“I know, from my own experience, I pursue the earmarks that really help my community,” said Rep. Nita Lowey, who has served in Congress for 30 years. | Zach Gibson/Getty Images education House Democrats say no to earmarks — for now

House Democrats don’t expect to resurrect the politically taboo practice of earmarked spending in the coming months but aren’t entirely ruling out the prospect of reviving the method in the years to come.

House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) announced in a letter to fellow lawmakers this week that “there is currently not the necessary bipartisan, bicameral agreement” to allow spending leaders to bring back the controversial practice of specifying that federal dollars must go to certain projects.


The announcement comes after Democratic leaders, including House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, spent weeks working with Republicans in both chambers to secure a bipartisan deal to usher back earmarks. The deal never materialized, though Democrats in favor of the spending perk say they aren’t giving up.

"Mr. Hoyer will continue to have conversations with leaders from both parties and chambers to find a path forward to restore earmarks with reforms to ensure transparency and accountability," spokeswoman Mariel Saez said Friday.

Earmarks will not be included in the spending bills lawmakers will be writing for fiscal 2020, which begins Oct. 1, Lowey said.

Morning Education A daily dose of education policy news — weekday mornings, in your inbox. Email Sign Up By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or alerts from POLITICO. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

But the chairwoman added that "over the coming months, Democrats and Republicans in the House and Senate must discuss the issue of earmarks in our respective caucuses and conferences to determine member preferences, solicit ideas to ensure that taxpayer dollars are spent wisely, and when applicable, change rules to permit members to request earmarks."

It was House Democrats who overhauled the earmarks process in 2006 in an effort to rein in funding directed to pet projects, instituting a one-year moratorium in 2007, followed by a GOP-led ban in 2011.

But lawmakers from both parties — especially those who have been on Capitol Hill for several decades — say the retired funding ritual doesn’t need to be nefarious and helps legislators ensure their districts get what they need from the federal government.

“I know, from my own experience, I pursue the earmarks that really help my community,” Lowey, who has served in Congress for 30 years, said in November. “And I will stand behind every dollar and project I ever secured. So there are a lot of members who feel that way.”

President Donald Trump breathed new life into the debate about bringing back earmarks early last year, saying there was “great friendliness” when lawmakers were able to ensure federal dollars went to specific projects and that “maybe” congressional leaders “should start thinking about going back to a form of earmarks.”