Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) last night received a sendoff befitting a 36-year titan of Capitol Hill. In the Capitol’s Statuary Hall, Congressional colleagues and national security leaders including Defense Secretary Robert Gates memorialized Murtha as one who wielded his clout with a strong arm. “A lot of members get here by running against this institution,” said Rep. Mike Doyle (D-PA). “Jack taught us to respect this institution.”

And respect he got. Murtha spent 21 years as either chairman or ranking member of the powerful House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, affording him a ringmaster’s control over our budget's largest spending bill. As overlord of billions of dollars in defense funding, he gave audience to countless people looking for a piece of the action and directed hundreds of millions of dollars in defense-related projects to his district. He was also the subject of several ethical inquiries: An investigation by the House Ethics Committee into his ties to a lobby firm that represented earmark recipients and donated to his reelection campaign found no overt wrongdoing (an FBI investigation is ongoing). However, the report noted that “there is a widespread perception among corporations and lobbyists that campaign contributions provide enhanced access to Members,” and appropriators are the most valued members of all.

Former House Appropriations Committee Chairman Clarence D. Long reportedly hung a sign in the committee hearing room that read, “Them that has the gold makes the rules.” Murtha embodied that concept, and his tenure provides a cautionary tale. Appropriators’ power is so great, and their responsibility to taxpayers so serious, we believe they require special rules to keep them from clutching the purse strings too tightly.

Committee term limits would go a long way toward preventing the kind of monarchy that Murtha was able to establish. House Republicans decided earlier this month to maintain the term limits they adopted in 1995, in part to counter the power of long-serving Democratic chairmen. Some lawmakers argue term limits could reduce chairmanships to prizes handed out for fundraising. That may be true for other committees. But the fact that lawmakers still fight to get on appropriations and spend years trying to claw their way to the chairmanships show why those committees are different. Appropriations “cardinals” have such direct influence over taxpayers’ money that allowing one person to dominate the position for decades reinforces the pay-to-play culture that earmarks have come to symbolize. 

The appropriations power principle was perhaps best articulated by another storied lawmaker who happened to die within days of Murtha. Rep. Charlie Wilson (D-TX) was known during his 24 years in the House for his flamboyant lifestyle, but his most enduring legacy was the millions in military aid he funneled to Afghan fighters via earmarks during their war with the Soviets in the 1980s. Wilson was appointed to the foreign operations appropriations subcommittee in 1976 through the efforts of special interests who knew he would repay them with funds, according to some accounts. He left that post and moved to the defense subcommittee in 1980. Why? “Anybody with any brain can figure out that if they can get on the defense subcommittee, that’s where they ought to be,” Wilson said, “because that’s where the money is.”