Earmark Dispute Stalls Senate Minibus

Republican divisions over earmarks have stalled the Senate’s effort to advance a five-bill appropriations “minibus” package before the end of the year. Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., wants to add four appropriations bills - Commerce, Justice, Science; Interior and Environment; Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education; and Transportation, Housing and Urban Development - to the Department of Defense Appropriations Act (HR 4016).

But Thune needs unanimous consent to combine the five funding bills into a single appropriations minibus under Senate Rule XVI. Conservatives are presently objecting to waiving the rule to allow the Senate to consider the minibus because the combined bills include Republican-sponsored earmarks totaling more than $5 billion that violate the Republican Conference Rules. And Thune has signaled that removing those earmarks is not an option, commenting, “the Appropriations Committee has done a lot of work already, and it’s hard to unwind that.”

What is an earmark?

Lawmakers in the House and Senate use earmarks - or “congressionally directed spending” - to fund specific projects in their states and districts. In most federal grant programs, Congress sets an overall appropriation, and executive-branch officials then use a merit-based or competitive allocation process to award those funds to projects that comply with the program’s eligibility and regulatory requirements. In contrast, earmarks direct executive-branch officials to circumvent merit-based and competitive allocation processes to prioritize specific projects, locations, or recipients when awarding program funds.

When did Congress ban earmarks?

House Republicans first banned earmarks in 2010. At the time, the ban did not apply to Democrats because Republicans adopted the earmark ban as part of their party rules. They did not have the votes to add it to the House rules. After the 2010 midterm elections, Republicans renewed the earmark ban in their party rules instead of adopting it as part of the House rules. However, the new GOP rule applied to Democrats in practice because Republican appropriators refused to consider their earmark requests during the appropriations process. Democrats continued this de facto earmark ban after they won a House majority in the 2018 midterm elections. Democrats ended the House’s decade-old ban on earmarks in 2021.

In the Senate, Republicans added an earmark ban to their conference rules in 2010 after it became apparent that the House would effectively block the practice. The Democratic majority on the Senate Appropriations Committee subsequently announced that it would not consider senators’ earmark requests for two years. In 2012, Democrats extended the de facto earmark ban by two years. And Republicans similarly enforced their conference earmark prohibition on all senators after they won a majority in the 2014 elections. In 2019, Senate Republicans voted to make the earmark ban in their conference rules permanent. As in the House, Democrats ended the Senate’s decade-old ban on earmarks in 2021.

Is the GOP earmark ban symbolic?

Senate Republicans reacted differently to Congress’s decision to get back into the earmark business. Whereas Democrats and House Republicans decided to change their earmark policies and, where applicable, repeal their bans, pro-earmark Republicans in the Senate voted to keep their ban in place. But Richard Shelby, R-Ala., persuaded enough of his fellow Republicans at the time that keeping the ban in their conference rules was a symbolic gesture because they couldn’t enforce it on party members who chose to violate it.

Senate Republicans subsequently embraced Shelby’s interpretation of their conference rules. After Democrats ended the Senate’s ban in 2021, pro-earmark Republicans have requested earmarks every year, even though their conference rules clearly stipulate “that it is the policy of the Republican Conference that no Member shall request [an earmark].” And the number of Republican senators who submit earmark requests during the annual appropriations process is increasing. Sixteen Republican senators requested earmarks in 2021 (for Fiscal Year 2022 appropriations). Twenty-one Republican senators requested earmarks in 2025 (for Fiscal Year 2026 appropriations). According to reports, Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins, R-Maine, has secured more than $810 million in earmarks in this year’s appropriations bills.

Is the Republican earmark ban enforceable?

The earmark ban in the Republicans’ conference rules is unenforceable only if enforcement requires senators to be bound by party decisions and to act accordingly on the Senate floor. It is enforceable if enforcement means taking action against party members who violate it.

The Republican Conference Rules admittedly state that no Republican senator “shall be deemed to be bound in any way by any action taken” by the party in the Senate. Instead, Republicans “shall be entirely free to act upon any matter” as their judgment dictates. But Republicans can still take action to punish party members who choose not to follow their conference rules.

One way Republicans can enforce their conference rules or encourage compliance is by removing party members from their positions when they violate them. For example, Republicans could easily enforce the term-limit provisions in their conference rules by removing party members from leadership positions if they thought those provisions were merely symbolic and refused to comply.

Senate Republicans have taken steps to punish party members in the past. In 2010, Republicans pressured Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, to resign as Conference Vice Chair after she lost the Republican primary and decided to run as a write-in candidate to keep her seat. In 1995, Republicans pressured Bob Packwood, R-Ore., to step down as chairman of the Finance Committee. And Republicans stripped Larry Craig, R-Idaho, of his seniority status on several committees in 2007.

While these examples of party discipline did not involve explicit violations of conference rules, they demonstrate that Senate Republicans have ways to enforce - or encourage - party members to adhere to the earmark ban.

The Takeaway

A five-bill minibus appropriations package is stalled in the Senate because it contains billions of dollars in earmarks in violation of Republican Conference Rules. While a majority of the Republican Conference is following the party’s ban, Thune appears unwilling to remove earmarks to advance the measure because of opposition from Republican appropriators. Whatever happens next, Senate Republicans could have avoided the present stalemate by signaling to party members that they are expected to comply with their conference rules and removing them from influential party positions when they don’t.