When Given Choice, Senators Lean Toward Spending

I'm going to take a quick look at how recent Senate voting on amendments to the Labor, HHS, and Education Spending bill indicates that the senators are having a hard time cutting out spending on earmarks. All of these votes occurred on Thursday, October 18.

1.

The first vote occurred at 12:33. The question was: Should the Senate limit a funding provision with respect to the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service? This Center, honoring the veteran U.S. Representative from New York, would be based in Harlem. I would think it unusual to establish a Center for a Congressman who is still actively serving. According to Jim DeMint (SC), Rangel himself put the earmark in the House version of the bill. The earmark is in the amount of $2m. The Center does not yet exist. It would be installed at the City College of New York.

The amendment was defeated, 34-61.

It was supported mostly be Democrats but received support from the following Republicans: Alexander (TN), Bond (MO), Cochran (MS), Collins (ME), Craig (ID), Hagel (NE), Hatch (UT), Lott (MS), Lugar (IN), Murkowski (AK), Shelby (AL), Specter (PA), Stevens (AK), Voinovich (OH), and Warner (VA).

The following Democrats voted to limit funding for the Center: Bayh (IN) and Feingold (WI).

2.

Second, an amendment that would provide funding so that the Department of Health and Human Services could research and try to go after these rogue, resistant staph infections that have been popping up around the nation. In its own words, "[An amendment] to provide funding for activities to reduce infections from methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and related infections."

OK, hard to argue this one. It passes 90-3. Coburn (OK), DeMint (OK), and Inhofe (OK) vote against it.

3.

Third, an amendment to add more spending to the bill for the Mine Safety and Health Administration. This is a Byrd (WV) amendment. Byrd explains it:

"Today, I am offering an amendment that would add $10 million. Did you hear that? It would add $10 million to MSHA's budget. These funds are necessary to enable MSHA both to complete the safety inspections required by the law and also to implement the mandates required by the MINER Act."

It passes easily, 89-4. Voting against are Cornyn (TX), DeMint (SC), Inhofe (OK), and Kyl (AZ).

4.

Fourth, a Brown (OH) amendment "To provide funding for the Underground Railroad Educational and Cultural Program." It is in the amount of $2m.

It had broad support and passed 81-12.

5.

Now for a different outcome, we take a look at an earmark that would have provided $1m for a museum dedicated to Woodstock. Tom Coburn (OK) offered an amendment that would take the $1m away from the Woodstock earmark and devote it instead to provide additional care for pregnant women, mothers, and infants.

Democrats moved to table the amendment. They needed 50 yeas to table (i.e. kill) it. They did not succeed

The motion to table the Coburn amendment got 42 yeas, to 52 nays, and failed to pass. When a motion to table fails, the underlying amendment is usually then allowed to pass by a voice vote, which is what happened with this amendment. So, no $1m of federal money for a museum devoted to Woodstock.

Democrats generally opposed taking money away from the Woodstock museum. Zero Republicans voted in support of saving the Woodstock earmark. Democrats voting against tabling the Coburn amendment, i.e. voting to take money away from the Woodstock museum included Feingold (WI), McCaskill (MO), Landrieu (LA), and Webb (VA).