Hold this, Coburn

[Chicken Little]

Politico

quote: Coburn Omnibus planned for July

Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is planning a "Coburn Omnibus" for July that would wrap most if not all of the bills held by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) into one large measure to be voted on by the Senate, according to a Coburn aide and two Democratic leadership staffers.

Coburn is blocking roughly a hundred bills that are generally non-controversial or have broad support. By placing a hold, Coburn prevents the bills from passing quickly through the Senate under a unanimous consent request. With floor time at such a premium, Reid would have trouble bringing up each bill for an individual debate and vote.

But in a stroke of legislative creativity that may have no precedent, Reid could lump all of the bills into one package and bring up the Coburn Omnibus for a single vote. Coburn can still object, but the broad popularity of the bills means that there would likely be more than enough support for veto-proof passage.

[Hoss]

Sorry to say Oklahoma has two of the biggest idiots ever in Washington: Coburn and Inhofe.  I'm embarrassed to even tell people that Inhofe was once the mayor of my city.

[YoungTulsan]

Finally, my federal grant to research the eating habits of gay ostriches will be appropriated!

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Hoss

Sorry to say Oklahoma has two of the biggest idiots ever in Washington: Coburn and Inhofe.  I'm embarrassed to even tell people that Inhofe was once the mayor of my city.

That's funny, friends never ask me who former mayors of Tulsa were.  I need to get new friends. []

[we vs us]

Wow.  He's holding "roughly a hundred" bills up? That's an amazing amount of obstruction for just one guy.  Is this all because he believes these bills have pork in them?

[sgrizzle]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

Wow.  He's holding "roughly a hundred" bills up? That's an amazing amount of obstruction for just one guy.  Is this all because he believes these bills have pork in them?

It's BAAAAAAACON!

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

Wow.  He's holding "roughly a hundred" bills up? That's an amazing amount of obstruction for just one guy.  Is this all because he believes these bills have pork in them?

Yes, essentially.  Though at times he mentions other "principles".  

Like last year, in addition to saving you money, he was also protecting the mentally ill's right to purchase firearms.  It's in the Constitution, or Bible, or something...look it up.

[cannon_fodder]

I like Coburns pork stance.  I like the fact that he actually does his own thing.  BUT, I too often don't like his thing.

But before I hang him out to dry on these bills, I'd like to see what they are.  If it is all pork, more power to him (and pork usually has broad based support).  But I really don't know.

[we vs us]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I like Coburns pork stance.  I like the fact that he actually does his own thing.  BUT, I too often don't like his thing.

But before I hang him out to dry on these bills, I'd like to see what they are.  If it is all pork, more power to him (and pork usually has broad based support).  But I really don't know.

It's the "roughly a hundred" part that's ridiculous to me.  Being a self-appointed one-man pork-stopper just reeks of self-aggrandizement. I'm hoping he has some criteria other than his own personal whim for holding these bills up, but that may be too much to ask.

[Chicken Little]

Coburn is an ideologue and deserves to be called out on his stance (not his wide-stance, that's Craig.)

He's held a bill that would reduce veteran suicides.  Sure, you can say it's pork (he did), but with vet suicides reaching their highest levels since Vietnam, there's also a pretty good reason to act.  A hold, just like it sounds, prevents action.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I like Coburns pork stance.  I like the fact that he actually does his own thing.  BUT, I too often don't like his thing.

But before I hang him out to dry on these bills, I'd like to see what they are.  If it is all pork, more power to him (and pork usually has broad based support).  But I really don't know.

It's the "roughly a hundred" part that's ridiculous to me.  Being a self-appointed one-man pork-stopper just reeks of self-aggrandizement. I'm hoping he has some criteria other than his own personal whim for holding these bills up, but that may be too much to ask.

Self-aggrandizement?  I guess that's in the eye of the beholder, I can see how people would interpret his actions that way and wouldn't call you as off-base for that assertion, though I don't agree.  It think you have to be somewhat ego-centric to run for office in the first place.  CL is right, Coburn is an idealogue and you might be able to go as far as to call him a political iconoclast.  He's all about cutting the size of government and government waste.  He's against BAU in D.C.,   personally, I think that's a good thing.  

I do have a belief that many bills these days are packaged or marketed so that they can be used as campaign ammo down the road, or to please special interests instead of really worrying about the substance of bills and true good of the constituency.  Senators and Congressmen are more worried about retaining their seats than doing what is right all the time.  That affects their votes on issues.  I give Coburn his props for being his own person and seeming to be the least guilty of becoming part of accepted DC culture.  One of my bigger problems with Obama has been his reluctance to vote on controversial issues in the last three years in the Senate for fear of being painted into a corner in a Presidential bid.  

Unfortunately, we've needed a whole Senate and Congress full of people who show fiscal responsibility and restraint for years and we have not.  What Coburn is doing now is essentially sticking his finger in the dike long after the town flooded and it rubs people the wrong way.  This country belongs to all citizens, not just the 536 elected officials in Washington (I don't count the Veep as "elected").  

Americans have become overly dependent on government for the solution to every problem.
Think about how farover-reaching and extensive government has become.  It's not a liberal vs. conservative issue any more.  

"Liberal" and "conservative" are nothing more than adjectives to pass blame around for how broken our federal government is.  No one is showing responsibility with our money.  I mentioned this in a thread yesterday on the city:  I think so many people figure government is out of our hands, it's for someone else to worry about- they are de-sensitized.  When people hear of a Federal budget in the trillions or a project in the billions, I think most people say to themselves: "Glad it's not my money."

Fact is, it is our money.  

There is a movement, and it's happening with our Republican leaders and Democrat leaders, to make people even more dependent on government.  Senators and members of the HOR trade out billions and billions a year in favors and projects just so they can stay in a $180,000 per year job with better benefits than most of us will ever see, including a cushy retirement.

Government meddling in private enterprise is partially to largely to blame for the sub-prime debacle and the present energy crisis.  Even the best intentions of government seems to eventually become a slave to the unintended consequences.

I honestly do see a time down the road when there will be a 70% total tax burden (Fed, state, local) on citizens to keep a broken and polluted government propped up and all the infrastructure and all the corporate welfare.

Love him or hate him, I'm glad Coburn's actions are being noticed on a national scale.  It's about time people wake up to the waste and BAU politics which are costing us billions every year.  I don't see how anyone could allow party affiliation to cloud that perception.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by Chicken Little

Coburn is an ideologue and deserves to be called out on his stance (not his wide-stance, that's Craig.)

He's held a bill that would reduce veteran suicides.  Sure, you can say it's pork (he did), but with vet suicides reaching their highest levels since Vietnam, there's also a pretty good reason to act.  A hold, just like it sounds, prevents action.

I'm not going to argue that Vets do deserve certain benefits, but take a look at what he's saying here and tell me if you want mandatory mental health screening when you go to your doctor.

That becomes a part of your permanent medical record and at least reading the story, it would make screening compulsory.  If someone were simply going through a brief depressive period, as most people do, their permanent medical record will reflect "depression".  That in itself can prevent a person from other rights like maintaining a pilot's license, owning a firearm, and could be basis to be declined for a job, private health benefits, or life insurance- or at least rated as a higher risk.

It's not as cut-and-dry as it seems on the surface.  Vet bills like this are nothing but politics at it's worst.

"He opposes provisions that would require mental health screening for all veterans receiving medical care. Coburn says it duplicates efforts by the Department of Veterans Affairs to identify mental illness and counsel veterans who might be suicidal.

He also says the bill violates the civil liberties of vets by "tracking" those who receive mental health services."

[Hometown]

quote:Originally posted by YoungTulsan

Finally, my federal grant to research the eating habits of gay ostriches will be appropriated!

Let's say your community derived it's income from gay ostriches.  And your community formed a consensus that research on gay ostriches was important to your community.  Should Washington listen to your input on what you believe your community needs, or should Washington dictate to you what your community needs?

Earmarks are a mechanism for funding community based needs.

[rwarn17588]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by we vs us

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

I like Coburns pork stance.  I like the fact that he actually does his own thing.  BUT, I too often don't like his thing.

But before I hang him out to dry on these bills, I'd like to see what they are.  If it is all pork, more power to him (and pork usually has broad based support).  But I really don't know.

It's the "roughly a hundred" part that's ridiculous to me.  Being a self-appointed one-man pork-stopper just reeks of self-aggrandizement. I'm hoping he has some criteria other than his own personal whim for holding these bills up, but that may be too much to ask.

Self-aggrandizement?  I guess that's in the eye of the beholder, I can see how people would interpret his actions that way and wouldn't call you as off-base for that assertion, though I don't agree.  It think you have to be somewhat ego-centric to run for office in the first place.  CL is right, Coburn is an idealogue and you might be able to go as far as to call him a political iconoclast.  He's all about cutting the size of government and government waste.  He's against BAU in D.C.,   personally, I think that's a good thing.  

Given that Coburn supported a war that's cost $1 trillion and has been enormously wasteful, I find his anti-spending stance unbelievably hollow.

Rant against that $50,000 earmark while ignoring that money black hole in Iraq ... [xx(]

Crap like that is the reason the Republicans are in big trouble with the voters. And it's not the only reason.

[Chicken Little]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

It's not as cut-and-dry as it seems on the surface.

Oh, but it is.  In the bill, there were safeguards and protections on who sees the information and how it is used.  It was doctor-patient information.  Period.  Are you telling me he doesn't understand this concept?

Moreover, things like PTSD are treatable medical conditions.  One might presume that a guy who wants people to call him Doctor would want to heal people.  In his position, he could not only help thousands of vets get the treatment they need, but he could also do much to help get rid of the stigma associated with mental health issues, thus helping millions more.

His financial reasoning is goofy, too.  Does anybody feel like arguing that research doesn't pay off in the long run?  In the short term, prevention, early screening, and intervention is a net savings for our economy and our government.  

And yet, he derails   breast cancer bills not just once, but twice!

And now he's got a hold on an AIDs prevention bill.  A bill that incidentally would be one of the few accomplishments that Bush could point to and say, unequivocally, "I hepped humanity...and the whole humanitarian race.  Heh, heh, heh."  I, for one, wouldn't begrudge him this one.

Coburn is and idealogue, but he most certainly is not an iconoclast.  He's not destroying flawed institutions, he's destroying people.

And yes, I'm telling you how I REALLY feel about it.