Members of the Republican Study Committee (RSC) have been under pressure to disclose their earmark requests after demanding a greater level of disclosure than Democrats initially wanted.

While most lawmakers trumpet their successes in bringing home federal money for local projects, the RSC protest has led to a sort of one-upmanship among lawmakers.

Last week, Rep. Rahm Emanuel (Ill.), chairman of the House Democratic Caucus, and other lawmakers began disclosing their earmark requests even though the “cardinals” who chair the appropriations subcommittees might not accept them. (The House so far has passed four of the 12 appropriations bills.)

Two lawmakers, Reps. Paul Ryan (Wis.) and Connie Mack (Fla.), have released certain projects when asked by the media.

The RSC disclosed the earmarks lawmakers requested in the Financial Services and Interior-Environment spending bills. Eight RSC lawmakers said it was their policy not to disclose earmarks, but the RSC listed their earmarks, as well as the earmarks of another 17 lawmakers, for the two spending bills.

Three lawmakers — RSC Chairman Rep. Jeb Hensarling (Texas) and Reps. John Shadegg (Ariz.) and Jeff Flake (Ariz.) — do not request earmarks.

“Does transparency need to come earlier in the process?” Hensarling asked. “Each member is going to make their own decision” about whether to release their earmark requests.

He added that the burden on RSC members “should not be more and should not be less.” The RSC has not taken a position on whether its members ought to disclose constituents’ requests or their requests to the appropriators.

Republican and Democratic aides said there are good reasons for lawmakers to keep mum on their requests, namely because lawmakers fear constituent groups could be disappointed if they do not ask for their earmark or if the request is rejected. 

 Earmark Disclosures Chart (.PDF)