WASHINGTON, D.C. — All congressional “pork barrel” spending would stop while a special panel holds hearings and makes recommendations for reform under a proposal put forward Thursday by Montana Rep. Denny Rehberg and other Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee.

Several of the sponsors said members of Congress should be able to continue the practice called earmarking — requesting spending for specific home-district projects — but that the process must be reformed to become honest and ethical. They said the American public does not trust Congress largely because of so much negative publicity about pork.

The proposal would create a bipartisan committee to study the problem and report back recommendations within six months. Congress would not be allowed to consider earmarks until the panel files a report.

At a press conference, Rehberg held up several newspapers with negative headlines on earmarks and pork. He said he hoped the GOP leadership put him on the Appropriations Committee as a reformer who would work to rein in spending and change the process.

“Reform is very difficult,” he said in an interview. “This is a huge deal.”

Rehberg asked for federal funding for 250 projects worth about $816.9 million for fiscal year 2008.

Noting that many of those projects were winnowed out during the appropriations process, Rehberg said he still would continue to fight for money for Montana projects.

“I work within the system,” Rehberg said. “What I’m saying is there could be a better way that would limit the spending.”

Members of Congress should still be allowed to request funding for projects, but there must be a process of prioritization, he said.

“I’m not trying to have it both ways,” Rehberg said. “Congress has to recognize there is a spending problem.”

His priorities would be on projects that cross county or state lines or those in rural areas, such as bringing telecommunications and highways to areas that couldn’t afford them on their own, he said.

Rehberg particularly wants the committee to examine whether new categories for earmarks should be established to distinguish between projects of national, military or local scope.

The St. Mary’s Diversion and other water projects would rank on a national level, he said, while housing projects at Malmstrom Air Force Base would rank as military projects.

Rehberg asked whether the taxpayers of Georgia or another state should have to pay for a swimming pool for a town in Montana.

The people of Montana put a premium on economy and efficiency in government and paying no more taxes than absolutely necessary, Rehberg said.

If they solely cared about federal dollars for projects in the state, former Sen. Conrad Burns would not have lost his bid for re-election, he said.

Rehberg said the new committee would have to examine the White House’s role in the budget process.

The administration requests funds for specific projects when it submits its annual budget request to Congress.

Rehberg was “particularly offended” by President Bush’s comment when he vetoed a recent appropriations bill that the measure had too many earmarks despite Bush having “set out clear goals for the Congress to reform the earmarking process.”

“He forgot to include himself in that process,” Rehberg said.

There are problems with the entire budgetary process, Rehberg added.

He noted that the administration has simply left out of its annual budgets some Montana water projects that have already been approved by Congress and signed into law by the president. Congress shouldn’t allow that to happen, he said.

The resolution would create a Joint Select Committee on Earmark Reform composed of 16 members of Congress, evenly split between the House and Senate and the two parties.

The panel would make a full study of earmarks in authorization, appropriation, and tax and tariff measures, and it would look at both Congress and the administration.

The committee would report back its findings within six months and Congress would not be able to consider any earmarks during that time.

The committee will hold at least five public hearings on the issue.

Democrats did increase the disclosure requirements for earmark spending when they took control of Congress in January.

Citizens Against Government Waste found that Democrats have cut down the dollar amount of earmarks in some recent appropriations bills by about one-third from 2006 levels, when the GOP controlled Congress. But the Republican sponsors said the reforms did not go far enough.

The panel could also consider whether to prohibit earmarks from being placed in bills after the committee stage, whether to allow earmarks to be removed at any stage of the legislative process and whether earmarks should be allowed in the administration’s annual budget submissions.

GOP Reps. Jack Kingston of Georgia, Zach Wamp of Tennessee and Frank Wolf of Virginia, all ranking members on Appropriations subcommittees, joined together to lead the effort. They now have 72 Republican co-sponsors for the resolution, they said.

While emphasizing that earmarking is a bipartisan problem, the Republican sponsors said they have not yet talked with any Democrats about their effort. They said it was important to get their own party on the same page first before reaching out to others.

Some said they would begin talking with Democrats now; others said they thought the political pressure on the hot topic alone would be enough to spur Democrats to support the measure.

“If this is not a bipartisan effort it will not happen,” Rehberg said.