What a difference a year makes, or doesn't.

Following months of bickering, Congress this week took what should have been 11 separate bills and produced a mammoth 2,500 page omnibus spending package, which contains some 9,000 earmarks for lawmakers' pet projects. If the Defense spending bill, which was approved earlier, were included, earmarks for in the 2008 budget would exceed 11,000.

In 2006, Democrats ran against what they called a culture of corruption among Republicans in Congress and when they regained control of Congress this year, they vowed to slash earmark spending and increase transparency in the budget process.

While earmark spending for 2008 is below the record levels set by Republicans in 2005, it is still estimated at over $16 billion.

Democrats claim that earmark spending for 2008 has been cut by 43 percent and amounts to only $9 billion. But watchdog groups and the federal Office of Management and Budget say that earmarks in the 2008 spending plan are closer to $16 billion, and that is only 13 percent below the 2005 peak.

We've seen the lists before, including the infamous "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska that put a spotlight on earmark spending. In 2008, the earmark list includes $475,000 for beaver management in Mississippi, $350,000 to synchronize traffic signals in Baton Rouge, $700,000 for a bike trail in Minnesota, $200,000 for a hunting and fishing museum in Pennsylvania and $1 million for a river walk in Massachusetts. It reportedly took 700 spreadsheets attached to the 2008 budget to list all the earmarks.

Budget watchers also note that the 2008 budget employs many gimmicks to make it look more responsible than it is, such as classifying some major spending projects as "emergency" spending, which is not added to the "baseline"budget. Dozens of earmarks also were added to the budget document at the very last minute, using a technique called "air-dropping."

Hurriedly throwing together a spending plan that runs over 2,500 pages and contains $16 billion in earmark spending, and then giving lawmakers less than 24 hours to read and digest the document is scandalous. It's also, sadly, standard operating procedure.

The 2008 budget mess is no worse than in prior years. Except, this time, Democrats had promised something else.

Funding for lawmakers' pet projects known as earmarks are not all bad. A fair percentage of them might be justifiable, but with 9,000 special requests buried in the $516 billion spending plan, that works out to 20 earmarks for each member of Congress. And that's just irresponsible spending of other people's money.

Some earmarks look like lawmakers "bringing home the bacon"to help their district or state, and improve their chances of re-election. Others can be traced to campaign donations, and the "pay-to-play" culture in Congress.

Most members of Congress pushing earmarks are co-conspirators. Most lawmakers know that most of their own requests would not survive public scrutiny, so they join the feeding frenzy and slip them quietly into the massive budget document with the understanding that their pet spending requests won't be challenged so long as they don't challenge those submitted by others.

All the talk about earmark reform was mostly that, just talk. And all the promises about more transparency are betrayed by the gimmickry designed to hide earmarks and excessive spending.

In other words, it's business as usual in Washington.