Here is that story. I cut it down to just deal with the specifics of the plan. It deals specifically with Defense Department Pork, which is probably one of the top areas where our tax dollars go to line pockets of THIS administrations contacts. Maybe if it was tougher to grab for money, we wouldn't have all those tag alongs by special interests.
-------
A simple  but difficult solution
Recalling the nature of pork, that it is of an unknown quality intended for a specific recipient of unknown worthiness, the solution is to impose due diligence on the process. In other  words, each congressional earmark for additional spending in  the defense budget should be the subject of the following:
1. An estimate of the cost  from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The estimate should  include both the first year and the next five. An objective assessment (i.e., not one from the contractor or other advocates)  of the cost, including whether there is a camel attached to that  nose under the tent, is needed.
2. An evaluation by the Government  Accountability Office (GAO), or another reputable evaluation  entity with no contract relationship with any defense program,  on the effectiveness and appropriateness of the proposed spending.
3. A written statement on the  desirability of the earmark from the manager in DOD, whether  civilian or military, who would oversee implementation of the  project. The intent of this requirement is to put on the public  record DOD program managers who today circumvent the authority  of the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Office of Management  and Budget, and the White House by quietly agreeing to more money  for their projects, or to start new projects, without authorization  from their own hierarchy. [6]
4. Detailed explanation in  committee reports and conference reports of the nature of each  earmark, its short and long term costs, and its worth as identified  by GAO and CBO, together with the identity of any member of Congress  seeking the earmark.
5. A requirement that any earmark  that makes it through this process can only be awarded to a contractor  after complete and open nation-wide contract competition.
Some, probably many, in Congress  will oppose these suggestions; clearly they would subvert the  intent of many members to steer government spending toward selected  interests for purposes that may or may not advance national security.  However, were there to be in Congress, especially the Senate,  members who seek genuine reform, there are tools at their disposal  to help them impose their will. Senate rules have been specifically  designed to assist them in this regard; all that is needed is  the will to do so.
It would likely not be a pretty fight, but it would definitely  be worth watching. And it would help the country separate the  real reformers from the rest.
Winslow T. Wheeler is the Director of the Straus Military  Reform Project at the Center for Defense Information. He spent  31 years working for US Senators from both parties and the Government Accountability Office. He contributed an essay on the  defense budget to CounterPunch's new book: Dime's  Worth of Difference. Wheeler's  new book, "The  Wastrels of Defense: How Congress Sabotages U.S. Security,"  is published by the Naval Institute Press.