Serving constituents, for many members of Congress, means bringing big-time government projects into their home districts. Spending on these now exceeds $1 billion a month, most of it going to military projects the military itself did not request. PNS commentator Sanford Gottlieb is author of "Defense Addiction: Can America Kick the Habit?" published by Westview Press.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- If John McCain became president, could he make a dent in porkbarrel spending?

McCain has crusaded in the Senate and on the stump in Republican primaries against costly congressional pork. He has been especially outspoken about the devious way it is often channeled to the states and districts of powerful legislative leaders without public hearings or votes.

The Arizona Republican has called the process "a total corruption of democracy."

In the last four years, the Republican-run Congress has spent a total of $54 billion on porkbarrel projects -- 60 percent of it military pork -- according to Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), a private watchdog group.

Congress, says McCain, "has squandered billions each year on projects the military did not request and does not need."

CAGW defines as pork spending that falls into at least one of these categories: requested by only one chamber of Congress; not specifically authorized; not competitively awarded; not requested by the president or far beyond the president's request; not discussed at congressional hearings; serving only a local or special interest.

The record of Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott of Mississippi fits the pattern. Lott landed a $1.5 billion contract for a helicopter carrier for the Ingalls Shipyard in Pascagoula, where his father used to work. Down payment in the fiscal 2000 budget was $375 million. The Pentagon had not requested the carrier.

Lott also wangled $87 million in military construction projects, none requested by the Pentagon, for Mississippi in the latest defense appropriation.

CAGW president Tom Schatz calls Lott "totally unrepentant" about pork for Mississippi.

Ted Stevens of Alaska, chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, is another prominent practitioner. One of his many many home-state trophies, tucked into the defense appropriation bill, is a $15 million project for development of a supersonic business jet by Gulfstream Corp.

"Many of the greatest hawks on Pentagon spending, who insist on raising the military budget -- notably Trent Lott and Ted Stevens -- are using the military budget as a slush fund for home-state projects," says John Isaacs, president of the pro-arms control Council for a Livable World.

South Carolina has a big influence over defense spending thanks to its congressional delegation. In the Senate, Strom Thurmond remains senior member of the Armed Services Committee although he recently stepped down as chairman. Senator Fritz Hollings is a member of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee. Floyd Spence chairs the House Armed Services Committee, reinforced by two other South Carolinians.

It hardly seems a coincidence that $65 million in unrequested military projects for South Carolina found their way into the latest defense appropriation bill.

With a narrow Republican majority in the House, some Democrats are still able to leverage slices of pork back to their districts. House minority leader Dick Gephardt, for example, managed to locate $275 million to build five F-15 fighters in his St. Louis district. Again, the Defense Department did not request these aircraft.

In last year's budget agreement, the White House and Congress authorized the president to make $2.3 billion in budget cuts, just 0.38 percent of the federal budget. Clinton is expected to cut 5 percent of Trent Lott's favorite shipyard contract and make other minor nicks in congressional pork.

The question is: In the face of Congress members' constant drive to direct federal contracts and jobs to their home constituents, could a President McCain make a difference? It would take a tough chief executive, willing to do three things: First, sell the country on his priorities. Second, expose porkbarrel spending as a raid on the treasury. Third, do battle with congressional leaders to remove pork from the budget.

Short of that, taxpayers beware.