Pork Barrel Reduction Act (S.2265): What the 2006 Earmark Reform Bill Proposed
The Pork Barrel Reduction Act, S.2265, never got past committee. Several of its ideas, including public lists of earmarks with each sponsor’s name and a 48-hour posting rule for conference reports, became Senate rules in 2007 through the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act. Congress banned earmarks in 2011 and brought them back in 2021 under new names: Community Project Funding in the House and Congressionally Directed Spending in the Senate. As of November 2026, members still request projects in public and certify they have no financial stake in them. Earmarks cannot go to for-profit companies. The House caps Community Project Funding at 0.5% of discretionary spending, and Senate guidance caps Congressionally Directed Spending at 1%. Fiscal 2026 bills carried roughly $15.5 billion in earmarks.
What happened on February 9, 2006
Ten senators, eight Republicans and two Democrats, announced the Pork Barrel Reduction Act together on February 9, 2006. They were Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), John McCain (R-Ariz.), Russ Feingold (D-Wis.), Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), John Ensign (R-Nev.), Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), John Sununu (R-N.H.), Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas). In public accounts, Coburn led the group. Fox News presented the bill as part of a push to restore trust in Congress after that period’s lobbying and ethics scandals.
The bill got the number S.2265. It was read twice and sent to the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration the same day. The PorkBusters campaign, a group of bloggers who targeted congressional earmarks from 2006 to 2010, called the bill’s introduction the real start of its push for earmark reform.
What the bill would have done
According to the senators who sponsored it, S.2265 would have changed how the Senate handled earmarks in six ways. The bill would have amended Senate Rule XVI, which covers appropriations bills. It also included a 60-vote point of order modeled partly on the Byrd Rule.
- A new point of order against unauthorized earmarks and policy riders. A senator could raise a point of order against an unauthorized earmark or policy rider in an appropriations bill or conference report. Unless three-fifths of senators voted to waive it, only that provision would be struck, and the rest of the bill would stay intact.
- No spending on earmarks that appear only in report language. Agencies could not fund items listed only in committee or conference reports, which senators cannot amend. Every earmark would have to be in the bill text, where it could be debated and amended.
- A 48-hour waiting period for conference reports. Conference reports would have to be filed and public for at least 48 hours before a floor vote, so members and the public could read them first.
- Stronger limits on new material in conference reports. Senate rules already allowed a point of order against conference reports that added material neither chamber had passed. The sponsors said these additions often survived anyway when they rode on must-pass bills. The bill would have barred such reports from consideration.
- Full disclosure of earmarks. Every bill and conference report would have to describe each earmark in detail, name the lawmaker who requested it, and state its essential governmental purpose.
- Lobbying disclosure by recipients. Organizations receiving federal money would have to report how much they spent on registered lobbyists. The sponsors said this would make it less likely that taxpayers unknowingly paid for lobbying in favor of earmarks.
Which ideas later became rules
Most of the bill’s disclosure and transparency ideas returned in other legislation. Its lobbying-disclosure requirement for grant recipients did not.
| S.2265 proposal (2006) | What happened later |
|---|---|
| Point of order to strike single earmarks | Senate Rule XLIV (2007) created a way to strike certain new spending items, including earmarks, from conference reports |
| No funding for earmarks found only in report language | Executive Order 13457 (January 2008) told agencies not to fund earmarks that appeared only in report language |
| 48-hour public posting of conference reports | Added to Senate Rule XXVIII by the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 |
| Limits on new matter in conference reports | Partly covered by Rule XLIV’s procedure against new spending items in conference reports |
| Disclosure of each earmark and its requester | Adopted in Senate Rule XLIV. Senate earmark lists must name the requesting senator and be posted online 48 hours before a vote |
| Recipients disclose lobbying spending | Not adopted in this form |
The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (P.L. 110-81) became law on September 14, 2007. Senate Rule XLIV defines earmarks the same way House Rule XXI, clause 9, does, except that the Senate rule also requires naming the requesters. The Senate rule calls an earmark a “congressionally directed spending item.” That phrase later became the Senate’s official name for earmarks.
How the PorkBusters campaign pushed the bill
PorkBusters relied on “blog pressure.” Its organizers set up a new tracking page to record which senators backed the bill and which opposed it. They asked readers to call their senators, find out where each one stood, and send the answers back. The campaign’s call to action asked for help with “reporting back to us on where they stand.”
The organizers also asked other bloggers to link to the announcement and the tracking page and to get their own readers to do the same. They predicted that opponents of the bill would be “fighting dirty” to defeat it. This was the campaign’s own description of its opponents, not a neutral account.
The first post promised to publish the bill text and invited readers with legal training to comment on the details. A later update said the full text was “available here (PDF).” A second update reported that the bill had been numbered S.2265.
What became of S.2265
S.2265 died in the Senate Rules and Administration Committee. There was never a floor vote, and it expired when the 109th Congress ended in January 2007. The broader effort kept going. In early 2007, the new Congress moved ethics and lobbying legislation that included earmark disclosure, and that became the 2007 law.
Earmarks after 2006: the ban and the return
Earmarks were disclosed from 2007, banned in practice from 2011, and allowed again from 2021.
- 2007: The House and Senate adopted formal disclosure rules in the 110th Congress (2007-2008).
- 2010 and 2011: The House Republican Conference adopted an “Earmark Moratorium” standing order in 2010 for the 112th Congress, and the Senate adopted a similar moratorium in 2011. The Congressional Research Service notes that the moratorium was never written into House or Senate rules, so no point of order could enforce it.
- 2021: The appropriations committees in both chambers brought earmarks back with new safeguards. The House calls them Community Project Funding, and the Senate calls them Congressionally Directed Spending.
How earmarks work as of November 2026
The two chambers use different names, but the rules are similar.
| Feature | House: Community Project Funding | Senate: Congressionally Directed Spending |
|---|---|---|
| Request limit | 20 per member for FY2027 (up from 15 in FY2026) | Set by committee guidance |
| Public posting | Members must post their requests online | Requests posted by senators and the committee |
| For-profit recipients | Not eligible | Not eligible |
| Overall cap | Capped at 0.5% of discretionary spending | Capped at 1% of discretionary spending under committee guidance |
| Accounts closed to requests | FY2027: Defense, Financial Services and General Government, Legislative Branch, National Security/State | Varies by subcommittee |
The Government Accountability Office follows how agencies spend earmarked money in its “Tracking the Funds” series.
Where earmarks stand in November 2026
Earmarks are now a regular part of appropriations, and the dollar totals depend on who is counting. Roll Call and The Washington Post reported in February 2026 that enacted fiscal 2026 bills carried nearly $15.5 billion in earmarks for more than 8,000 projects. Citizens Against Government Waste, an advocacy group, uses a broader method and counts about $23.7 billion. The National Taxpayers Union looked at only four bills and counted $5.25 billion.
The fiscal 2027 cycle is still open. The National Taxpayers Union counted 6,693 House earmark requests totaling $8.68 billion. A stopgap law, P.L. 119-103, signed September 2, 2026, funds the government through December 11, 2026. No full-year FY2027 bill has been enacted. FY2027 earmarks will not reach any project unless Congress passes full-year spending bills.
The next date to watch is December 11, 2026. By then Congress has to pass full-year bills, another stopgap, or a full-year continuing resolution, or face a lapse in funding. A full-year continuing resolution would largely carry over FY2026 priorities and would generally leave out new FY2027 earmarks.
FAQ
Did the Pork Barrel Reduction Act ever pass?
No. S.2265 went to the Senate Rules and Administration Committee on February 9, 2006, and never got a floor vote. Several of its ideas became Senate rules through the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007.
Who sponsored S.2265?
Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) led a group of ten senators: eight Republicans and two Democrats. The Democrats were Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and Evan Bayh of Indiana.
Are earmarks banned today?
No. The moratorium was party and committee policy, not a chamber rule, and both chambers dropped it in 2021. Earmarks now come with public request lists and a ban on for-profit recipients. The House caps Community Project Funding at 0.5% of discretionary spending, and Senate guidance caps Congressionally Directed Spending at 1%.
What is the difference between Community Project Funding and Congressionally Directed Spending?
Both are earmarks. Community Project Funding is the House term, and Congressionally Directed Spending is the Senate term. Each chamber’s appropriations committee sets its own request limits and decides which accounts accept requests.
How much money goes to earmarks each year?
Enacted fiscal 2026 bills carried about $15.5 billion in earmarks, according to Roll Call and The Washington Post. Other groups count differently and report anywhere from $5.25 billion to $23.7 billion. For FY2027, House members have asked for $8.68 billion so far, but nothing is funded until full-year bills pass.
What was PorkBusters?
PorkBusters was a campaign of bloggers who opposed congressional earmarks from 2006 to 2010. It tracked senators’ positions on bills such as S.2265 and asked readers to contact their lawmakers. The current website at this address is not connected to that campaign.
Sources
- Congressional Research Service, Lifting the Earmark Moratorium: Frequently Asked Questions (R45429)
- Congressional Research Service, Earmark Disclosure Rules in the Senate (RS22867)
- Congressional Research Service, Overview of Continuing Appropriations for FY2027 (R49353)
- Congressional Research Service, Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2026 Appropriations (R48564)
- Government Accountability Office, Tracking the Funds: Community Project Funding/Congressionally Directed Spending
- Senate Appropriations Committee, FY 2026 Congressionally Directed Spending
About this article
- Fact-checked before publication.
- Published · Updated
