Like epitaphs, earmarks remain as testaments even after their sponsors pass. Like former Rep. Tom Allen, for example, who still has earmarks pending within an omnibus spending bill expected to earn approval by the U.S. House of Representatives this week.

That’s because the bill is a pre-election holdover. Allen is one of many ex-representatives with earmarks in the bill, of which there are 8,570 for $7.7 billion, according to a government waste watchdog, the Taxpayers for Common Sense.

Allen’s earmarks are not controversial: $173,000 for blueberry research, for example. Sen. Olympia Snowe, Sen. Susan Collins and Rep. Mike Michaud are all co-sponsors. It’s the practice that is the problem.

The presidential campaign brought concern about earmarks into focus. For such a small part of federal spending, they are controversial because the chance for waste – the proverbial pork – is great due to the veiled nature of the practice.

Transparency is an absolute necessity for earmarks, to ensure the expenditure is justified. It seems expiration is necessary as well, when the earmarks’ sponsors no longer serve in Congress.

This would strike the right balance and make earmarks what they really are: the individual requests of sitting legislators, not standing funding requests that transcend elections.

Earmarks that expire could make their sponsors accountable among their constituents, not just their congressional colleagues. If continued service is a condition for earmark approval, candidates for re-election would be forced to justify them.

Expirations would also cleanse the earmark ranks. The loss of a sponsor wouldn’t preclude a successor from adopting an orphan earmark, but only if they re-justify its existence. There’s no grandfathering or inheriting. The process starts fresh.

The old saying about money is “you can’t take it with you.” Earmarks that don’t expire, however, means legislators are taking it with them. Given concerns about waste, allowing earmarks to be legislative legacies – instead of conditions of service – appears irresponsible.

And appearance is everything with earmarks. These hated little fiscal riders should be more transparent and accountable. President Barack Obama lauded the stimulus bill for lacking earmarks, in part, for those reasons.

Controlling legislators from submitting new earmarks gets us halfway. Trimming earmarks submitted by legislators no longer being held responsible for them is a logical next step.