CNN/Politics‘ Chris Cillizza identifies the most important part of omnibus spending bill introduced today – the resurrection of earmarks:
… the actual impact of banning earmarks was very different than what those who pushed the ban hardest believed it would be.
What happened, in practice, was that leaders in both parties lost leverage over their rank-and-file members. They no longer had a carrot to dangle in front of wavering members to get them to sign on to a piece of legislation where the vote was tight.
That loss of leverage was compounded by the rise of third-party groups — led by super PACs — over the past decade. Their ascension signaled a diminution in the power of political parties. No longer could party leaders overseeing campaign committees bend members to their will by offering — or withholding — support.
Add those two factors together, and you get developments like the rise of the House Freedom Caucus, a rump group that has no loyalty to or fear of party leaders. And over the last decade, it’s the extremes — like those represented by the Freedom Caucus — who have increasingly have influence in Congress.
While I hesitate to comment on whether or not this is the most important, it’s certainly very important. If Cillizza is correct as to the levers it gives Congressional leaders over their caucus members, then look for multiple cries of corruption emanating from the lead troublemakers sometime in the next couple of years.
Why?
Because their influence will wane, at least so long as relative moderates are in charge of Congress. The would-be follower extremists, faced with legal bribes, will suddenly be willing to change their votes from NO TO EVERYTHING! to Uh, if I can have this, then OK.
And the ideologues who have been enjoying outsized influence of late will suddenly be back out in the wilderness, right where they belong. And hating it. So they’ll scream foul corruption as loudly as possible, and the cycle will begin anew.
Because I doubt the body politic will actually learn anything from this.