Why’d Goldman Get an Earmark?

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Here’s a nominee for one of the 111th Congress’ most dubious earmarks: $3 million to subsidize a mining concern owned primarily by Goldman Sachs, recipient of a $10 billion bailout (since repaid), and two hedge funds. Politico reports that the measure was slipped into the House defense appropriations bill by Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.), the top Republican on the House appropriations committee who’s regularly featured on Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics’ annual list of the most corrupt members of Congress. How’d he earn a spot on the list? For allegedly trading earmarks for campaign contributions—a matter for which he’s presently under federal investigation.

Lewis and his supporters say this particular earmark is a matter of national security. The mining project in question, run by a company called Molycorp Minerals, is harvesting rare elements that are an ingredient in the magnets used in precision-guided missiles and smart bombs. (Among Lewis’ top contributors are defense and aerospace firms that produce such munitions.) China, as Politico notes, is the world’s primary producer of these hard-to-come-by minerals, but the country has threatened to stop exports, prompting a search for other sources.

Even so, the question remains: Why use taxpayer money to aid a project that Goldman, Pegasus Partners, and Resource Capital Funds invested in with the clear expectation of turning a profit? Politico reports:

“It’s probably good business, and we probably don’t need to subsidize it,” said Ryan Alexander, president of the nonpartisan Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Moreover, Alexander said, if getting the elements from the mine is really a national security issue, then the funding request would have come through the Department of Defense — and not through a lawmaker’s earmark.

“If this is critical to national security, and the private equity firms that own Molycorp can’t find another $3 million to meet the needs of the Mountain Pass mine, there still is no excuse for this being an earmark,” Alexander said. “DOD can request programmatic funding so those funds are weighed against other security priorities rather than being singled out by one member of the House Appropriations Committee.”

The earmark isn’t a done deal yet. It still has to survive the conference process to reconcile the House and Senate versions of the bill, a process expected to begin later this month. Stay tuned.

Follow Daniel Schulman on Twitter.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate