I'm Just a Bill

For all the fanfare and bother that comes with being in the United States Senate, individual Senators usually have to be in trouble to get much national-level ink (think Sen. Chris Dodd's sweetheart mortgage deal). So when Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn was written about in both the New York Times and the Washington Post today for actually doing his job, it meant something.

The crux of both pieces is that Senator Coburn is a thorn in the side of the Democratic Leadership in the Senate. The "problem", if you were to call it that, is that because it would take too much time to individually consider all of the slices of pork that each Senator wants, the Senate usually deals with these spending requests by simply adopting them by 'unanimous consent' - that is, the bill passes because no one objects to it.

But Senator Coburn, who has earned a reputation for being a budget hawk during his four years in the Senate, hasn't been afraid to take on his colleagues who want their fill of the pork barrel buffet. Instead of rolling over and playing dead, he's been placing 'holds' on many of these bills - forcing the Senate to go through the normal process of considering each one with the whole legislative bit; you know, School House Rock-style, with votes and stuff.

The Democratic leaders in the Senate, U.S. Sen. Harry Reid and Sen. Dick Durbin, seem to be fed up with all this legislating.

The No. 2 Democrat in the Senate, Richard J. Durbin of Illinois, said Mr. Coburn’s approach was well within the rules but far outside the bounds of collegiality. “The Senate really depends on people getting along with one another and agreeing you are not going to abuse the right to stop the train,” Mr. Durbin said. - New York Times

It should be surprising to see a thinly-veiled version of the old "You gotta go along to get along" advice coming from one United States Senator to another - but in times like this, apparently, it is not.

There is plenty here to be written about the utterly shameless nature that accompanies the expenditure of literally billions of tax dollars. But a bunch of other right-minded bloggers have already written those articles, and they'll write more. More fascinating, and less analyzed, is the culture that has developed in the Capitol that makes the 'hold' the problem, and not the spending.

United States Senators are men and women who have been elected to represent whole American states. They are supposed to be the Lords of democracy and their presence is supposed to be measured not just in inches and pounds, but in the feelings that well up among those near them.

But here Reid and Durbin are, snivelling about a colleague because they would rather acquiese and move on rather than legislate. They would choose to play the Capitol games and continue the climb up the ranks of seniority while shoring up re-election instead of doing what they were sent there to do.

A simple comparison to Coburn and some of his critics is telling. Nebraska Senator Ben Nelson was quoted in the Washington Post: "What do the constituents in your state expect of you? I believe they expect me to get some things done. I don't believe they're looking for 'no.' They're looking for 'yes,' ". Ignore the utterly comical construction of that quote and contrast it with Coburn's, which also appeared in the WaPo:

"Coburn said his colleagues have lost appreciation for the broad national interest and instead hope to pass legislation in their names so they can win reelection. "When you take that oath, it doesn't say anything about your state," he said. "The parochialism needs to die."

The Oklahoman has pledged to serve no more than two terms in the U.S. Senate, while Harry Reid has spent more than twenty years of his life clawing up the seniority ladder. Coburn looks for ways to end duplication of services and make government more effective in helping people while Sen. Reid vents his frustration this way: "For those of you who may not know this," Reid told reporters recently, "you cannot negotiate with Coburn. It's just something that you learn over the years . . . is a waste of time. (Washington Post)"

It isn't hard to see where the frustration comes from in Senators Reid, Durbin, and Nelson; it is the difference between men who would prostitute power so that they can continue to wield it, and a man sensible enough to give that power its due respect. We should hope that the Senate would be full of the latter sort of men, and empty of the former.

This post was originally posted at The Everyday Republican.