Senate earmark battle turns very personal
Bottom line: Coburn is right and we need more lawmakers like him on spending.
THEHILL-A battle between the offices of Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) and Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) over a controversial earmark intensified earlier this month, displaying how debates on Capitol Hill sometimes can turn personal.
The senators had been at odds over the matter for much of the summer, but it would reach a new level when John Hart, communications director for Coburn, forwarded a news article detailing his boss’s request for an investigation of a defense contractor.
The target of the would-be investigation, 21st Century Systems Inc. (21CSI), employs Patrick Nelson, the son of the centrist senator. Sen. Nelson had requested an earmark for 21CSI, triggering a heated battle between the senators that has raged for weeks.
What is Coburn right about exactly? That it’s worse to create a porky earmark because your son works for a company rather than because the company gave you a campaign donation? (Neither or which, I’m sure, Coburn has never done.)
Let’s track ethics legislation through the Senate, and see if they filabuster.
Let’s make it a real ear mark.
Like on cattle or pigs.
Each Senator or Congressional Representative is allowed as many ear marks as he or she can get approved. However, each one must be accompanied by a “marking” of that politician’s ear.
If there isn’t any more space to mark (or, any more ear), then the right to ear mark expires.
Fair?