John Baer: Sestak's tone-deaf when it comes to earmarks

JOE SESTAK readily admits he has trouble answering questions succinctly.

He says that much of what he's asked about is so complicated that he needs time to explain things. He also says this is a drawback in his profession and tells me that he works on it "constantly."

The Democratic congressman and Senate candidate should work a little harder to reconcile taking campaign contributions from those benefiting from federal "earmarks" (which direct money to be spent on specific projects) while claiming "a personal policy" against doing so.

The issue isn't complicated.

Sestak's campaign Web site (joesestak.com) says: "If an organization or individual has made a request for an appropriations project, and has made a contribution to [Sestak's] campaign, he returns that contribution."

But the Inky recently reported that Sestak took at least $119,650 from employees of companies in his district with "earmarks" from the congressman.

Sestak's Republican opponent, Pat Toomey, says Sestak violates his own ethics pledge and should return the money. So what's the deal?

In addressing this evident disconnect, Sestak and campaign aides say the "ethics pledge" is really an internal congressional-office policy. It applies only to senior executives. It applies only during "appropriations season," defined by spokesman Jonathon Dworkin as "early April to mid-June."

Here's what Sestak's congressional Web site says: "It is the Congressman's practice to decline campaign contributions from senior company officials during the appropriations period when the companies have requests before him. . . . admittedly imperfect, this practice is one step in the Congressman's broader effort to restore accountability and transparency to government."

("Restore?" Musta been living at sea.)

Monday, at a Pennsylvania Press Club luncheon in Harrisburg, Sestak said, "I kept my pledge," but he added, "it's hard to be perfect."

Indeed it is.

The campaign Web site clearly states that Joe keeps no dough from earmark recipients. The congressional Web site offers a narrow variant of that - so narrow as to be meaningless. Anybody can give, except in springtime.

So Sestak's "I'm-a-reformer" pitch on this issue is overstated.

Also, defining "appropriations season" as April to mid-June suggests that earmarks aren't offered or considered at any other time. Two Democratic congressional offices I contacted say the "season" runs January to August or September.