You're wrong, its not a fake issue. The numbers are low, but the truth is, that 1% of spending is used by appropriators to buy much high levels of federal spending than would otherwise pass through Congress.

Bear with me while I explain it. Let me tell you a story.

We have an idealistic young freshman Republican Congressman, lets call him Mr. Conservative. Well, Mr. Conservative, like many of his friends (particularly Republicans) came to Washington saying that the government is too big, too intrusive, and we have to shrink it. Then, met John Murtha, Jerry Lewis, and Dave Obey (Senior members of the Appropriations Committee). Obey comes up to Mr. Conservative, and says, "I've got a great deal for your constituents. I can put a $1.5 million earmark for your district's largest employer, Littletown General Hospital, to support jobs and high-tech research." This is great, says Mr. Conservative, "I get to support my favorite hospital, create new jobs, and promote a high-tech economy." So, he puts out a press release touting the earmark when the appropriations committee passes the bill. It also helps that the lobbyists for Littletown General Hospital come in and throw a nice fundraiser for Mr. Conservative. Of course, that's not why he got the earmark, but it will help in next year's election against Ms. Lefty, right?

Now, the Health and Human Services Appropriations bill is slated to be brought up on the House floor tomorrow, and it's cost has ballooned up to $150 billion because those bleeding-heart liberals leading Congress have created a new welfare program that Mr. Conservative opposes, and he really wants to vote against. Then, that nice Dave Obey -- who put in the earmark that will do so much good for Littletown General -- stops our hero in the hall and reminds him that he's put this important project in the bill, and "you wouldn't want to vote against jobs and high tech industry for your district, would you?" He also reminds our hero how nice he was to put the earmark in, and "wouldn't it be a shame for Littletown if they never got another earmark?" How can Mr. Conservative vote against the interests of his own district? Wouldn't Mr. Conservative's election opponent, Ms. Lefty, like to know that he opposes high tech research and jobs?

The next day, Mr. Conservative goes in and votes for a bloated $150 billion welfare bill. This is how $18 billion in earmarks buys our government a $3 trillion budget and a $500 billion deficit. This is not a fake issue. Earmarks go to the very heart of the overspending in Washington.

That's a good point, but the problem doesn't seem to be with earmarks, it seems to be with greed and finance.

I grant that earmarks might have an effect greater than the numbers indicate, but McCain pretty much destroyed his credibility on spending reform when he chose Palin and repeatedly broadcast lies denying she'd aggressively sought and obtained pork for Alaska, most infamously with the Bridge to Nowhere. Don't think the politicians didn't learn the cynical lesson--grab all the pork you can and then just deny, deny, deny.