A public advocacy organization is suing the White House for failing to disclose its administrative earmarks, and cites a Heritage Foundation investigation as evidence.
Cause of Action, an organization that uses public advocacy to ensure transparency in government, announced its suit last week.
Heritage investigative reporter Lachlan Markay broke the news that the timing and allocation of administrative earmarks has been strikingly correlated to crucial congressional votes on the Obama administration’s liberal agenda.
Here’s an excerpt from Cause of Action’s press release about the lawsuit:
Cause of Action filed suit Wednesday against the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) citing the OMB’s continued failure to produce documents regarding executive branch agencies’ use of administrative earmarks. Following a request under the Freedom of Information Act for documents relating to the cooperation of Congress and federal agencies on pet projects, the OMB has yet to comply with its FOIA obligations, prompting the government accountability group Cause of Action to file suit…
While the Obama Administration has iterated its support of the earmark ban, with the President himself stating in the State of the Union Address that if a bill came to his desk “with earmarks inside,” he will veto it, concerns remain over this avenue of agency grants achieving the same ends as legislative earmarks. Just last month when confronted with a report from The Heritage Foundation showing how key legislative votes coincided with spikes in federal agency grants to Democratic districts, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney claimed that, “the president’s opposition to earmarks is well known.”
What do you think of the practice of administrative earmarks?