A dispute among influential Republican lawmakers over a ban on “earmark” spending threatens an area of potential bipartisan agreement between the GOP and White House in the aftermath of last week’s midterm election.

The incoming House Republican majority has proposed extending a moratorium on earmarks, which are funds requested by individual lawmakers for specific projects back home. On Tuesday, conservative Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina said that he would press his GOP colleagues in the Senate to adopt a similar moratorium when lawmakers returned to Washington next week.

But several senior Republican lawmakers consider earmarks part of their constitutional obligation to determine how federal money is spent. They disagree with election-year rhetoric that government spending can be reined in with a strict earmark ban. A ban is an idea that “doesn’t save any money,” said Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Senate Republican leader.

The disagreement is surfacing at a crucial point. Republicans, fresh from winning control of the House and gaining seats in the Senate, will make their first attempt next week to convert ideas from successful political campaigns into governing policy.

Earmark spending is a favorite campaign symbol of government excess. Examples of pork projects go back years — among the most well-known is the “bridge to nowhere” in Alaska.

Yet attempts to limit lawmakers’ ability to steer funding to their home states regularly runs into dissent. Popular Capitol wisdom holds that one lawmaker’s pork is another’s vital infrastructure project, representing a road or hospital that would not get built without federal government funds.

The House GOP this year imposed a moratorium on earmarks within its own ranks as a way to burnish its conservative credentials heading into campaign season, particularly among “tea party” voters. Earmarks soared to unprecedented levels prior to 2006, the last time the GOP had been in the majority.

Senate Republicans, though, did not agree to such a ban. DeMint proposed a halt on earmarks this spring, but senators voted it down.

Now, in a first test of their newly bolstered numbers in Congress, Republicans in both chambers are returning to the issue. The GOP is intent on showing voters it understood the lesson of the election and the message of tea party conservatives who helped propel the party to power.

President Obama identified the earmark ban as an issue “we can work on together.” Rep. Eric Cantor, the No. 2 Republican in the House, said he would like to take Obama up on the offer.

Yet old spending habits are hard to break among Congress members who see the power of the purse as one of their greatest strengths. Although earmarks make up a tiny fraction of the federal budget, they are an enormous source of power for lawmakers to provide resources to constituents.

The Republican leaders of the main House and Senate spending committees are divided on the question. Rep. Jerry Lewis of Redlands supports an earmark moratorium, while Sen. Thad Cochran of Mississippi does not.

In recent days, Sen. James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.) has appeared on 10 conservative radio talk shows across the country with an appeal about the importance of such spending.

“People now realize you can’t have a ban on earmarks,” Inhofe said.

If Congress chooses not to direct spending, Inhofe argues, the responsibility will fall to the administration, which already exerts influence over its own pet projects in the president’s annual budget. Inhofe said his aim was to reform the earmarking process, not eliminate it.

The conservative Oklahoman, who is perhaps most widely known for calling global warming a hoax, is intent on branding earmark foes as “goguers” — those who demagogue the issue to score political points.

“It’s the most demagogued thing I’ve run into in the years I’ve been in politics,” Inhofe said. “Many of the big-spending Republicans demagogue earmarks so people think they’re conservative.”

Inhofe will argue for new Senate rules to make the earmarking process more transparent, without an outright ban.

But he will face a challenge from fellow conservative DeMint, who will be seeking an unqualified ban next week from his peers.

The South Carolina senator counts support from several newly elected colleagues — including Rand Paul in Kentucky, Marco Rubio in Florida and Pat Toomey in Pennsylvania — and other tea-party-backed candidates he supported in the election.

“Many Republicans are still addicted to earmarks and won’t give them up without a fight,” DeMint wrote in a letter to supporters Tuesday. “I know it’s difficult to quit this habit.”

He should know. DeMint confided to supporters, “I used to request earmarks too.”

lmascaro@tribune.com
‘Earmark’ ban proves an early obstacle to GOP unity

As candidates count down the hours to election day, many campaigns are bracing for the possibility that it may take weeks before the final results are known. And that’s before the lawyers have their say.

In several states that host what may prove to be decisive contests for the House and Senate, elections officials say a definitive vote count may not be known until well after Nov. 2.

In Washington, for instance, all but 2% of ballots are expected to be cast by mail. With polls showing Sen. Patty Murray locked in a tight race with Republican Dino Rossi, it may be those votes arriving after election day that tip the balance.

“We do have a sense for the dramatic here in Washington,” said Secretary of State Sam Reed.

His office is also preparing for the possibility of a recount, which would automatically occur if the two leading candidates are separated by a margin within 0.5%. Recount laws vary by state, and in several, losing candidates have to pick up the tab if they seek one.

In Alaska, simply tallying the votes presents an additional challenge because of the write-in candidacy of Sen. Lisa Murkowski. Write-in ballots won’t be counted until mid-November, if officials decide it is necessary to do so.

For Rossi, a recount may provide a sense of d

Democrat Kendrick Meek reasserted on Friday that he was in Florida’s three-way Senate race to stay, despite reports that he had been urged to withdraw in favor of Gov. Charlie Crist.

Meek took to the airwaves in the morning to deny reports that former President Clinton had urged Meek to withdraw so that Crist would stand a better chance of defeating Marco Rubio, the Republican nominee who is a “tea party” movement favorite.

“I told him I didn’t have any thoughts about getting out of the race,” Meek said of Clinton on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “He didn’t encourage me to get out of the race.”

Meek made similar statements exonerating Clinton on the other morning shows and Clinton himself weighed in later in the day, reaffirming his support.

“We did talk last week following a rally in Orlando about the race and its challenges,” Clinton stated. “I didn’t ask Kendrick to leave the race, nor did Kendrick say that he would. I told him that how he proceeds was his decision to make and that I would support him regardless.”

It may take three points to define a plane, but in politics, three-way races are notoriously unstable — as the battle in Florida illustrates.

Crist, once a rising star in the GOP, was forced to run as an independent when it became clear he could not win his party’s primary against Rubio, who is far more conservative, especially on social issues such as abortion rights and stem-cell research.

Meek, a Democratic congressman, won his primary against businessman Jeff Greene, setting up a three-way race among an African American Democrat, a moderate Republican running as an independent and a staunch conservative Republican supported by the tea party wing.

There have been numerous reports that top Democrats would have been happy to see Meek withdraw, clearing the way for Crist, who famously hugged President Obama, to gather the anti-Rubio vote in one column. Polls show Rubio with a solid lead over Crist, with Meek running a distant third.

Part of the rationale is also based on the arithmetic of the Senate, where the GOP is hoping to at least increase its influence and perhaps win a majority. The Florida seat is held by a Republican, and Crist has been careful to avoid saying with which party he would caucus during the organization of the post-election Senate. Two independents already caucus with the Democrats and are key members of the Democratic majority.

The Florida race would not be the first in which top Democrats, seeking to save the Senate, got involved in local races.

During the primaries, there were reports that White House aides had discussions about a job for Joe Sestak if he dropped his bid to unseat Sen. Arlen Specter, a fellow Democrat. Sestak went on to win the primary and is locked in a close race with Republican Pat Toomey.

Michael.muskal@latimes.com

Twitter.com/LATimesmuskal
Democratic candidate denies Bill Clinton urged him to quit Florida Senate contest

The measure passed by a 61-38 vote, with just two Republicans crossing party lines to support the bill, which would create a $30-billion small-business lending fund and provide $12 billion in tax breaks to help companies invest and hire. The bill now heads to the House, where it is expected to pass swiftly.

Yet the months-long impasse over the bill to aid small businesses, which have been hard hit during the economic downturn and are championed by both parties as engines of the recovery, highlights the partisan divisions before the fall midterm election.

“It tells you the depth of the gridlock and dysfunction that unfortunately has gripped the Congress,” said Sen. Evan Bayh (D- Ind.). “Hopefully, some of that will abate after the election.”

The bill enjoyed bipartisan support at the outset, but the addition of the $30-billion small-business lending fund to give credit-starved firms access to capital created insurmountable partisan divisions.
Republicans quickly opposed the lending fund as a “mini-TARP” — reminding voters of the unpopular Troubled Assets Relief Program that was the cornerstone of the 2008 federal bank bailout.

Republicans filibustered in July, demanding the chance to offer more amendments — including those unrelated to the legislation. Democrats shelved the bill as the debate dragged on and other legislation took priority.

Those expected to champion the bill from the business community — the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Businesses — instead focused on using the legislation as a vehicle to overturn an onerous business reporting requirement in the new healthcare law.

“All of a sudden it became a partisan exercise again,” said Sen. Orrin Hatch (R- Utah). “It’s amazing to me how difficult it is to work together around here, even when we want to. It’s almost like an arrogance of power: We’re going to teach those Republicans.”

Republican Sen. George LeMieux of Florida and Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio, neither of whom are seeking re-election, joined 57 Democrats and two independents to pass the measure.

The House passed a version of the bill earlier this year, and at one point over the summer, frustrated House lawmakers walked across the Capitol to stage a quiet sit-in at the Senate chamber to protest the delays on this and other jobs bills.

“While I am grateful for this progress, it should not have taken this long to pass this bill,” Obama said on the eve of Senate action. He has promised to sign the legislation quickly.

The bill offers $12 billion in tax breaks to businesses to encourage investment, entrepreneurship and hiring.

Businesses also would be able to write off more of their costs of buying equipment or making shop improvements. Those who are self-employed could deduct healthcare costs from the self-employment tax. The bill would also continue to waive Small Business Administration loan fees that had been cut as part of the 2009 recovery package.

The $15-billion cost of the bill is offset by closing tax loopholes and increasing tax-reporting requirements and penalties.

Democrats estimate the legislation could create 500,000 jobs.

Amendments earlier in the week sought to lift a much-criticized healthcare tax reporting requirement that both Democrats and Republicans agree needs to be fixed. But the amendments failed as senators could not agree on a way to recoup the $17 billion in revenue that would be lost by doing away with the provision.

Republicans also made two procedural moves on Thursday to attach tax credits for research and development and biodiesel development, but both were rejected.

lmascaro@tribune.com
Senate approves Obama’s small-business aid package

Overcoming the threat of a Republican filibuster, the Senate on Wednesday cleared the way for approving a $26-billion aid package for cash-strapped states that is expected to keep 138,000 teachers from being laid off nationwide and sustain medical care for the poor.

The Senate is scheduled to give its final approval to the bill Thursday. And House Speaker Nancy Pelosi called her chamber, which has already begun its August recess, back into session next week for a vote Tuesday to approve the Senate bill and send it to President Obama for his promised signature.

Moving into campaign mode, President Obama on Saturday cast the Republicans as an obstructionist force bent on impeding the nation’s economic recovery for political purposes.

Obama used his weekly radio address to deliver a message that Senate Republicans are also blocking an extension of jobless benefits to millions of unemployed Americans suffering in a tough economy.