ref>{{cite book | title = $315 million bridge to nowhere | url = http://www.taxpayer.net/user_uploads/file/Transportation/gravinabridge.pdf | publisher = Taxpayers for Common Sense | date = February 9, 2005 | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20081025113307/http://www.taxpayer.net/user_uploads/file/Transportation/gravinabridge.pdf | archive-date = October 25, 2008 }}</ref> |
|||
<!--Feel free to add other examples of pork barrel. Be sure to include a link to the pork-barrel's Wikipedia article, how much it cost and a citation.--> |
|||
Former Hawaii Senator [[Daniel Inouye]] described himself as “the No. 1 earmarks guy in the U.S. Congress.”<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://bangordailynews.com/2012/12/18/politics/daniel-inouye-was-war-hero-senate-deal-maker-no-1-earmarks-guy/|title=Daniel Inouye was war hero, Senate deal maker, 'No. 1 earmarks guy'|last1=Brown|first1=Emma|last2=Post|first2=The Washington|website=The Bangor Daily News|access-date=2016-04-11}}</ref> Inouye regularly passed earmarks for funding in the state of Hawaii including military and transportation spending.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/earmarks.php?cid=n00001762|title=Daniel K. Inouye: Campaign Finance/Money – Other Data – Earmarks 2010 |website=www.opensecrets.org|access-date=2016-04-11}}</ref> |
|||
Pork-barrel projects, which differ from ''[[Earmark (politics)|earmarks]]'', are added to the federal budget by members of the appropriation committees of [[United States Congress]]. This allows delivery of federal funds to the local district or state of the appropriation committee member, often accommodating major campaign contributors. To a certain extent, a member of Congress is judged by their ability to deliver funds to their constituents. The Chairman and the [[ranking member]] of the [[United States Senate Committee on Appropriations|U.S. Senate Committee on Appropriations]] are in a position to deliver significant benefits to their states. Researchers Anthony Fowler and Andrew B. Hall claim that this still does not account for the high reelection rates of incumbent representatives in American legislatures.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Fowler | first1 = Anthony | last2 = Hall | first2 = Andrew B. | title = Congressional seniority and pork: a pig fat myth? | journal = [[European Journal of Political Economy]] | volume = 40 | issue = A | pages = 42–56 | doi= 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2015.07.006 | date = December 2015 }}</ref> |
|||
The [[Madrid–Seville high-speed rail line|Madrid–Seville high-speed line]] was a noted example of pork barrel politics in Spain. [[Pasqual Maragall]] revealed details of an unwritten agreement between him and [[Felipe González]], the prime minister at the time who was from [[Seville]]. The agreement was that Barcelona would receive the [[1992 Summer Olympics]] and Seville would receive the high-speed railway line (which opened in 1992).<ref>{{cite news | last = Iglesias | first = Natalia | title = Maragall revela que acordó con González que el AVE llegara primero a Sevilla | url = http://elpais.com/diario/2007/11/18/catalunya/1195351643_850215.html | work = [[El País]] | date = 18 November 2007 }}</ref> This was in spite of position of the [[Madrid–Barcelona high-speed rail line]] as Spain's most profitable high-speed line.<ref>{{cite news | title = Solo 11 de 179 rutas de tren en España cubren gastos operativos | url = http://www.preferente.com/noticias-de-transportes/solo-11-de-179-rutas-de-tren-en-espana-cubren-gastos-de-explotacion-235175.html | work = La Preferente }}</ref> Barcelona received its AVE connection in 2008, though with many advantages that the line to Seville does not have, e.g. full-speed bypasses [http://www.ferropedia.es/wiki/LAV_Madrid_-_Sevilla#Velocidades_autorizadas LAV Madrid – Sevilla] and [http://www.ferropedia.es/wiki/LAV_Madrid_-_Zaragoza_-_Barcelona#Velocidades_m.C3.A1ximas_y_limitaciones_de_velocidad.5B10.5D LAV Madrid – Zaragoza – Barcelona]: the decision to construct the line to Seville was only taken in 1986 and construction was rushed, so that the line would be ready for the [[Seville Expo '92]]. |
|||
==Use of the term outside the United States== |
|||
In other countries, the practice is often called [[patronage]], but this word does not always imply corrupt or undesirable conduct. |
|||
=== Australia === |
|||
"Pork barrel" is frequently used in reference to [[Australian politics]],<ref>{{cite news | last = Taylor | first = Lenore | title = The Australian: PM rolls out his own pork barrel | url = http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23801061-5013946,00.html | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080605193323/http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0%2C25197%2C23801061-5013946%2C00.html | url-status = dead | archive-date = 5 June 2008 | work = [[The Australian]] | publisher = [[News Corp Australia]] | date = 3 June 2008 | access-date = 31 August 2013 }}</ref><ref>{{cite news | last1 = Pearlman | first1 = Jonathan | last2 = Coorey | first2 = Phillip | title = Vaile in last-ditch pork barrel | url = http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/11/16/1194766968042.html | work = [[The Sydney Morning Herald]] | date = 16 November 2007 | access-date = 31 August 2013 }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|last=Link|first=Madeline|date=2020-05-25|title='Call me Pork-Barilaro': deputy premier defends regional arts grants|url=https://www.northerndailyleader.com.au/story/6768622/call-me-pork-barilaro-deputy-premier-defends-regional-arts-grants/|access-date=2021-07-09|website=The Northern Daily Leader|language=en-AU}}</ref> in circumstances where [[marginal seat]]s might be seen as receiving more funding than [[safe seat]]s. The term's widespread appearance in news media has led to it being commonly used in [[Australian English]] as a verb, such as in "pork barrelling".<ref>{{cite news|last=Van Onselen|first=Peter|title=The Australian: Leaders won’t admit they have a pork barrelling problem|url=https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/leaders-wont-admit-they-have-a-pork-barrelling-problem/news-story/517d2d05be33faad43b1288b96ffadd7|work=[[The Australian]]|publisher=[[News Corp Australia]]|date=1 July 2021|access-date=3 July 2021}}</ref> |
|||
=== Central and Eastern Europe === |
|||
Romanians speak of ''{{lang|ro|pomeni electorale}}'' (literally, "electoral alms"), while the Polish ''{{lang|pl|kiełbasa wyborcza}}'' means literally "election sausage". In Serbian, ''{{lang|sr|podela kolača}}'' ("cutting the cake") refers to post-electoral distribution of state-funded positions for the loyal members of the winning party. The Czech ''{{lang|cs|předvolební guláš}}'' ("pre-election [[goulash]]") has similar meaning, referring to free dishes of [[goulash]] served to potential voters during election campaign meetings targeted at lower social classes; metaphorically, it stands for any populistic political decisions that are taken before the elections with the aim of obtaining more votes. The process of diverting budget funds in favor of a project in a particular constituency is called ''{{lang|cs|porcování medvěda}}'' ("portioning of the bear") in Czech usage.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.euro.cz/detail.jsp?id=11172 |title=Porcování medvěda zvítězilo nad ideály |publisher=Euro.cz |access-date=14 August 2010 }}</ref> |
|||
=== India === |
|||
In India, the term "pork barrel politics" has been employed to depict the pattern of distribution of discretionary grants by the national government (see for example Biswas et al. 2010;<ref>{{Cite journal | doi=10.1111/j.1468-0343.2009.00363.x|title = Fiscal Federalism, State Lobbying and Discretionary Finance: Evidence from India| journal=Economics & Politics| volume=22| pages=68–91|year = 2010|last1 = Biswas|first1 = Rongili| last2=Marjit| first2=Sugata| last3=Marimoutou| first3=Velayoudom|s2cid = 59387644}}</ref> Rodden and Wilkinson 2004;<ref>Rodden and S. Wilkinson, 2005. [https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/18135/rodden.wilkinson.isnie2004.pdf?sequence=1 ''The Shifting Political Economy of Redistribution in the Indian Federation'']</ref> Sharma, 2017.<ref>{{Cite journal | doi=10.1080/14736489.2017.1279922|title = A situational theory of pork-barrel politics: The shifting logic of discretionary allocations in India| journal=India Review| volume=16| pages=14–41|year = 2017|last1 = Sharma|first1 = Chanchal Kumar| hdl=10419/156103|s2cid = 55173537|url = https://www.giga-hamburg.de/en/system/files/publications/wp298_sharma.pdf| hdl-access=free}}</ref> However (Sharma, 2017) is most explicit in drawing the parallel between the tactical distribution of grants in India and the notion of pork barrel politics. Chanchal Kumar Sharma demonstrates that the incentives of the Prime Minister's party under a coalition system create a universalisation effect which means "giving something to everyone". Thus, the states governed by non-affiliated parties do not suffer as much as in the dominant party era. In fact, a coalition party system limits opportunities to reward party loyalty (see Sharma 2017). |
|||
===Ireland=== |
|||
The term ''parish pump politics'' is more commonly used in Ireland although Independent TD [[Shane Ross]] did refer to Pork Barrel politics at a press conference for the [[Independent Alliance (Ireland)|Independent Alliance]] in the run up to the [[2016 Irish general election|2016 general election]], saying that the Alliance was "not interested in ''pork barrel'' politics".<ref>{{cite web|last=Kelly|first=Fiach|title=Independents not interested in 'pork barrel' politics, says Shane Ross|url=https://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/independents-not-interested-in-pork-barrel-politics-says-shane-ross-1.2547270|date=February 25, 2016|website=The Irish Times|language=en}}</ref> Despite being appointed [[Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport]] in the [[Members of the 32nd Dáil|32nd Dáil]] he went on to prioritise the reopening of a police station in his own constituency which was eventually delivered on the eve of the election of new Taoiseach [[Leo Varadkar]] in June 2017.<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/stepaside-garda-station-to-re-open-fulfilling-key-shane-ross-demand-1.3118058|title=Stepaside Garda station to re-open, fulfilling key Shane Ross demand|work=Irish Times}}</ref> |
|||
=== German-speaking countries === |
|||
The German language differentiates between campaign goodies (''Wahlgeschenke'', literally "election gifts") to occur around election dates and parish-pump politics (''Kirchturmpolitik'', literally "steeple politics") for concentrating funding and reliefs to the home constituency of a politician. While the former is a technical term (almost neutral or only slightly derogatory) the latter is always derogatory and its beneficial scope is not wider than the area within which the politician's village church steeple can be seen. In Switzerland the wording of provincial thinking (''Kantönligeist'', literally "[[Cantons of Switzerland|cantonal]] mind") may cover these actions as well and it is understood as a synonym in Germany and Austria. |
|||
=== Philippines === |
|||
{{main|Priority Development Assistance Fund}} |
|||
[[File:Million People March in Luneta against Pork Barrel 24.JPG|thumb|Protest against pork barrel politics at the 2013 [[Million People March]] in [[Luneta]]]] |
|||
In the [[Philippines]], the term "pork barrel" is used to mean funds allocated to the members of the [[House of Representatives of the Philippines|Philippine House of Representatives]] and the [[Senate of the Philippines|Philippine Senate]] to spend as they see fit without going through the normal budgetary process or through the Executive Branch. It can be used for both "hard" projects, such as buildings and roads, and "soft" projects, such as scholarships and medical expenses. The first pork barrel fund was introduced in 1922 with the passage of the first Public Works Act (Act No 3044). This pork barrel system was technically stopped by President [[Ferdinand Marcos]] during his dictatorship by abolishing Congress. It was reintroduced to the system after the restoration of the Congress in 1987. The program has had different names over the years, including the Countryside Development Fund, Congressional Initiative Fund, and currently the Priority Development Assistance Fund.{{citation needed|date=September 2013}} Since 2006, the PDAF was [[Philippine peso|₱]]70.0 M for each Representative and ₱200.0 M for each Senator. |
|||
During the presidency of [[Gloria Macapagal Arroyo]], PDAF became the biggest source of corruption among the legislators.<ref>{{cite news|last=Cabacungan|first=Gil|title=Arroyo chose who, how much PDAF to give|url=http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/471659/arroyo-chose-who-how-much-pdaf-to-give|access-date=8 September 2013|newspaper=Inquirer.net|date=22 August 2013}}</ref> [[Kickback (bribery)|Kickback]]s were common and became syndicated—using pre-identified project implementers including government agencies, contractors and bogus [[non-profit corporation]]s as well as the government's [[Commission on Audit (Philippines)|Commission on Audit]].<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/471659/arroyo-chose-who-how-much-pdaf-to-give|title=Arroyo chose who, how much PDAF to give|last=Cabacungan|first=Gil C.|website=newsinfo.inquirer.net|access-date=2016-04-11}}</ref> |
|||
In August 2013, outrage over the ₱10 billion [[Priority Development Assistance Fund scam]], involving [[Janet Lim-Napoles]] and numerous Senators and Representatives, led to widespread calls for abolition of the PDAF system.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://pcij.org/stories/pdaf-wins-elections-favors-political-parties/|title=PDAF wins elections, favors political parties|website=Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism|access-date=2016-04-11}}</ref> The so-called [[Million People March]] which occurred on August 26, 2013, National [[Heroes' Day]] in the Philippines, called for the end of "pork barrel" and was joined by simultaneous protests nationwide and by the [[Filipino diaspora]] around the world.<ref>{{cite news|last=Francisco|first=Rosemarie|title=Tens of thousands of Filipinos protest "pork barrel" funds|url=https://www.reuters.com/article/us-philippines-politics-idUSBRE97P01T20130826|access-date=28 August 2013|newspaper=Reuters.com|date=26 August 2013}}</ref> |
|||
Petitioners have challenged the constitutionality of the PDAF before the high court following reports of its widespread and systematic misuse by some members of Congress in cahoots with private individuals. Three incumbent senators and several former members of the House of Representatives have been named respondents in a plunder complaint filed with the Office of the Ombudsman in connection with the alleged ₱10 billion pork barrel scam. Public outrage over the anomaly has resulted in the largest protest gathering under the three-year-old Aquino administration.<ref name="Merueñas">{{cite news | last = Merueñas | first = Mark | title = Supreme Court declares PDAF unconstitutional| url = http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/story/336120/news/nation/supreme-court-declares-pdaf-unconstitutional | work = [[GMA News and Public Affairs|GMA News]] | date = 19 November 2013 }}</ref> |
|||
On November 19, 2013, the Supreme Court declared the controversial Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), or more commonly known as the pork barrel, as unconstitutional. In a briefing, the high court declared the PDAF Article in 2013 General Approriations Act and all similar provisions on the pork barrel system as illegal because it "allowed legislators to wield, in varying gradiations, non-oversight, post-enactment authority in vital areas of budget executions (thus violating) the principle of separation of powers".<ref name="Merueñas" /> |
|||
=== Nordic countries === |
|||
Similar expressions, meaning "election meat", are used in Danish (''{{lang|da|valgflæsk}}''), Swedish (''{{lang|sv|valfläsk}}'') and Norwegian (''{{lang|no|valgflesk}}''), where they mean promises made ''before'' an election, often by a politician who has little intention of fulfilling them.<ref>''[[Nationalencyklopedin]]'', NE Nationalencyklopedin AB. Article ''Valfläsk''</ref> |
|||
The Finnish political jargon uses ''{{lang|fi|siltarumpupolitiikka}}'' ([[culvert]] politics) in reference to national politicians concentrating on small local matters, such as construction of roads and other public works at politician's home municipality. In Iceland, the term ''kjördæmapot'' refers to the practice of funneling public funds to key voting demographics in marginal constituencies. |
|||
=== United Kingdom === |
|||
The term is rarely used in [[British English]], although similar terms exist: '''election sweetener''', '''tax sweetener''', or just '''sweetener,''' which refers to the practice of a Chancellor of the Exchequer leaving room in their fiscal programme to announce a big tax cut or spending boost in the budget immediately prior to an election, usually targeting a key voting demographic (such as the elderly) or benefitting marginal constituencies.<ref>{{cite news | last = Thornton | first = Philip | title = Brown warned on pre-election tax 'sweeteners' | url = https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/brown-warned-on-preelection-tax-sweeteners-484599.html | work = [[The Independent]] | date = 24 February 2005 | access-date = 31 August 2013 }}</ref> The term "pork barrel" was, however, used in August 2013 by the [[Campaign for Better Transport (United Kingdom)|Campaign for Better Transport]] in their criticism of [[Danny Alexander]] MP's involvement in securing funding for the A6 Manchester Airport Relief Road which passed through a marginal Liberal Democrat constituency.<ref>{{cite web | title = Treasury minister's role in road funding 'in danger of looking like pork barrel politics' (blog) | url = http://www.bettertransport.org.uk/blogs/roads/120813_manchester_airport_link | website = bettertransport.org.uk | publisher = Campaign for Better Transport | date = 12 August 2013 | access-date = 31 August 2013 }}</ref> It was also used by [[Pete Wishart]] in the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|House of Commons]] on 26 June 2017 in reference to [[Conservative–DUP agreement|the deal]] between the [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] and the [[Democratic Unionist Party]] to keep the former in power.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Millar |first1=Joey |title='It's almost laughable!' Greedy SNP put in place after saying DUP deal UNFAIR for Scotland |url=https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/821501/DUP-deal-theresa-may-snp-pete-wishart-damian-green |access-date=7 August 2018 |date=27 June 2017}}</ref> In February 2019 it was used by shadow chancellor John McDonnell to criticise Theresa May's rumoured attempts to persuade Labour MPs to vote for her Brexit deal.<ref>{{cite news |last1=McDonnell |first1=John |title=McDonnell accuses PM of 'pork-barrel' politics with Brexit 'bribery' |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/feb/02/mcdonnell-accuses-pm-of-pork-barrel-politics-with-brexit-bribery |access-date=2 February 2019 |date=2 February 2019}}</ref> In March 2021 opposition Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer accused ministers of “pork barrel politics” over how they had categorised local authorities under the new £4.8bn Levelling Up Fund, which the Financial Times reported favoured some prosperous Tory voting areas.<ref>{{cite news |last1=Bounds |first1=Andy |last2=Smith |first2=Alan |title=Levelling up Fund bias in favour of Tory seats 'pretty blatant' |url=https://www.ft.com/content/d485da2a-5778-45ae-9fa8-ca024bc8bbcf |access-date=6 March 2021 |date=5 March 2021}}</ref> The [[Good Law Project]] has warned the Government of legal proceedings over the matter.<ref>https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/pork-barrel-politics/</ref> |
|||
During the [[2008 United States presidential election]] campaign, the [[Gravina Island Bridge]] (also known as the "Bridge to Nowhere") in Alaska was cited as an example of pork barrel spending. The bridge, pushed for by Republican Senator [[Ted Stevens]], was projected to cost $398 million and would connect the island's 50 residents and the [[Ketchikan International Airport]] to [[Revillagigedo Island]] and [[Ketchikan]].<ref>{{cite book | title = $315 million bridge to nowhere | url = http://www.taxpayer.net/user_uploads/file/Transportation/gravinabridge.pdf | publisher = Taxpayers for Common Sense | date = February 9, 2005 | url-status = dead | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20081025113307/http://www.taxpayer.net/user_uploads/file/Transportation/gravinabridge.pdf | archive-date = October 25, 2008 }}</ref><!--Please feel free to add other examples of pork barrel. Could you include a link to the pork barrel's Wikipedia article, its cost, and a citation? --> Pork-barrel projects, which differ from ''[[Earmark (politics)|earmarks]]'', are added to the federal budget by members of the appropriation committees of the [[United States Congress]]. This allows the delivery of federal funds to the local district or state of the appropriation committee member, often accommodating major campaign contributors. To a certain extent, a member of Congress is judged by their ability to deliver funds to their constituents. The Chairman and the [[ranking member]] of the [[United States Senate Committee on Appropriations]] are in a position to deliver significant benefits to their states. Researchers Anthony Fowler and Andrew B. Hall claim that this still does not account for the high reelection rates of incumbent representatives in American legislatures.<ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Fowler | first1 = Anthony | last2 = Hall | first2 = Andrew B. | title = Congressional seniority and pork: a pig fat myth? | journal = [[European Journal of Political Economy]] | volume = 40 | issue = A | pages = 42–56 | doi= 10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2015.07.006 | date = December 2015 }}</ref> Former Hawaii Senator [[Daniel Inouye]] described himself as "the No. 1 earmarks guy in the U.S. Congress".<ref>{{Cite web|last1=Brown|first1=Emma|last2=Post|first2=The Washington|title=Daniel Inouye was war hero, Senate deal maker, 'No. 1 earmarks guy'|url=http://bangordailynews.com/2012/12/18/politics/daniel-inouye-was-war-hero-senate-deal-maker-no-1-earmarks-guy/|access-date=2016-04-11|website=The Bangor Daily News|date=18 December 2012}}</ref> Inouye regularly passed earmarks for funding in the state of Hawaii including military and transportation spending.<ref>{{Cite web|title=Daniel K. Inouye: Campaign Finance/Money – Other Data – Earmarks 2010|url=http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/earmarks.php?cid=n00001762|access-date=2016-04-11|website=www.opensecrets.org}}</ref> |
|||
==See also== |
==See also== |
||
{{Portal|United States|Politics}} |
{{Portal|United States|Politics}} |
||
{{Div col|colwidth=20em}} |
{{Div col|colwidth=20em}} |
||
*[[Advocacy group]] |
|||
*[[All politics is local]] |
|||
*[[Citizens Against Government Waste]] |
*[[Citizens Against Government Waste]] |
||
*[[Client politics]] |
|||
*[[Clientelism]] |
|||
*[[Corporate welfare]] |
*[[Corporate welfare]] |
||
*[[Earmark (politics)]] |
*[[Earmark (politics)]] |
||
Line 111: | Line 35: | ||
*[[Golden Fleece Award]] |
*[[Golden Fleece Award]] |
||
*[[Government waste]] |
*[[Government waste]] |
||
*[[Lobbying]] |
|||
*[[Money loop]] |
*[[Money loop]] |
||
*[[People's Initiative Against Pork Barrel]] |
*[[People's Initiative Against Pork Barrel]] |
||
Line 128: | Line 51: | ||
[[Category:English-language idioms]] |
[[Category:English-language idioms]] |
||
[[Category:Ethically disputed political practices]] |
[[Category:Ethically disputed political practices]] |
||
[[Category: |
[[Category:Political pejoratives]] |
||
[[Category:Metaphors referring to objects]] |
[[Category:Metaphors referring to objects]] |
||
[[Category:Metaphors referring to food and drink]] |
[[Category:Metaphors referring to food and drink]] |
Revision as of 20:17, 14 July 2024
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fa/Pork_barrel_cartoon.jpg/220px-Pork_barrel_cartoon.jpg)
Pork barrel, or simply pork, is a metaphor for the appropriation of government spending for localized projects secured solely or primarily to direct expenditures to a representative's district. The usage originated in American English, and it indicates a negotiated way of political particularism.
Political science
Scholars use it as a technical term regarding legislative control of local appropriations.[1][2] In election campaigns, the term is used in derogatory fashion to attack opponents. Typically, "pork" involves national funding for government programs whose economic or service benefits are concentrated in a particular area but whose costs are spread among all taxpayers. Public works projects, certain national defense spending projects, and agricultural subsidies are the most commonly cited examples. Citizens Against Government Waste outlines seven criteria by which spending in the United States can be classified as "pork":[3]
- Requested by only one chamber of Congress
- Not specifically authorized
- Not competitively awarded
- Not requested by the President
- Greatly exceeds the President's budget request or the previous year's funding
- Not the subject of Congressional hearings
- Serves only a local or special interest.
History and etymology
The term pork barrel politics originated in American English,[4] and usually refers to spending intended to benefit a constituents of a politician in return for their political support, either in the form of campaign contributions or votes. In the popular 1863 story "The Children of the Public", Edward Everett Hale used the term pork barrel as a homely metaphor for any form of public spending to the citizenry;[5] however, after the American Civil War, the term came to be used in a derogatory sense. The Oxford English Dictionary dates the modern sense of the term from 1873.[6]
Pork barrels originally came from storing meat.[7] By the 1870s, references to "pork" were common in Congress, and the term was further popularized by a 1919 article by Chester Collins Maxey in the National Municipal Review, which reported on certain legislative acts known to members of Congress as "pork barrel bills". He claimed that the phrase originated in a pre-Civil War practice of giving enslaved people a barrel of salt pork as a reward and requiring them to compete among themselves to get their share of the handout.[8] More generally, a barrel of salt pork was a common larder item in 19th-century households and could be used as a measure of the family's financial well-being. For example, in his 1845 novel The Chainbearer, James Fenimore Cooper wrote: "I hold a family to be in a desperate way when the mother can see the bottom of the pork barrel."[9]
Examples
An early example of pork barrel politics in the United States was the Bonus Bill of 1817, which was introduced by Democrat John C. Calhoun to construct highways linking the Eastern and Southern United States to its Western frontier using the earnings bonus from the Second Bank of the United States. Calhoun argued for it using general welfare and post-roads clauses of the United States Constitution. Although he approved of the economic development goal, President James Madison vetoed the bill as unconstitutional. One of the most famous alleged pork-barrel projects was the Big Dig in Boston, Massachusetts. The Big Dig was a project to relocate an existing 3.5-mile (5.6 km) section of the Interstate Highway System underground. The official planning phase started in 1982; the construction was done between 1991 and 2006, and the project concluded on December 31, 2007. It ended up costing US$14.6 billion, or over US$4 billion per mile.[10] Tip O'Neill (D-Mass), after whom one of the Big Dig tunnels was named, pushed to have the Big Dig funded by the federal government while he was the speaker of the United States House of Representatives.[11]
During the 2008 United States presidential election campaign, the Gravina Island Bridge (also known as the "Bridge to Nowhere") in Alaska was cited as an example of pork barrel spending. The bridge, pushed for by Republican Senator Ted Stevens, was projected to cost $398 million and would connect the island's 50 residents and the Ketchikan International Airport to Revillagigedo Island and Ketchikan.[12] Pork-barrel projects, which differ from earmarks, are added to the federal budget by members of the appropriation committees of the United States Congress. This allows the delivery of federal funds to the local district or state of the appropriation committee member, often accommodating major campaign contributors. To a certain extent, a member of Congress is judged by their ability to deliver funds to their constituents. The Chairman and the ranking member of the United States Senate Committee on Appropriations are in a position to deliver significant benefits to their states. Researchers Anthony Fowler and Andrew B. Hall claim that this still does not account for the high reelection rates of incumbent representatives in American legislatures.[13] Former Hawaii Senator Daniel Inouye described himself as "the No. 1 earmarks guy in the U.S. Congress".[14] Inouye regularly passed earmarks for funding in the state of Hawaii including military and transportation spending.[15]
See also
References
- ^ Bickers, Kenneth N.; Stein, Robert M. (2008). "The Congressional Pork Barrel in a Republican Era". The Journal of Politics. 62 (4): 1070–1086. doi:10.1111/0022-3816.00046. JSTOR 2647865. S2CID 154556676.
- ^ Shepsle, Kenneth A.; Weingast, Barry R. (1981). "Political Preferences for the Pork Barrel: A Generalization". American Journal of Political Science. 25 (1): 96–111. doi:10.2307/2110914. JSTOR 2110914.
- ^ "Citizens Against Government Waste". Cagw.org. 2006. Archived from the original on July 14, 2008.
- ^ Drudge, Michael W. (1 August 2008). "'Pork Barrel' Spending Emerging as Presidential Campaign Issue". America.gov. United States Department of State. Archived from the original on 8 September 2008. Retrieved 14 August 2010.
- ^ The story first appeared in Frank Leslie's Illustrated Newspaper, Jan. 24 and Jan. 31, 1863. Hale, Edward Everett (1910). "The Children of the Public". The Man without a Country and Other Tales. Macmillan: 97–175.
{{cite journal}}
: Cite journal requires|journal=
(help) - ^ Oxford English Dictionary[permanent dead link], pork barrel, draft revision June 2008. Retrieved October 22, 2008.
- ^ "Dictionary and Thesaurus". Merriam-Webster. Retrieved 2016-04-15.
- ^ Maxey, Chester Collins (1919). "A Little History of Pork". National Municipal Review. 8 (10): 691–705. doi:10.1002/ncr.4110081006.
- ^ Quoted in: Volo, James M.; Volo, Dorothy Denneen (2004). The Antebellum Period. Greenwood Publishing Group. p. 170. ISBN 978-0-313-32518-2.
- ^ Klein, Rick (August 6, 2006). "Big Dig failures threaten federal funding". The Boston Globe.
- ^ Rimer, Sara (30 December 2009). "In Boston, Where Change Is in the Winter Air". New York Times. Retrieved 17 November 2010.
- ^ $315 million bridge to nowhere (PDF). Taxpayers for Common Sense. February 9, 2005. Archived from the original (PDF) on October 25, 2008.
- ^ Fowler, Anthony; Hall, Andrew B. (December 2015). "Congressional seniority and pork: a pig fat myth?". European Journal of Political Economy. 40 (A): 42–56. doi:10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2015.07.006.
- ^ Brown, Emma; Post, The Washington (18 December 2012). "Daniel Inouye was war hero, Senate deal maker, 'No. 1 earmarks guy'". The Bangor Daily News. Retrieved 2016-04-11.
- ^ "Daniel K. Inouye: Campaign Finance/Money – Other Data – Earmarks 2010". www.opensecrets.org. Retrieved 2016-04-11.