WASHINGTON — Since forming in 1994, the Blue Dog Coalition, a group of House Democrats who call themselves fiscal conservatives, has argued for trimming federal spending. Now, with the Iraq supplemental-spending bill in limbo, its members find themselves defending legislation President Bush and Republican members of Congress have characterized as fiscally irresponsible.

At issue is HR1591, which provides emergency funding for government operations for the current fiscal year. The bulk of spending, in both the House and Senate versions of the bill, would go to fund military operations in Iraq...

It also includes spending on what opponents consider pork — programs without a broad national benefit...

Since the invasion of Iraq in 2003, Congress has passed supplemental-spending bills to add funding for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and for Gulf Coast recovery programs...

Each of these bills, when signed into law by President Bush, contained spending for programs unrelated to the wars or rebuilding after Hurricane Katrina...

Supplemental-spending bills “are completely at odds with fiscal discipline,” said Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Government, a Washington advocacy group. “It opens up more opportunities to abuse the process.”

Still, MacGuineas said, the direction of the war in Iraq will drive the debate.

“The supplemental will live or die based on policies having to do with Iraq, not on pork.”

For the complete article, please visit the Arkansas Democrat Gazette website.