HUD Took ZERO Deductions From HUD Congressional Earmarks; Other Agencies Took $500M (3%).

Large OMB report HERE shows deductions taken by Federal agencies from FY 2008 earmarked funds.

Related NY Times story is HERE.

Some agency deductions were to pay for agencies administrative costs, some were because earmarked projects were "ineligible"--AKA ILLEGAL. DOT had $8.1 Million of these "ineligible" projects (see page 23).

On page 3, OBM lists HUD as one of several agencies which did not deduct ANYTHING from earmarked funds--meaning ALL $$ were to be disbursed to grantees. In FY 2008 there were 777/$205 Million in HUD earmarks; a listing is HERE.

Despite the modest 3% agency deductions (including millions for ineligible/illegal projects) Senator Nelson self righteously claims in the NY Times story:

"“This is an issue of transparency,” Mr. Nelson said. “Some of these agencies are clearly taking money without any authority, and they should not have these off-budget expense accounts."

[Perhaps he was peeved that Agriculture/Rural Development deducted 6% /$20.1 Million of their earmarked $$?].

Thankfully, the NY Times story adds a bit more context:

"Many federal agencies can cite laws or rules that they say grant them the authority to take part of the earmarked money. But the laws and rules do not always specify the percentage that can be withheld, and some agencies say there is no law outlining how much they can take. As a result, many agencies have developed their own policies."