This morning the Huffington Post is reporting that Republican Vice Presidential nominee Paul Ryan passed only two bills in his years in the House of Representatives.

…in December 2008, with legislation to change the way arrows (as in bows and arrows) are hit with an excise tax. Specifically, his bill amended the Internal Revenue Code to impose a 39-cent tax per arrow shaft, instead of a 12.4 percent tax on the sales price. The bill also “includes points suitable for use with arrows in the 11 percent excise tax on arrow parts and accessories.”

The reporter for the Post sums up Ryan’s presumed motivation:

It appears Ryan had a personal interest in passing the arrow tax bill: He is an accomplished bowhunter. Jay McAninch, president of the Archery Trade Association, earlier this year praised Ryan on his blog for pushing that bill through.

What Ryan accomplished is known as a tax earmark. It carves out a special exemption in the tax code to benefit a particular industry. Often these tax earmarks benefit an industry in a member’s district or state.

Matthews Solocam is an archery business located in Sparta, Wisconsin. Sparta is not in Ryan’s district, but it is in his home state, and in the district of fellow Republican Tom Petri.

While Ryan may save a few pennies on his arrow purchases, I suspect that Matthews (and other American arrow manufacturers) gained a great deal more. This tax earmark will “keep on giving” because as the price of arrows increases the tax on arrows will now remain constant.

Tax earmarks are included in the Republican earmark moratorium put in place at the beginning of this Congress. Republicans are typically more comfortable with tax earmarks. They are more comfortable not taking people’s money than spending it. But tax earmarks are more expensive than appropriations earmarks in that they reduce overall revenue on a continuing basis.

Ryan’s tax earmark was passed well before the moratorium went into place, but did occur while Republicans were pummeling Democrats over appropriations earmarks (while still requesting them).

I am not suggesting there was anything illegal with Ryan’s earmark. I am suggesting that there is something questionable about it when one is claiming to have the best fiscal interests of the country in mind.