Sometimes it amazes me that civilization doesn't grind to a standstill.

And, frankly, sometimes I don't think that would be all that bad of an eventuality.

I remember back in the campaign that featured George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Ross Perot.

Perot's running mate, Admiral Stockwell or Stockdale or whatever, was in one of the debates. I remember him blurting out "Gridlock!" as if he had some kind of G-rated version of Tourette's Syndrome.

I remember thinking at the time that gridlock - when it comes to government - is a good thing.

If I ever run for office - which is ever so slightly less likely than me winning the next $200 million Powerball game - I already know what my slogan will be.

"Lick Your Lips - No New Government."

Oh, sure, you can say no new taxes, but I'd be way beyond that.

My platform would be a one-year moratorium on any new government programs or new laws.

Just leave things the way they are for a year and see how it goes.

Leave all the tax rates alone. Leave all the benefits alone. Don't do anything.

Gridlock, in other words.

This comes to mind because last week Congress passed a lobbying-reform bill.

Gridlock would have been better.

See, the idea was to keep special interest "pork projects" out of appropriations bills.

But, in typical Congressional fashion, the intent was watered down by the ever-present loophole.

Turns out nearly half of the pork projects targeted by the bill still could wind up into spending bills without public scrutiny.

This because of a glaring loophole in the bill's language.

The Boston Globe and tax watchdog groups were quick to point out the silliness.

The Senate passed the bill because lawmakers are trying to show us how much integrity they have.

They feel a need to do this because of guys like Jack Abramoff, the high-profile lobbyist who was indicted a while back.

Part of the bill was designed to curb the huge and growing number of pork barrel projects that are tacked onto spending bills with no public debate.

In Congress they call these projects "earmarks."

The new bill doesn't ban the projects, but requires lawmakers to disclose any earmarks at least 24 hours before debate on the spending bill.

But, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, the bill defines earmarks as only non-federal protects. That means that 5,283 of the 12,852 earmarks in the 2006 spending bills would have been exempt from the rules.

Remember Randy "Duke" Cunningham? He's the Congressman who recently was convicted and is doing time for accepting more than $2 million in bribes in exchange for favors for arms-related companies.

Well, his earmarks were in the arms spending bill. They were federal projects that would have been outside the scope of the new law. That's according to Keith Ashdown of the TCS.

And all the tax watchdog groups agree that the most egregious, wasteful spending is in federal programs, again, exempt from the new controls.

And beyond that, even non-federal earmarks could make it through if lobbyists and lawmakers figured out ways to channel the money through a federal agency instead of sending it directly to a district.

And trust me, it won't take lawmakers long to figure out how to get that accomplished.

So, the net result of the bill will be minimal, while lawmakers are telling us all about how hard they are working to eliminate pork barrel spending.

Here are a few examples from recent recent budgets, compliments of Citizens Against Government Waste (cagw.org)

* $375,000,000 for an unrequested and unneeded amphibious assault ship in the state of Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.).

* $700,000 for the Admiral Theater in Bremerton, Wash., the district of House appropriator Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), despite a $4.2 million privately-funded facelift.

* $500,000 for the Olympic Tree Program in the state of Senate appropriator Robert Bennett for the 2002 Winter Olympics.

* $13,500,000 for the International Fund for Ireland, which helped finance the World Toilet Summit.

* $6,435,000 for wood utilization research.

* $1 million for the Waterfree Urinal Conservation Initiative.

* $500,000 for the Sparta Teapot Museum in Sparta, N.C.

And the shameful waste of our tax dollars isn't even the worst part.

The worst part is the "pay-to-play" culture that permeates Congress.

Lobbyists know if they throw enough money around, they can get Congressmen to vote their way. That's because Congressmen need money to get re-elected.

And Congressmen know that if they shower some really cool stuff on their constituents, they are more likely to get re-elected.

Of course, none of this has anything to do with honesty, integrity, patriotism or an effective citizen legislature.

Mostly it has to do with power, money, greed and corruption, which seem to be the hallmarks of our system of government.

Lawmakers pretend to care, but they don't care because they benefit from things staying the way they are. It would be simple to write a law prohibiting earmarks.

But it will never happen because the fox is guarding not only the henhouse, but the barn, the pasture, the driveway, the farmhouse and the closet that houses the farmer's shotgun.

Article 1, Section 9, Clause 7 of the United States Constitution says this: "No money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in Consequence of Appropriations made by law ..."

Do you suppose they envisioned wasteful, unauthorized earmarks being added to spending bills without public debate in the dark of night?

Nah, I think the guys who wrote the constitution are dizzy from spinning in their graves. [[In-content Ad]]