Individual earmarks may have swum upstream for the winter, but there’s still something very fishy going on with Congress in terms of spending. Despite all the discussion about austerity and countless campaign promises to cut spending, the crafters of the Continuing Resolution let stand a rulemaking policy no one can be proud of: a special interest-driven program that will create over 100 new government employees, more red tape, and hundreds of millions of new federal spending, without any benefit to taxpayers…all for – you guessed it – a fish.

You may have thought that Ted Stevens’ giant salmon of a private plane was the most spectacular fish-related waste of taxpayer dollars in history, but you’d be wrong. It turns out that the government’s handling of real fish -specifically, catfish – dwarfs that million-dollar monstrosity.

A special interest provision tacked onto the 2008 Farm Bill mandated that the USDA inspect all imported catfish. Proponents, who unsurprisingly included those with a stake in the American catfish industry, cited safety concerns as the reason behind the program, patriotically claiming that protecting Americans from bad foreign catfish was as important, if notmore important than protecting them from foreign terror groups.

Unfortunately, their argument for a sort of “catfish TSA” doesn’t hold water. As it turns out, all catfish are already inspected by the FDA, so this second inspection would be superfluous at best and at worst, a complete waste of taxpayer funds. Second, catfish are actually low on the threat-level scale, labeled a “low-risk” food by both the CDC and – get this – the USDA itself.

You read that right.

There’s a provision asking for more cash for the USDA to double-inspect a fish the USDA don’t consider unsafe. These fish are more like foreign exchange students than al-Qaeda.

A post by the Taxpayer Protection Alliance’s David Williams details the Government Accountability Office’s (GAO) subsequent ruling that USDA oversight of catfish would result in regulatory overlap and fragmentation and lead to increased regulatory costs.

The price tag for U.S. taxpayers? A minimum of $30 million per year.

You might be wondering if, like Ted Stevens’ giant flying salmon, whether the catfish boondoggle was snuck in under the radar and passed through the censors unnoticed. It turns out, though that two high-profile Senators John McCain and Tom Coburn, introduced legislation in early March to repeal the USDA catfish provision. Calling it “nothing more than a protectionist tactic funded at taxpayers’ expense,” McCain exposed the program as just another earmark pushed by a few lawmakers’ regional interests. Shockingly, the repeal provision didn’t pass.

So next time you’re dining on a catfish special in a local restaurant, remember this: that ugly little fish with its weird bug eyes and slightly woodsy taste didn’t just cost you the $17.95 it’s listed for on the restaurant menu. It’s journey from a foreign market, through two government inspections, on special order by Congress, cost Americans nearly $30 million. Congress could have papered the walls of the Capitol with 24k grouper for half that.

Will they ever learn?