Today in the L.A. Times, there’s a great story called “Lawmakers try to save their earmarks” which talked about members of both parties going behind the scenes to lobby agencies for projects that were scrapped with the old GOP spending bill.

Although many candidates ran on the platform of being against the pork, the L.A. Times, with the help of a Freedom of Information Act requests, found out they sure wanted them after all probably for nothing more than a mention in the local newspaper or on the 10:00 p.m. newscast.

According to the L.A. Times story, it seems Montana’s junior Senator, Jon Tester, D-Mont., has been out there trying to recover some of that tasty pork that was requested by his predecessor.

The story kind of reminds me of that video with the rats in a Taco Bell scurrying around for crumbs.

Back in 2006, many democrats, like Jon Tester here in Montana, ran their races on fiscal discipline. They came out against earmarks and pork. Tester even made the mistake at one time saying “I don’t support earmarks, period.” He changed his tune later when someone explained what earmarks were to him.

Harry Reid promised to get Tester on the Appropriations Committee as soon as possible so he could continue to bring home the pork, like Conrad Burns did. Tester was not placed on the Appropriations Committee for the 110th Congress.

We’re still in the war, too, if you’re keeping track of broken promises.

The democrats took over the House and Senate partly because of their stance to reign in spending and their rage against earmarks. Their plan worked.

Although it’s early in the 110th Congress, have the Democrats done any better? No. Will the appropriations bills be done by October 1 as they promised? No. Will there be fewer earmarks? I doubt it (probably less in Montana).

The funny part of this whole issue is the voters actually thought the democrats would change this process, but it appears this democratic-controlled congress also has a big appetite for pork. Maybe bigger?