The spending of a draft law that deletes billions for local projects, where Congress waives to Trump

A Museum in Connecticut was planning to build the planet and the observatory. Tennessee boys and girls’ clubs were appointed to expand their counseling programs. A college in Georgia wanted to turn part of its library into a commercial incubator, and at least twenty airports across the United States were on the right path to renew their limbs and corridors.

Those projects and dozens of others who were in a line to receive federal funding this year witnessed that money evaporated this week when the Republicans gathered about the extension of Stopgap government to avoid closing in the middle of the night tonight. This measure, which was approved on Tuesday and awaiting a vote in the Senate, largely maintains government spending at the current levels.

This means that it does not include the allocations requested by members of Congress for individual projects in their regions and states. Completely, the total of projects reached about $ 13 billion, according to Congress aides, a decrease in a bucket when it comes to federal spending.

Their neglect is another way that Congress abandoned its strength of the portfolio – in this case, its members’ ability to direct federal funds to the projects that help its voters – at the beginning of President Trump’s second term.

The legislators at both parties expressed its regret for the disappearance of allocations, leaving a set of improvements and community programs in Lurch.

“I am sorry for everyone who did not get their projects,” said actor Tom Cole, the Republic of Oklahoma, who heads the Credit Committee, said his colleagues in the House of Representatives Chamber on Tuesday.

Mr. Cole, who was scheduled to boycott 107.7 million dollars compared to 15 projects, said, a decrease of 144.7 million dollars he requested. “I support them.”

Republican decision in Congress comes to enter the draft spending law without allocations because they have increasingly resulted in their Trump’s institutional authority.

The allocations – now known as “financing community projects” in the House of Representatives and “spending guided by Congress” in the Senate – are among the most obvious ways that Congress members can confirm their authority to spend, by directing federal agencies to spend money on specific projects in their states and regions.

These programs, which cover a wide spectrum, directly benefit voters and provide the legislators with something tangible to martyrdom as evidence that they are getting results for their components.

In spending bills approved by the credits committees in the House of Representatives and the elderly this year, the legislators directed the money towards community awareness efforts in the clubs of boys and girls or major guidance programs. They directed them towards university research projects, police centers, and response to emergency situations, work training programs and community centers. They requested federal funds to strengthen dozens of airport projects, highways and transit.

But Republicans who control Congress did not take any of these laws and failed to reach a funding agreement with Democrats before the deadline on Friday to maintain the flow of government funds. This has left them to pushing a temporary correction that leaves the allocations – and almost any other change in current spending.

Democratic lawmakers indicated that there is no allocation as one of the many problems they saw with a spending that they greatly opposed.

“These projects are really important to societies,” said actor Robert Garcia from California, whose boycott had received $ 13.4 million in 14 projects. He said that the Republicans were briefly not to see their financing.

“Some Republicans really love these projects,” said Mr. Garcia. “I think it is a shame that none of them stands for their societies, none of them says anything about these projects.”

The allocations have a controversial modern history. For decades, they were transferred to draft laws to give legislators an incentive to conduct difficult voices politically in exchange for being able to direct federal funds to the homeland.

But critics have mocked allocations such as pork or trivial magnets. A series of scandals in the early first decade of the twentieth century and the prominent projects that were considered to spend Boondoggles-such as “Bridge anywhere” in Alaska and the tea jug museum that was now closed in western North Carolina-only isolated this perception.

When the anti -Congressing tea party invaded, the legislators placed a cessation of its allocation in 2011. But they returned after 10 years, with more strict and more transparent bases, in an attempt to reduce party networks and encourage Congress members to promote spending legislation.

The allocations are now 1 percent of the total estimated spending. The legislators must submit a public list with their requests and confirm that they are not or their direct family members who have any financial interest in any of them.

Projects still have critics. Many conservative legislators proudly abstain from the allocation process, citing them as evidence of government waste. Others raise concerns about the possibility of corruption or the scope of covered projects. Even the legislators who requested financing for projects mocked this practice.

Actor Tim Porschet, a Republican who was in a queue to secure $ 7.5 million in allocations for his area in East Tennessee, said that they support their neglect as a necessary way to curb government spending.

“I hope that no person will be hurt,” said Mr. Porschet, who requested money for the guidance program and a law enforcement team that fights the exploitation of children and their projects in universities. “But we are at the age of 36 trillion dollars, and we will have to tighten our belt.”

The actor Don Bacon, from Nebraska, a Republican, has recognized the victory of 10 million dollars to help upgrade the corridors at Omaha Airport, that some of his voters are likely to disappoint. But he stood beside his support to measure spending.

He said about the allocations: “I preferred to get it.” “But I prefer not to be closed, right?”

Mr. Bacon received $ 45.6 million for projects in his area of ​​spending bills at home. But he said he hoped for the best of next year.

“We will re -offer most of these in the next session,” he said.

Maya C Millerand Ilana Marcos and Jeremy Singer The reports contributed.