Coburn Talks Porkbusting (Conference call with Bloggers)

Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) joined bloggers Glenn Reynolds, Mark Tapscott, NZ Bear, Erick Erickson, Tim Chapman, and myself to to discuss spending, appropriations, and earmarks this afternoon in the wake of last weeks "Bridge To Nowhere" drama.

One of the key points discussed is how 'sunshine' is the enemy of pork barrel earmark spending. The process has been deliberately gamed by Congress to provide as little light on last minute changes, congressional earmarks, and other sundry spending tricks. As the "Bridge To Nowhere" episode showed, when pork filled projects attached onto large appropriation bills is spotlighted it becomes very uncomfortable for legislators to stand up and fight for boondoggles.

One of the the suggestions from the bloggers (Mark Tapscott) was that the Senator use the "porkbuster" term. It was noted that the word "earmark," while technically accurate, didn't have the same resonance. He agreed to use the term.

I asked the Senator about plans for reworking the Line Item Veto Act (invalidated by the Supreme Court in 1996) so that it would pass constitutional muster. He mentioned that he was working with former Congressman Charlie Stenholm (D-TX) on getting selective rescission back on the legislative agenda.

It was a new concept to me - one the Senator quickly explained - and a little research dug up the transcripts from a 1999 House Committee on Rules, Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process, hearing that addressed legislative options to enact a rescission process that would meet the constitutionality issues laid out in the Clinton v. New York City (Line Item Veto) case. The Congressional Research Service's Louis Fisher highlights all of the major alternatives - all of which are still viable options 6 years later.

Sen. Coburn plans on maintaining contact with the group, and we'll bring you updates individually and collectively...

Tim Chapman notes this from the Senator, "What we need is a lot of pressure on Senators out there. The battle for pork is a good battle. It is immoral when we have $600 billion we added to the debt this last year...when your running a deficit it is just flat immoral."

Glenn Reynolds notes his impression of the call, "(1) the White House is beginning to feel the heat; and (2) this will be going on over the next year. It's a war of attrition, not a quick-hit."

Mark Tapscott notes, "It was very clear virtually from the outset of the conversation that Coburn is absolutely serious about continuing and expanding this effort, which he began in the Senate last week with a blizzard of amendments transferring funds from well-known pork barrel projects like "the Bridge to Nowhere" in Alaska to paying for Hurricane Katrina recovery and reconstruction.

John Hawkins's impression of the message from Coburn is that those in the Senate who want to cut spending need the blogosphere's help to make it happen.

Erick Erickson reminds us that the Senator is a RedState fav, so much so they've affectionately nicknamed him Sentator Trainwreck.

Update on this story http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1509534/posts

"By the time Senate debate began, what had been a largely conservative movement on the Web had crossed the aisle. Bloggers of all stripes were following the proceedings in real time, rooting for what they labeled fiscal sanity -- and for Katrina relief overall. "Honestly, there's no reason for any Democrat to vote against this amendment," opined The Daily Kos, which, along with the Talking Points Memo, are lefty counterparts to Instapundit."

Go Coburn Go!!!!!

An email I recieved last week from the CFG:

"Coburn the Barbarian"
10/24/05 Club For Growth Email

That's the headline of an editorial from the Wall Street Journal last Friday, referring to freshman Senator Tom Coburn (elected last year in part with over $1 million in contributions from Club members). In the "go-along-to-get-along" Senate, you're considered a barbarian if you look out for the national interest instead of the pork in your home state.

Coburn forced his colleagues to vote on his amendment to defund the infamous "Bridge to Nowhere", a $223 million pork project that connects an island community of only 50 people in Alaska. The savings would then be directed towards the rebuilding of a bridge near New Orleans that was destroyed by Hurricane Katrina.

The Journal editors wrote:

"On current trends, freshman Tom Coburn of Oklahoma is soon going to need a food taster to accompany him to the Senate dining room. Which is all the more reason for the rest of us to admire his political nerve.

"Mr. Coburn yesterday took to the floor not once, but twice, to force his colleagues to defend some of their more egregious "earmarks," or pork projects they plan to funnel to home states. The Republican dared to use the "p" word ("priorities") and suggested that taxpayers might be better served if hurricane relief was offset by deleting earmarks for a sculpture garden in Washington state, an art museum in Nebraska, and a Rhode Island animal shelter, among other national necessities."

Three cheers for Tom Coburn and kudos to all the Club members who supported him last year. Rome wasn't built in a day, and the Senate's traditions of pork won't be banished until and unless we make it politically impossible for them to continue. While his amendment was crushed, we take heart that Coburn had excellent support from other Senators elected with substantial Club member support: Jim DeMint (SC), John Sununu (NH), Wayne Allard (CO), Richard Burr (NC), and David Vitter (LA).

That's one key quality that we look for in candidates when recommending them to Club members: political nerve. We find it more often than any other group.

Senator Coburn has more testicles (2) than my 2 senators combined (Santorum and Specter-none). It sounds as though he is willing to keep up the pressure. Time will tell, but from the sound of it, I think he'll follow through on his promises.

BTW, I already emailed Santorum on the Coburn amendment, telling him how disappointed I was that he voted against it. I told him that I expected that kind of vote from RINO Specter, but not from him. Of course, I never received a reply, not even a canned response.

I view Coburn as a very important person in the upcoming climate. He is capitalizing on a series of popular political positions.

I don't see any way Mrs. Clinton does not get the Democrat nomination. And Gulliani's recent pronouncements make it very clear that he is committed to an internationalist Liberal political agenda; he is not going to back away from his pro-abortion position; and his idea of solutions all focus on government response.

We are approaching a presidential race between two Liberal New Yorkers. A candidate with a popular agenda on the third line would get more votes in most states.

well, your right that the problem isn't that government is appropriating in the wrong places, but that it has the power to appropriate at all. At least for roads. And even if it did, it doesn't have the constitutional power to provide charity to NO. Coburn hasn't said anything about this, but at least he's taking steps in the right direction:

http://www.neoperspectives.com/transportation_socialism.htm

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.