The House's Budget Bill Cuts Earmarks, but Spending Will Be Going Up Anyway
Every cut helps, but that's not where the money is.

The House of Representatives passed a continuing resolution (C.R.) on Tuesday to keep the government funded through September. The measure now heads to the Senate, where its fate is uncertain, although some Democrats appear to be ready to support the bill to avert a government shutdown.
The C.R. keeps most federal programs funded at FY 2024 levels, excluding defense spending, which will receive a $7 billion boost. A few notable energy and environment programs will receive funding cuts, including the Department of Energy's Loan Programs Office (LPO), which will see its budget fall from its FY 2024 level of $70 million to $55 million. Created in 2005 to fund first-of-its-kind energy projects, the program's lending authority spiked under the Biden administration—jumping from $17 billion in 2021 to more than $400 billion in 2024. With a majority of this authority set to expire in FY 2026, the agency's inspector general warned in November 2024 that the LPO was at high risk for fraud and abuse.
The C.R. also cuts all earmarked funding from the FY 2024 spending bill, which amounted to nearly $15.8 billion. The Army Corps of Engineers, which received $1.5 billion (a 49 percent increase over FY 2023) for various infrastructure projects in congressional districts, was given $18.5 million for "operations and maintenance" at Georgia's Brunswick Harbor. The scope of the project includes annual maintenance dredging. Despite this and regular annual appropriations, dredging activities have not commenced. In a February letter to the chief of the Corps of Engineers, Sens. Jon Ossoff (D–Ga.) and Raphael Warnock (D–Ga.) wrote, "This collective failure to execute a basic mission with ample funding provided by Congress raises serious concerns about the Corps' ability to effectively and collaboratively execute such projects in future years."
Earmarks in the last fiscal year also benefited wealthier congressional districts that do not need additional federal assistance. Rep. Mikie Sherrill (D–N.J.), who represents the Garden State's wealthiest district, secured over $959,000 for stormwater resiliency upgrades in Maplewood, New Jersey, a town with a median household income of $167,428. Earmarked funding for Putnam Valley, New York—whose median household income was nearly $135,000 in 2023—gave the town $1.5 million to replace a pump station at a waste treatment plant.
As the C.R. cuts some wasteful spending for energy and environment projects, it also boots funding for others, including wildfire suppression programs at the Department of the Interior. The federal government's wildfire management strategy has historically prioritized suppression and rapid response over active forest management, including activities like mechanical thinning and prescribed burns. From 2010 to 2020, "federal spending on fire suppression was five times greater than spending on fuel treatments," according to the Property and Environment Research Center. This has created more wildfire risk, especially in Western states.
Cutting earmarks hopefully signals that members of Congress are ready to end the wasteful practice altogether. Still, the C.R. does not appear to fully appreciate America's fiscal situation ($28.91 trillion in debt held by the public). The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget calculates that the net result of the bill is a "$10 billion increase in funding above FY 2024 levels." Overall, it will reduce the federal deficit by only $8 billion through 2034.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Cut fucking spending. This is horseshit.
Multiple reports also state it includes an inpoundment clause to allow the president, through DOGE audits, to cut spending without going through lengthy recissions.
This means the cap is last years budget with an easier process to reduce and not spend to the cap.
This keeps getting missed by many.
Cap same with easier process for identified cuts through audit seems like a good thing.
Jesse, you must understand that Reason’s goal is not to see spending reduced. Their objective is to destroy President Trump.
If Congress was sincere about cuts, they would eliminate the Department of Education, the EPA, FEMA, the Commerce Department, end all foreign aid, subsidies, monies to NGOs, and either terminate most of the alphabet agencies or at least cut their budgets by 50%.
But Congress didn't, so you know this budget is only window dressing...again.
Anybody who votes against those things should be primaried next year.
Overall not a bad bill under the circumstances. Perfect doesn't have to be the enemy of good. Now congress needs to actually do the job mandated by the constitution and pass a budget.
“The C.R. also cuts all earmarked funding from the FY 2024 spending bill, which amounted to nearly $15.8 billion.”
“The C.R. keeps most federal programs funded at FY 2024 levels, excluding defense spending, which will receive a $7 billion boost.”
“The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget calculates that the net result of the bill is a "$10 billion increase in funding above FY 2024 levels."”
Cuts 15billion but adds 7billion back leaving cuts of 8billion, but it’s actually a 10billion increase? The math ain’t mathing.
If you can't fit your legislation on the front of a 3x5 postcard in single-spaced 12pt Times New Roman font, the legislation should automatically fail.