In the past year, Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) joined a caucus of lawmakers who promised to end all earmarks. Yet that didn’t stop Burr’s office from distributing an appropriations request form to those interested — a typical first step when requesting funding for a local project.

A spokesman for Burr said that’s in line with the Reagan21 Caucus’s guidelines.

Burr is not the only member of the caucus to make that interpretation.

A strategic approach to the group’s pledge has allowed the 17 members of the bicameral GOP caucus to seek funding requests for constituents back home while pushing for earmark reform in Washington. In addition, some members’ offices have assisted local government officials in the grant-making process while others have hardened their positions over the past several months after first leaving room to maneuver on the earmark question.

Such wiggle room is written directly into the caucus’ policy, which states that “new” earmarks are forbidden — leaving the door open for past projects.

“Until public confidence is restored, we must end all earmarks. To lead by example, congressional members of Reagan21 will request no new earmarks,” reads part of the group’s platform. Reagan21 also supports a number of other conservative positions, such as a presidential line-item veto and adopting English as the United States’ official language.

Burr sponsored more than $116 million of earmarked funding by himself or with other lawmakers last year, according to data compiled by Taxpayers for Common Sense (TCS), a budget watchdog group.

Walker said Burr’s funding requests this year must meet at least one of three criteria: projects must have been previously funded by the federal government, authorized by Congress or included in the president’s budget. The policy was crafted after Burr joined the caucus last year.  

The focus on new projects was conscious, according to lawmakers on the caucus’s executive committee.

“The reason the word ‘new’ is in that pledge is because some members had outstanding commitments that they felt obligated to. That’s why,” said Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.).

“There was very vigorous discussion about whether or not it ought to be ‘all earmarks’ or ‘no new earmarks,’ ” said Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.). “The group decided the language that was most reflective of what we as a group were promoting was ‘no new earmarks.’ ”

Both Ryan and Price said caucus members were worried about long-term projects they had committed to, such as those with the Army Corps of Engineers and with their state delegations. But neither Price nor Ryan is requesting earmarks for those projects or any others this year.

Last year, Price sponsored by himself or with other lawmakers more than $2 million worth of earmarks while Ryan secured more than $5 million, according to TCS.

“The process is corrupt. It’s corrupting. You have to put a stake in the ground and say no,” said Price.

Like other members of the Reagan21 Caucus, Burr has received credit from budget watchdog groups for swearing off the earmark process completely. Burr is among 46 lawmakers “who have personally decided to stop receiving pork projects,” according to the Club for Growth’s list.

Andrew Roth, the Club’s director of government affairs who maintains the list, said the caucus’s distinction on past earmarks is no reason to discredit the group’s broader position.

“There is an argument that they shouldn’t,” said Roth. “But swearing off new earmarks deserves some credit. I did not want to split out the list by different grades of purity.”

Burr’s staff has also held meetings with local government officials seeking federal funds this spring. Jim Freeman, a city manager for Havelock, N.C., along with other town leaders, stopped by his office, as well as others from the state’s congressional delegation this month.

That included Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), who has made a similar pledge not to request new earmarks.

“We were very much made aware that they were not in support of earmarks,” said Freeman about all three lawmakers. “Instead, we were directed to some agencies for grant monies.”

Asked about the meeting, Jones’s office said the North Carolina Republican is refraining from the earmarks process this year.

“Pursuant to his pledge, Congressman Jones has not requested any [fiscal year] 2009 earmarks, period,” Kathleen Joyce, Jones’s spokeswoman, said in an e-mailed response. “He has not submitted any forms requesting earmarks to the Appropriations Committee.”

Walker said Havelock’s projects did not meet any of Burr’s three criteria to request funding.

But the meetings, first reported in the Havelock News, raised eyebrows at another budget watchdog group, Americans for Prosperity (AFP). Last week, the group sent letters to the lawmakers involved and specifically asked Burr and Jones to hold fast on their earmark pledges.

Ed Frank, AFP’s vice president of public affairs, said his group would prefer to see no earmark requests but said Burr was “on the right track” by requesting no new funding.

Another Reagan21 member has toughened her position on earmarks after aides first said she would seek federal funds.

In her failed bid for a House Appropriations Committee seat, Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo.) promised to request only existing earmarks. Her chief of staff, Guy Short, told a local newspaper in February that if Musgrave had won the seat, the state would have benefited from taxpayer funds. Musgrave signed off on more than $27 million of earmarks by herself or with other members last year, according to TCS.  

Since then, Musgrave has moved to end all her earmark requests this year, according to a March statement.

“Until public confidence is restored, I believe we must end all earmarks,” Musgrave said. “Until we find a real solution to this problem, I will refuse to participate in this broken process.”

Her office is considering other channels to help constituents, such as competitive grants from federal agencies.

“Earmarks are a very small part of the funding process and we will continue to pursue other avenues of federal funding to fund programs that are necessary for Colorado. We won’t be participating in the earmark process until the earmark process is fixed,” said Joe Brettell, Musgrave’s spokesman.