Republicans may have overstepped their intent when they took a broad “no earmark” pledge in March to cover all spending for the remainder of the 111th Congress. The “unanimous” vote—meaning that everyone who was in the room voted “aye”—references the Rule that covers specific legislation requiring more transparency. That rule however, defines and includes not only earmarks, but also defines and covers limited tax benefits and limited tariff benefits. Each of these is very distinct and all are not “ear marks”. Unfortunately, because the Republican caucus pledge references the Rule (and doesn’t single out the paragraph that defines “ear marks”) these other measure have gotten tangled in the web. The Republican caucus pledge goes further than the Democrats’ earmark pledge and as a result the bipartisan Miscellaneous Tariff Bill hangs in the balance.
After senior Republicans requested that leadership not include the tariff benefits in the moratorium, their overtures were rebuffed and alas the Miscellaneous Tariff Bill is included in the crosshairs of the political one-upmanship on earmark pledges for the rest of the Congress. So importers that were not paying duties on products already vetted years ago and never opposed are not paying taxes on these imports because the package expired in December and the Congress can’t find the time, and not the political strength to simply renew them.
These MTBs go through more vetting than any other appropriations measure, in fact efforts are absurdly duplicated within the Administration, which ironically enough is a waste of taxpayer money. When the bills are passed, they are open to ANY US company that wants to import a razor blade, chemical, or paper bag under the new tariff measure. The bills can be jettisoned from the final package if even the smallest US company has a legitimate objection or simply claims that they make the product in the United States. The onus is on the importer to prove otherwise. Republican sponsors of these bills are quietly stating that they would still like to support the MTB, but they are a bit gun shy about bucking their leadership right now. Further guidance from leadership will be needed to allow the bill to go forward, even though Democrats are drafting the measure as we speak and working towards getting the necessary votes on both sides of the aisle. If the bill can go by a voice vote with no Republicans going on the record as voting for this non controversial bipartisan package (or no earmark hounds calling for a recorded vote), then it can succeed.
[tags legislation, trade]
