Utah is No. 18 among U.S. states in "pork barrel" spending in the 2006 federal budget, a move upward from last year's rankings, according to an annual report by Citizens Against Government Waste.

The watchdog group released its 16th annual "Congressional Pig Book" Wednesday, which includes Utah's statistics -- almost $97.6 million in what the group calls wasteful spending, for a per capita pork spending amount of $39.51.

For the uninitiated, "pork" means homestate and home district projects specially set aside in congressional spending measures, chiefly the 11 annual appropriations bills.

Utah ranked 24th in last year's survey. Alaska has the highest "pork per capita" amount -- $489.87, for a total of $325 million -- and also led the rankings last year.

The group's report has been lauded; U.S. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., once said that "Americans everywhere should thank Citizens Against Government Waste for its tireless efforts."

The group has also been called "a bunch of psychopaths" and "peckerwoods" by Sens. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, and Robert Byrd, D-W.Va., respectively.

The report details several expenditures in Utah that are identified as wasteful, and Sen. Robert Bennett, R-Utah -- a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee -- is singled out for criticism.

"Most of these projects are added at the behest of members of the appropriations committee," said CAGW spokesman Tom Finnigan. "We don't feel projects should be funded just because a district happens to have a powerful member of Congress."

Bennett said through a spokesperson that the group is off base.

"I'm sorry someone's led them astray in their analysis," he said, "and failed to provide them with complete information about these worthwhile Utah projects."

The largest of those projects include $5 million for the Utah Conservation Initiative; $3 million for the Washington Fields Project; $1 million for a competency-based distance education initiative at Western Governors University; $4 million for the Utah Public Lands Artifact Preservation Act; and $1.5 million for the Bonneville Shoreline Trail.

In criticizing the projects, Bennett said, including a new Museum of Natural History at the University of Utah, "CAGW demonstrates that it's missed it again.

"For example, without a new museum at the U, ancient artifacts found on federal land will continue to deteriorate in the closets and filing cabinets where they're currently housed," he said. "CAGW is ignoring the tremendous cost to the government which would result in failing to protect these valuable historic items."

Other items on the criticized list of projects include areas identified by state leaders as priorities for economic development, such as $900,000 for botanical research and $545,000 for advanced computing research and education. Also mentioned is a $500,000 allotment toward a wastewater treatment plant in Eagle Mountain.

Finnigan acknowledged that some projects sound like good work and that overall pork spending, at $29 billion, represents at most about 4 percent of discretionary federal spending.

But, he added, "pork has a cultural effect on the rest of Congress" in that it can make it seem acceptable to exceed budget limits and accrue debt. The impact of pork also goes beyond the amount of wasteful spending, he said.

He used the passage of the Medicaid prescription drug benefit -- a controversial and tremendously expensive measure -- in 2003 as an example.

"A lot of members who were hesitant to vote for that did so because they were promised pork in their own districts," Finnigan said.

The 2006 budget includes 9,963 projects identified as pork, a 29 percent decrease from the previous year. The dollar amount of those projects, however, increased 6.2 percent over 2005.

To be considered pork by CAGW, an appropriation must meet at least one of the following requirements:

* Requested by only one chamber of Congress

* Not specifically authorized

* Not competitively awarded

* Not requested by the President

* Greatly exceeds the President's budget request or the previous year's funding

* Not the subject of congressional hearings

* Serves only a local or special interest

This story appeared in The Daily Herald on page C1.