Political particularism

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

In political science, political particularism is the ability of policymakers to further their careers by catering to narrow interests rather than to broader national platforms.[1]

Political science

In a

ethnic and religious identity and the interests of the communities defined by these bonds. This stands in contrast with the ideas and values of political pluralism, with its emphasis on universal rights, separation of religion and the government, and an ethic of ethnic and religious tolerance.[citation needed
]

Parliamentary practice

When an elected assembly, which is supposed to express collective interests, directs funds to a specific recipient (with

universal rights and therefore the rights of minorities or any other kind of "other
".

It is in direct opposition to the concept of universality of the law and to the trustee model of representation. The practice in the following countries is often called pork barrel or earmark or patronage, but those words do not always imply corrupt or undesirable conduct.

Australia

"Pork barrel" is frequently used in reference to

Australian politics,[2][3][4] in circumstances where marginal seats might be seen as receiving more funding than safe seats or when funding for projects is heavily directed toward the party-held seats, with the opposition receiving little to no such funding. The term's widespread appearance in news media has led to it being commonly used in Australian English as a verb, such as in "pork barrelling".[5] The sports rorts affair (2020) perpetrated by Senator Bridget McKenzie
is a classic example of pork barrelling in Australian politics.

Central and Eastern Europe

Romanians speak of pomeni electorale (literally, "electoral alms"), while the Polish kiełbasa wyborcza means literally "election sausage". In Serbian, podela kolača ("cutting the cake") refers to post-electoral distribution of state-funded positions for the loyal members of the winning party. The Czech předvolební guláš ("pre-election goulash") has a similar meaning, referring to free dishes of goulash served to potential voters during election campaign meetings targeted at lower social classes; metaphorically, it stands for any populistic political decisions that are taken before the elections with the aim of obtaining more votes. The process of diverting budget funds in favor of a project in a particular constituency is called porcování medvěda ("portioning of the bear") in Czech usage.[6]

German-speaking countries

The German language differentiates between campaign goodies (Wahlgeschenke, literally "election gifts") to occur around election dates, and parish-pump politics (Kirchturmpolitik, literally "steeple politics") for concentrating funding and reliefs to the home constituency of a politician. While the former is a technical term (almost neutral or only slightly derogatory) the latter is always derogatory and its beneficial scope is not wider than the area within which the politician's village church steeple can be seen. In Switzerland the wording of provincial thinking (Kantönligeist, literally "cantonal mind") may cover these actions as well and it is understood as a synonym in Germany and Austria.

India

In India, the term "pork barrel politics" has been employed to depict the pattern of distribution of discretionary grants by the national government (see for example Biswas et al. 2010;[7] Rodden and Wilkinson 2004).[8]

Ireland

The term parish pump politics is more commonly used in Ireland although Independent TD

Minister for Transport, Tourism and Sport in the 32nd Dáil in 2016, he prioritised the reopening of a police station in his own constituency, which was eventually delivered on the eve of the election of new Taoiseach Leo Varadkar in June 2017.[10]

Italy

Apart from the law not respecting the duty of generality (legge provvedimento), political particularism in Italy is expressed properly in so-called legge mancia.[11]

Enacted in 2004 with the purpose of financing small public works of local authorities, it creates a public fund whose use is subject to previous advice from Appropriation Committees of the Chamber and Senate. Soon this system revealed a very different nature: the money from the "tip law" went to finance practically everything (from sports clubs to cultural associations to parishes). In 2008, after the failed suppression, the law resurfaced when parliamentarians of the Budget Commission of the Chamber presented a resolution that "commits the government" to distribute 103 million euros to 588 initiatives by decree;[12] the advice was given by two parliamentary Committees up to 2010, in order to distribute public money from the fund for "urgent interventions aimed at socio-economic rebalancing and the development of the territory and the promotion of sporting, cultural and social activities".[13]

Afterwards, the fund was closed, even if periodically anti-parliamentarian polemics cry about its restoration under other guise.[14] In May 2016, Minister Pier Carlo Padoan, presenting a budgetary reform bill, "emphasized the brake on the bad habit of inserting micro-sector or local regulations. The stop, explained the minister, is aimed at 'avoiding' that parliamentary work 'concentrates exclusively on particularistic norms', which respond to needs linked to individual situations and individuals."[15]

Nordic countries

Similar expressions, meaning "election meat", are used in Danish (valgflæsk), Swedish (valfläsk) and Norwegian (valgflesk), where they mean promises made before an election, often by a politician who has little intention of fulfilling them.[16]

The Finnish political jargon uses siltarumpupolitiikka ("culvert politics") in reference to national politicians concentrating on small local matters, such as construction of roads and other public works at politician's home municipality.

In Iceland, the term kjördæmapot refers to the practice of funneling public funds to key voting demographics in marginal constituencies.

Philippines

Luneta

In the Philippines, the term "pork barrel" is used to mean funds allocated to the members of the Philippine House of Representatives and the Philippine Senate to spend as they see fit without going through the normal budgetary process or through the executive branch. It can be used for both "hard" projects, such as buildings and roads, and "soft" projects, such as scholarships and medical expenses. The first pork barrel fund was introduced in 1922 with the passage of the first Public Works Act (Act No 3044). This pork barrel system was technically stopped by President Ferdinand Marcos during his dictatorship by abolishing Congress. It was reintroduced to the system after the restoration of the Congress in 1987. The program has had different names over the years, including the Countryside Development Fund, Congressional Initiative Fund, and currently the Priority Development Assistance Fund.[citation needed] Since 2006, the PDAF was 70.0 M for each Representative and ₱200.0 M for each Senator.

During the presidency of

non-profit corporations as well as the government's Commission on Audit.[18]

In August 2013, outrage over the ₱10 billion

Filipino diaspora around the world.[20]

Petitioners have challenged the constitutionality of the PDAF before the high court following reports of its widespread and systematic misuse by some members of Congress in cahoots with private individuals. Three incumbent senators and several former members of the House of Representatives have been named respondents in a plunder complaint filed with the Office of the Ombudsman in connection with the alleged ₱10 billion pork barrel scam. Public outrage over the anomaly has resulted in the largest protest gathering under the three-year-old Aquino administration.[21]

On November 19, 2013, the Supreme Court declared the controversial Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF), or more commonly known as the pork barrel, as unconstitutional. In a briefing, the high court declared the PDAF Article in 2013 General Approriations Act and all similar provisions on the pork barrel system as illegal because it "allowed legislators to wield, in varying gradiations, non-oversight, post-enactment authority in vital areas of budget executions (thus violating) the principle of separation of powers".[21]

Spain

The

better source needed] the decision to construct the line to Seville was only taken in 1986 and construction was rushed, so that the line would be ready for the Seville Expo '92
.

South Africa

In 2010, the National Treasury of the Republic of South Africa explored earmarking,[26] along with recycling and tax shifting, as ways of using carbon tax revenues. While the Treasury did "not support full earmarking of revenues generated from environmental taxes" they were considering "partial 'on-budget' earmarking"[verification needed] of some revenue. At that time concerns were raised that special interest groups could constrain government and control public resources through earmarking.[26]: 8 

United Kingdom

The term "pork barrel" is rarely used in British English, although similar terms exist: election sweetener, tax sweetener, or just sweetener, which refers to the practice of a Chancellor of the Exchequer leaving room in their fiscal programme to announce a big tax cut or spending boost in the budget immediately prior to an election, usually targeting a key voting demographic (such as the elderly) or benefitting marginal constituencies.[27]

The term "pork barrel" was, however, used in August 2013 by the

Ben Houchen was accused of pork barrel politics in the Financial Times.[32]

United States

In the United States, the term earmark is used in relation with the congressional allocation process.[33]: 36 [34][35]

Discretionary spending, which is set by the

entitlement programs in the federal budget.[36]

Pork-barrel projects, which differ from earmarks, are added to the federal budget mainly by members of the appropriation committees of United States Congress.

See also

References

  1. SSRN 220452. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help
    )
  2. ^ Taylor, Lenore (3 June 2008). "The Australian: PM rolls out his own pork barrel". The Australian. News Corp Australia. Archived from the original on 5 June 2008. Retrieved 31 August 2013.
  3. ^ Pearlman, Jonathan; Coorey, Phillip (16 November 2007). "Vaile in last-ditch pork barrel". The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved 31 August 2013.
  4. ^ Link, Madeline (2020-05-25). "'Call me Pork-Barilaro': deputy premier defends regional arts grants". The Northern Daily Leader. Retrieved 2021-07-09.
  5. ^ Van Onselen, Peter (1 July 2021). "Leaders won't admit they have a pork barrelling problem". The Australian. News Corp Australia. Retrieved 3 July 2021.
  6. ^ "Porcování medvěda zvítězilo nad ideály". Euro.cz. Archived from the original on 28 December 2021. Retrieved 14 August 2010.
  7. S2CID 59387644
    .
  8. ^ Rodden and S. Wilkinson, 2005. The Shifting Political Economy of Redistribution in the Indian Federation
  9. ^ Kelly, Fiach (February 25, 2016). "Independents not interested in 'pork barrel' politics, says Shane Ross". The Irish Times.
  10. ^ "Stepaside Garda station to re-open, fulfilling key Shane Ross demand". Irish Times.
  11. ^ Legge mancia, Treccani on line, ad vocem (transl.: law-tip). For its use in official act, see Chamber of deputies, XVI Legislatura, Resoconto stenografico dell'Assemblea, Seduta n. 379 di mercoledì 6 ottobre 2010, p. 49.
  12. ^ "Dalle fogne ai prodotti tipici Riesumata la "legge mancia"".
  13. ^ "La casta si regala 150 milioni con la Legge mancia". 21 November 2012.
  14. ^ "LA LEGGE MANCIA E' MORTA MA I SUOI FONDI SONO VIVI – Professione Parlamento". 9 February 2017.
  15. ^ "Padoan: riforma del bilancio per fermare «leggi mancia»", Il Sole 24 ore, 26 May 2016.
  16. ^ "Valfläsk". Nationalencyklopedin, NE Nationalencyklopedin AB.
  17. ^ Cabacungan, Gil (22 August 2013). "Arroyo chose who, how much PDAF to give". The Inquirer. Retrieved 8 September 2013.
  18. ^ Cabacungan, Gil C. (22 August 2013). "Arroyo chose who, how much PDAF to give". The Inquirer. Retrieved 2016-04-11.
  19. ^ "PDAF wins elections, favors political parties". Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. Retrieved 2016-04-11.
  20. ^ Francisco, Rosemarie (26 August 2013). "Tens of thousands of Filipinos protest "pork barrel" funds". Reuters.com. Retrieved 28 August 2013.
  21. ^
    GMA News
    .
  22. ^ Iglesias, Natalia (18 November 2007). "Maragall revela que acordó con González que el AVE llegara primero a Sevilla". El País.
  23. ^ "Solo 11 de 179 rutas de tren en España cubren gastos operativos". La Preferente.
  24. ^ http://www.ferropedia.es/wiki/LAV_Madrid_-_Sevilla#Velocidades_autorizadas
  25. ^ "LAV Madrid - Zaragoza - Barcelona - Ferropedia". Archived from the original on 2014-08-19. Retrieved 2021-12-28.
  26. ^ a b "Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions: The Carbon Tax Option" (PDF), National Treasury Republic of South Africa, p. 75, December 2010, retrieved January 4, 2017
  27. ^ Thornton, Philip (24 February 2005). "Brown warned on pre-election tax 'sweeteners'". The Independent. Retrieved 31 August 2013.
  28. ^ "Treasury minister's role in road funding 'in danger of looking like pork barrel politics' (blog)". bettertransport.org.uk. Campaign for Better Transport. 12 August 2013. Retrieved 31 August 2013.
  29. ^ McDonnell, John (2 February 2019). "McDonnell accuses PM of 'pork-barrel' politics with Brexit 'bribery'". Retrieved 2 February 2019.
  30. ^ Bounds, Andy; Smith, Alan (5 March 2021). "Levelling up Fund bias in favour of Tory seats 'pretty blatant'". Retrieved 6 March 2021.
  31. ^ "Pork Barrel Politics".
  32. ^ Payne, Sebastian (3 May 2021). "Tories' red wall shows no signs of crumbling on Teesside". Financial Times.
  33. ^ Karen L. Haas, ed. (January 6, 2015), "Rules of the House of Representatives" (PDF), Clerk of the House of Representatives, pp. 45 or 75, retrieved January 4, 2017
  34. ^ "Guidance to Agencies on Definition of Earmarks", Office of Management and Budget Executive Office of the President of the United States, November 12, 2010, archived from the original on April 1, 2010, retrieved January 4, 2017
  35. National Archives. {{cite book}}: |work= ignored (help
    )
  36. .

Further reading

  • Burke, Edmund. 1774 (1906). Speech to the electors of Bristol in The Works of the Right Honorable Edmund Burke. Vol. II. New York: Oxford University Press.

External links