Formula Act

Floor Speech

One of Congress's most basic jobs is the power of the purse. Americans rely on this body to provide Federal funds for programs that support national defense, small businesses, border defenses, conservation of public lands, food assistance for the poor, and so much more.

And as a longstanding member of the Appropriations Committee, I am proud of the work that the Appropriations Committee has done to meet the needs of this Nation. And as a senior Senator from New Hampshire, when I talk to small business owners, educators, healthcare professionals, community leaders across my State, it is unfortunate that not all of the needs of our State are being met.

And for years, New Hampshire, like most small States in this country, has received among the lowest apportionments in the country from formula grant programs that are administered by our Federal Agencies.

Congress has long used earmarks or congressionally directed spending to address funding gaps and inequities between the States. And, in fact, Senator Judd Gregg--whom I had the pleasure of serving with both when he was Governor and I was in the State senate and then when he was in the Senate and I got elected--was a big supporter of congressionally directed spending because he believed, like I do, that I know better how money should be spent in New Hampshire than a bureaucrat here who was making decisions about how to spend Federal dollars.

Congressionally directed spending levels the playing field for States like New Hampshire, and even for Indiana, to ensure that our communities can get their fair share to address our local needs.

Unfortunately, back in 2011, when Congress instituted a ban on congressionally directed spending, we ceded the power of the purse to unelected officials in the executive branch. And while I know that many of these individuals are dedicated bureaucrats, they are public servants. They don't necessarily understand the needs of New Hampshire in the same way that I do as somebody who has represented that State for decades.

So that is why I was very pleased that under the leadership of Chairman Leahy and Ranking Member Shelby, Congress once again passed a bipartisan bill to include congressionally directed spending in our budget process.

And when we did that, the Appropriations Committee instituted some major reforms to improve accountability and transparency in the process of congressionally directed spending.

I am going to talk about some of those reforms because while I appreciate the perspective of my colleague from Indiana, I think he has not pointed out the reforms that exist in the process of congressionally directed spending.

First of all, Members are required to certify that neither we nor any member of our immediate family would financially benefit from the requests that are made. Secondly, those congressionally directed spending requests have to be made in writing and posted online by the Member and the Appropriations Committee so that the public has every opportunity to view the name and location of the project, the intended recipient, and the purposes of that request. For example, the requests for fiscal year 2023 are available online right now before they would be available if this government, this administration, were determining how to spend that money.

So the Senator from Indiana doesn't have to wait until those Senate bills are posted to inspect congressionally directed spending projects.

The reforms also include a 1-percent cap on discretionary spending for CDS items and a ban on congressionally directed spending items to for-profit entities.

Finally, the Appropriations Committee requires the Government Accountability Office to audit a sample of enacted congressionally directed spending items to ensure that Congress is being held accountable for these projects.

The chair and ranking member instituted these reforms to restore the trust of the American people in the appropriations process, and I believe it is working. And I can tell you, as I travel around New Hampshire, it is one of the things that I hear from people in our communities that they are interested in.

They want to know about the appropriations process, and they want to know what other opportunities are there to support initiatives that may not fit within some grant program, that they may not be able to raise money in the private sector for but that are very important for our communities.

The resolution sponsored by the Senator from Indiana would require the chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee to certify that not just Senate earmarks have been disclosed but that all House earmarks have been disclosed.

I think that bill is a solution in search of a problem. The House already has its own rule that governs congressionally directed spending items, and it is required to identify these items.

It knows what its Members have requested, and it is responsible for disclosing them. Requiring the Senate to confirm that the House has done its job before we can consider a message from the House is unnecessary, and it could stop consideration of appropriations bills before they ever get here.

The resolution sponsored by my colleague from Indiana would change Senate rule 44 in ways that could have unintended consequences and could delay critical funding for projects that are important in my home State of New Hampshire and in so many States across this country.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. SHAHEEN. 902, the nomination of Shereef Elnahal.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source