Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Senate GOP doesn’t support fiscal responsibility?

posted at 9:49 am on March 5, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

The Senate Republican caucus may act to distance itself from John McCain when he returns to Washington next week to vote on a series of bills intended to highlight his record as the real agent of change in this election. On one of these stands, however, the GOP caucus will make itself look ridiculous. McCain wants to vote with Jim DeMint to impose a one-year moratorium on earmarks — and Roll Call reports that the Republicans don’t want any part of that liberal nonsense:

The first test of whether the GOP Conference — and particularly its leadership — are in lock step with McCain could come as early as next week, when the chamber is expected to consider a one-year moratorium on earmarks during the budget debate. The amendment, sponsored by Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) and endorsed by McCain, has garnered little support from rank-and-file Republicans, particularly the party’s “Old Bulls,” who have mounted a defense of earmarks in recent weeks.

DeMint said on Tuesday that he hoped to set a vote for the amendment during a time when McCain can be there. “Obviously, this is his baby and I consider him the champion of this,” DeMint said. …

According to one senior GOP aide, despite the desire to unite around McCain, his positions on several big-ticket issues likely will mean the Conference will not find common ground with their nominee.

“We’re not going to back him on earmarks, or on climate change, or on immigration,” the aide said. … Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander (Tenn.), who touted McCain’s positions on fiscal responsibility, climate change and immigration as a key to his ability to reach independent voters, acknowledged that those votes will put him in conflict with the GOP [emphasis mine -- Ed]. “There will be some [conflict],” Alexander said Tuesday, noting that while “I’ve supported others in this primary contest, I’m very comfortable with Sen. McCain” as the nominee.

We have reached a sad state of affairs when the Republican caucus leadership can make a statement like this. A vote for fiscal responsibility will put McCain in conflict with the GOP? The party won’t back McCain on earmarks, even though his improbable come-from-behind victory for the party’s nomination shows exactly how seriously the Republican voters take fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability?

This shows the deafness that comes from living within the Beltway for too long. If the Republicans didn’t lose in 2006 because of Iraq, nor because of profligate spending, nor because of corruption generated from the nexus of political contributions and earmarking, exactly why do these geniuses think they’re in the minority? Misaligned stars in the firmament? Not only did the voters send a message on corruption, they had it delivered by FedEx with two signatures and a return receipt. Yet the survivors of 2006 somehow think that fiscal responsibility doesn’t matter.

What’s most frustrating is that Democrats have dropped the ball on this issue. They broke their vaunted ethics rules on earmarking literally at the first opportunity to do so in 2007, dropping over 11,000 earmarks into 2008’s appropriations, mostly via air-dropped conference report pork. They want to spend perhaps as much as $300 billion a year more in 2009 and beyond. Only an opposition party firmly and overtly committed to fiscal responsibility can prevail against the party who offers costly and damaging wealth-redistribution programs, and the corrupting and encroaching increase in federal control over American lives.

Instead of finding ways to pick fights with John McCain, perhaps the Senate and House GOP caucuses ought to try listening — not just to McCain, but also to the message voters have been trying to deliver for two years.


Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages:

A moratorium for even a year could be very politically valuable. I don’t understand the reluctance ont he part of the “old bulls”.

DerKrieger on March 5, 2008 at 9:55 AM

A vote for fiscal responsibility will put McCain in conflict with the GOP?

Only an opposition party firmly and overtly committed to fiscal responsibility can prevail against the party who offers costly and damaging wealth-redistribution programs, and the corrupting and encroaching increase in federal control over American lives.

John McCain is more of a fiscal conservative than most of these pseuds. Pork and federal spending seems to make the world of our caucus leaders go round.

I sure hope Tom Coburn is not in on this farce after his excellent remarks at CPAC.

Pax americana on March 5, 2008 at 9:58 AM

“We’re not going to back him on earmarks, or on climate change, or on immigration,”

Um…um…um…

ninjapirate on March 5, 2008 at 9:59 AM

Instead of finding ways to pick fights with John McCain…

/Coffee spit all over monitor.

Hellooo? McCain has been picking fights with the GOP forever. He’s reaching out to Republicans for a change, and they don’t want any aprts of it. And on such matters as anthropogenic climate change, I hope the GOP ignores him.

Akzed on March 5, 2008 at 10:00 AM

It strikes me that the GOP senators are not only deaf but, dumb stupid. Such a bill would not pass the democrat controlled senate, no way – no how. Why not at least raise the issue so the dems can take more heat?

Up-Chuck on March 5, 2008 at 10:04 AM

Of course they don’t support fiscal responsibility. It’s not their money, so what do they care as long as they get re-elected? If they need more, they just confiscate more.

Leonidas Hoplite on March 5, 2008 at 10:06 AM

McCain will run into a great deal of difficulty if he listens to his impulse to try and out Democrat the Democrats. Go after earmarks..fine…it is only about 1% of discretionary spending. But he can’t hope to win the argument in which he says “I’m like you only different.” This sort of strategic policy parallelism works fine for Obama because it provides shelter from Clinton while focusing on his center of gravity, namely the speech and presence game. McCain doesn’t have those attributes.

McCain runs the risk of becoming General Mcclellan.
“If General McClellan isn’t going to use his army, I’d like to borrow it for a time.” (Commenting on General McClellan’s lack of aggression, 1862)

moxie_neanderthal on March 5, 2008 at 10:07 AM

Hellooo? McCain has been picking fights with the GOP forever. He’s reaching out to Republicans for a change, and they don’t want any aprts of it. And on such matters as anthropogenic climate change, I hope the GOP ignores him.

Akzed on March 5, 2008 at 10:00 AM

And the pork? It does finnace those incumbents’ re-election. Is that a good thing?

a capella on March 5, 2008 at 10:09 AM

I may disagree with McCain on several of the issues mentioned, but certainly not the earmark issue. Republican legislators would be well served, as would the Party, if they didn’t give the Dems campaign talking points by going public with their disagreements now. If they want to fight McCain on some issues, let’s get him (the Republican) elected first. Consider the alternative!

markmougel on March 5, 2008 at 10:11 AM

The GOP old bulls will never pull their heads out of their arses on their own. It will have to be done for them.

It would be very interesting if the Democrats decided to vote with McCain and DeMint on this one. They could easily vote for the moratorium on the floor to embarrass GOP leaders then pursue a strategy of gutting the moratorium in conference committee when nobody is looking.

syndicate on March 5, 2008 at 10:11 AM

It’s the economy stupid!!!
And it will ring true this time also.
People perceive unbridled spending as a sign of an uncaring, bourgeois, snotty, out of touch, congress.
It doesn’t matter how much, or how little it actually effects the economy…earmarks and spending are a standard that the congress will be judged on this year.
Cut back spending, cut back special interests, cut back on lobbying, and you will win the election.

right2bright on March 5, 2008 at 10:11 AM

We have reached a sad state of affairs when the Republican caucus leadership can make a statement like this. A vote for fiscal responsibility will put McCain in conflict with the GOP? The party won’t back McCain on earmarks, even though his improbable come-from-behind victory for the party’s nomination shows exactly how seriously the Republican voters take fiscal responsibility, transparency, and accountability?

Bravo Ed. Bravo.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:14 AM

Politicians behaving like polticians. Forever running to get re-elected. Buying votes while building bridges to nowhere. They’re a disgrace. They get away with it because most of the electorate are braindead zombies who want to be spoon fed.

Throw the bums out.

Institute term limits.

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 10:14 AM

And the pork? It does finnace those incumbents’ re-election. Is that a good thing?
a capella on March 5, 2008 at 10:09 AM

Good? Aren’t we talking politics? Good?

Akzed on March 5, 2008 at 10:15 AM

Self-serving politics as usual – but they are politicians, not statesmen.

TooTall on March 5, 2008 at 10:17 AM

Of all of these issues, climate change is by far the most dangerous. Are “independents” really so clueless that they want a 50 cents a gallon carbon tax?

Buy Danish on March 5, 2008 at 10:25 AM

McCain is crossing the aisle to join Jim DeMint to put a moratorium on earmarks. This is a definite positive for McCain and could be very damaging to the party itself. We know that the dims want to spend us into submission and any Republicans going along with this suicidal action should be judged accordingly.

volsense on March 5, 2008 at 10:26 AM

Wait a minute. How many of these self-serving bozos were on the front lines against the amnesty nonsense last year? The ones who stood tallest against amnesty have almost all endorsed McCain now (Coburn, Cornyn), or work with him in a collegial fashion (Jeff Sessions) and will endorse him soon.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:27 AM

I support the position of not agreeing with McCain on immigration and climate change, but seeing my beloved GOP balk at financial responsibility makes me cry a little inside.

What the hell happened to our party?

I also agree with the above comment. No way the Dems let this pass…take it up as a banner issue during an election year and let the Dems take the heat for it’s failure.

lodestonejames on March 5, 2008 at 10:27 AM

I’m fine with them not backing him on climate change, but re: the spending…when will they f-ing learn!?! Their lack of accountability, transparency, and general fiscal responsibility is tantamount to criminal embezzlement in my opinion.

CP on March 5, 2008 at 10:30 AM

Buy Danish, have you read Climate of Fear? The baseline assumptions behind the entertaining action plot are sound. My daughter was just telling us the other day about how her 6th grade science teacher is always talking about “Global Warming” and showing pictures of shrinking glaciers, etc.

We have been very vocal in our opposition to this brainwashing, but have told our kids to not argue with their teachers when they do this stuff and when they start talking about how wonderful Al Gore is. So our kids understand it, but very few others do, and this is a private college-prep school.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:31 AM

That’s just …sad. I have no other words.

DreadWolf on March 5, 2008 at 10:32 AM

Wait a minute. How many of these self-serving bozos were on the front lines against the amnesty nonsense last year? The ones who stood tallest against amnesty have almost all endorsed McCain now (Coburn, Cornyn), or work with him in a collegial fashion (Jeff Sessions) and will endorse him soon.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:27 AM

I forgot DeMint, of course. He’s endorsed McCain and is an anti-amnesty hero along with Sessions and Coburn.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:36 AM

I think its time to publicly embarrass this den of thieves for what they are, RINOs.

We need to contact the senator’s offices via email, telephone, FAX, what ever method and let them know that they are on the wrong end of the stick. I think it would do good also to remind the Republican party that monetary support is contingent upon how the congress-critters act.

We need to make the same commotion now that was made when they were trying to shove shamnesty down our throats.

belad on March 5, 2008 at 10:43 AM

Misaligned stars in the firmament?

You may be onto something here….

Limerick on March 5, 2008 at 10:43 AM

Fiscal responsibility is the second biggest reason that I became a Republican despite the power of the social conservatives and despite the anti-environmentalism. As the survival of the West is my foremost concern, lack of fiscal responsibility won’t break my support of Republicans, but it sure as hell reduces my enthusiasm.

And my moonbat friends have no end of fun pointing out the deficiencies of the Republicans with respect to fiscal responsibility. It’s one of the most effective arguments that the mooonbats have. It helps the moonbats to view themselves as heroes when they are able to see the Republicans as total hypocrites. It also helps the moonbats to recruit as it gives them a good talking point. More personally, the moonbats bringing up the lack of Republican fiscal responsibility gets under my skin the most. When the moonbats bring up the social conservatism of the Republican Party, I’m not bothered. I just say to the moonbats that I’m on your team on those issues, but the Republicans just give me me a better deal overall. On fiscal responsibility, I’m just left trying to defend the indefensible–a bad position.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 10:46 AM

This is a brilliant move by Mac, showing he’s the real change agent in this election.

Mac is leading his party with action, while Obama spouts platitudes but has done nothing of real substance in Congress. I’ve still yet to see Obama’s legislation of “hope” and “change”. The truth is Obama represents more of the same old tired liberal Dukakis-Mondale leftwing, just wrapped in new packaging and platitudes.

Nice move Mac.

thankful on March 5, 2008 at 10:48 AM

Senator Alexander’s office can’t seem to find the staffer who would comment on this statement for the proletariat.

I think he’s douching…

Jaibones on March 5, 2008 at 10:49 AM

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:31 AM

Do you mean Michael Chrichton’s State of Fear? Affirmative!

Buy Danish on March 5, 2008 at 10:50 AM

DerKrieger: I don’t understand the reluctance ont he part of the “old bulls”.

Simple. They’re willing to see everyone’s ox gored except their own.

Idiots.

irishspy on March 5, 2008 at 10:53 AM

I forgot DeMint, of course. He’s endorsed McCain and is an anti-amnesty hero along with Sessions and Coburn.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Actually, he first endorsed, and actively worked for, Mitt Romney.

Buy Danish on March 5, 2008 at 10:53 AM

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 10:14 AM

I too see 535 lumps of ass lard that needs to be thrown out with the trash by Anti-incumbant voting or term limits. Either way would suit me.

But I ain’t holding my breath.

[Edited by Ed M]

JohnnyD on March 5, 2008 at 10:54 AM

They hide it very well, but the fact is that many senators and congressmen do end up obtaining personal wealth through these earmarks. They have land deals, business deals, promises of future employment etc. tied up in earmarks. Why else would they fight so hard to keep doing them, especially when they know it would help their party to at least appear to be against them.

rockmom on March 5, 2008 at 10:58 AM

Instead of finding ways to pick fights with John McCain, perhaps the Senate and House GOP caucuses ought to try listening — not just to McCain, but also to the message voters have been trying to deliver for two years.

Only problem is Sen. McCain has also failed to listen to the message of voters, so it is an across the board problem with both parties now.

JeffinSac on March 5, 2008 at 11:00 AM

Listen Republicans. WE DEMAND A BALANCED BUDGET. WE DEMAND THE ELIMINATION OF ALL EARMARKS.

You people make me sick.

msipes on March 5, 2008 at 11:02 AM

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 10:46 AM

Don’t be too discouraged thuja. Your moonbat friends have short term memory loss. They forgot about the New Deal, The Great Society and all the other fantastic social programs to come down the pike in the past 8o years.

Of course they can grouse all they want because either Dem candidate will continue to fleece them just as much, if not more, as the rest of us.

It bothers me too, but I remember who brought us to this point in time.

JohnnyD on March 5, 2008 at 11:06 AM

Buy Danish….yeah, screwed up the title! LOL

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 11:07 AM

Dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb, dumb.

What’s the point of working so hard and spending so much money to get these guys in office if they are just going to act like power-hungry Socialist Democrats?

29Victor on March 5, 2008 at 11:09 AM

I forgot DeMint, of course. He’s endorsed McCain and is an anti-amnesty hero along with Sessions and Coburn.

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 10:36 AM

Actually, he first endorsed, and actively worked for, Mitt Romney.

Buy Danish on March 5, 2008 at 10:53 AM

Yes, but right at or after CPAC he did endorse McCain. So I’m curious who these GOP “heros” are who use immigration against McCain now (to help kill earmark reform, IMHO) and exactly how outspoken they were against amnesty a year ago?

funky chicken on March 5, 2008 at 11:09 AM

McCain would be a fool to pick a big public fight over climate change legislation or immigration, the former will alienate his base and the latter will alienate his base, independents, and moderates of both parties. Let these issues lie for the general as much as you can.

But earmarks is a no-brainer, this issue appeals to voters of all political stripes. The Republicans in Congress could help their brand immensely by getting behind this in a public way that forces the Dems to block it. Can we start another Harriet Miers/Amnesty uprising to keep these tools from screwing us over again?

Dudley Smith on March 5, 2008 at 11:21 AM

Get out your vomit bags.

Here’s the top 21 moochers in the Senate. All in office at least 23 years.

Rank-Name-Date Elected

1 Robert Byrd (D-WV) January 3, 1959 ….. coming up on 50 years
2 Ted Kennedy (D-MA)November 7, 1962 ….. 40 year club
3 Daniel Inouye (D-HI) January 3, 1963 ….. 40 year club

4 Ted Stevens (R-AK) December 24, 1968 ….. 40 year club

5 Pete Domenici (R-NM)January 3, 1973 ….. 30 year club

6 Joe Biden (D-DE) January 3, 1973 ….. 30 year club

7 Patrick Leahy (D-VT) January 3, 1975 ….. 30 year club

8 Richard Lugar (R-IN) January 4, 1977 ….. 30 year club
9 Orrin Hatch (R-UT) January 4, 1977 ….. 30 year club
10 Max Baucus (D-MT) December 15, 1978
11 Thad Cochran (R-MS)December 27, 1978
12 John Warner (R-VA)January 2, 1979
13 Carl Levin (D-MI)January 3, 1979
14 Chris Dodd (D-CT)January 3, 1981
15 Chuck Grassley (R-IA) January 3, 1981
16 Arlen Specter (R-PA) January 3, 1981
17 Jeff Bingaman (D-NM)January 3, 1983
18 John Kerry (D-MA)January 2, 1985
19 Tom Harkin (D-IA)January 3, 1985
20 Mitch McConnell (R-KY) January 3, 1985
21 Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) January 3, 1985

Being a senator. It’s not just a job, it’s a career.

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 11:24 AM

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 11:24 AM

fogw, could you explain your list of the “top 21 moochers” better? I don’t even know if “mooching” measures something I could argue without embarrassment or not.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 12:07 PM

1 Robert Byrd (D-WV) January 3, 1959 ….. coming up on 50 years

Approaching 3.9 million dollars in income from salary alone.

Multiply that by at least ten to calculate supplemental income from kickbacks on earmarked projects.

Are you comfortable? Why yes, I make a good living.

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 12:09 PM

fogw, could you explain your list of the “top 21 moochers” better? I don’t even know if “mooching” measures something I could argue without embarrassment or not.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 12:07 PM

Try leeches, bloodsuckers or parasites.

Does that work for ya?

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 12:12 PM

And my moonbat friends have no end of fun pointing out the deficiencies of the Republicans with respect to fiscal responsibility. It’s one of the most effective arguments that the mooonbats have. It helps the moonbats to view themselves as heroes when they are able to see the Republicans as total hypocrites.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 10:46 AM

On every major spending issue we have ever seen, your moonbat friends are supporting liberals who wanted to spend more. End of discussion.

Jaibones on March 5, 2008 at 12:12 PM

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 11:24 AM

Second look at term limits.

liquidflorian on March 5, 2008 at 12:47 PM

Being a senator. It’s not just a job, it’s a (whore’s) career.

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 11:24 AM

Thanks for that list of moochers, fogw.

Add, they don’t fall under the Social Security system they imposed on us. That’s why they’re all multi-millionnaires when they retire, regardless of tenure. And we don’t even know about all the bennies, official, and otherwise. I despise them, left and right.

Preaching drinking water, while drinking wine:

…murmurings of the little harp-girl’s song in Heinrich Heine’s 1844 poem “A Winter’s Tale”

I know the authors, I know the tune,
I know it line for line
In public, water is all they preach;
While in secret they guzzle wine.

Entelechy on March 5, 2008 at 1:26 PM

And my moonbat friends have no end of fun pointing out the deficiencies of the Republicans with respect to fiscal responsibility. It’s one of the most effective arguments that the mooonbats have. It helps the moonbats to view themselves as heroes when they are able to see the Republicans as total hypocrites.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 10:46 AM

On every major spending issue we have ever seen, your moonbat friends are supporting liberals who wanted to spend more. End of discussion.

Jaibones on March 5, 2008 at 12:12 PM

Well no, it’s the end of the discussion. This isn’t about the logic of the moonbat position. I’m talking about how the moonbats make their case to themselves. They refuse to look at the facts about Democratic spending and use Republican pork to defend their refusal to look–just the typical caviling of any religion. If the Republican weren’t being such utter hypocrites about fiscal responsibility, the moonbat defenses would collapse a little and the Democratic politicians would have to follow a little more fiscal restraint also. The implication of this has been noted from other angles before: Republican lack of fiscal responsibility enables greater Democratic lack of fiscal responsibility.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 1:54 PM

If the Republican weren’t being such utter hypocrites about fiscal responsibility, the moonbat defenses would collapse a little and the Democratic politicians would have to follow a little more fiscal restraint also. The implication of this has been noted from other angles before: Republican lack of fiscal responsibility enables greater Democratic lack of fiscal responsibility.

thuja on March 5, 2008 at 1:54 PM

I take it you weren’t posting here on this site when Republican commenters were screaming at the top of their lungs, protesting Bush’s Democrat-like spending habits. As a matter of fact, all true conservatives, on this site and elsewhere in the political universe were outraged at Bush. Enough so, that Nancy Pelosi became Speaker of the House.

But you know I’m having a hard time coming up with any example of liberal Democrats ever complaining about wasting money. It’s always been their modus operandi, and they dance in the streets when they see the redistribution of the wealth, from the producers in our economy to the lackeys who always have their heads in the government feeding trough looking for a handout.

I get your drift though, anything and everything that ever went haywire was Bush’s fault, even the Democrat’s lack of fiscal responsibility. So in your hypothesis, once the Republicans become fiscally responsible, then the Democrats will follow suit. Funny, I saw no evidence of this during the 40 some odd years the Dems controlled both the House and the Senate. But that was probably, uh, Eisenhower’s fault.

Are there monkeys flying around your house?

fogw on March 5, 2008 at 2:37 PM

We need a wave of GOP primary challangers for upcoming House and Senate elections. There must be a cleansing.

ThePrez on March 5, 2008 at 4:09 PM

There was a time when one voted for the party who personally delivered the most to you. I’ve read about people calling the mayor’s office to get a free bucket of coal, knowing they’d only get it if they’d both voted for the mayor and got others to vote for that mayor. When my father was out of work in 1959 or 1960, he called the Democratic Party Chairman and got a job digging ditches for the county road department. It looks like old-fashioned vote-buying still happens—only on a much grander scale.

Al in St. Lou on March 5, 2008 at 6:23 PM

Comment pages:


You must be logged in to post a comment.