JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL

The Congressional Research Service is helping its masters hide wasteful spending.

Nothing highlighted Congress’s spending problem in last year’s election more than earmarks, the special projects like Alaska’s “Bridge to Nowhere” that members drop into last-minute conference reports leaving no opportunity to debate or amend them. Voters opted for change in Congress, but on earmarks it looks as if they’ll only be getting more smoke and mirrors.

Democrats promised reform and instituted “a moratorium” on all earmarks until the system was cleaned up. Now the appropriations committees are privately accepting pork-barrel requests again. But curiously, the scorekeeper on earmarks, the Library of Congress’s Congressional Research Service (CRS)–a publicly funded, nonpartisan federal agency–has suddenly announced it will no longer respond to requests from members of Congress on the size, number or background of earmarks. “They claim it’ll be transparent, but they’re taking away the very data that lets us know what’s really happening,” says Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn. “I’m convinced the appropriations committees are flexing their muscles with CRS.”

Indeed, the shift in CRS policy represents a dramatic break with its 12-year practice of supplying members with earmark data. “CRS will no longer identify earmarks for individual programs, activities, entities, or individuals,” stated a private Feb. 22 directive from CRS Director Daniel Mulhollan.

When Sen. Coburn and Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina submitted earmark inquiries recently, they were both turned down. Each then had heated conversations with Mr. Mulhollan. The director, who declined to be interviewed for this article, explained that because the appropriations committees and the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) were now preparing their own lists of earmarks, CRS should no longer play a role in the process. He also noted that both the House and Senate are preparing their own definitions of earmarks. “It is not appropriate for us to continue our research,” his directive states. Read more…

Sen. Coburn Discusses Earmarks with John Gibson of Fox News Channel

JOHN FUND ON THE TRAIL

The Congressional Research Service is helping its masters hide wasteful spending.

Nothing highlighted Congress’s spending problem in last year’s election more than earmarks, the special projects like Alaska’s “Bridge to Nowhere” that members drop into last-minute conference reports leaving no opportunity to debate or amend them. Voters opted for change in Congress, but on earmarks it looks as if they’ll only be getting more smoke and mirrors.

Democrats promised reform and instituted “a moratorium” on all earmarks until the system was cleaned up. Now the appropriations committees are privately accepting pork-barrel requests again. But curiously, the scorekeeper on earmarks, the Library of Congress’s Congressional Research Service (CRS)–a publicly funded, nonpartisan federal agency–has suddenly announced it will no longer respond to requests from members of Congress on the size, number or background of earmarks. “They claim it’ll be transparent, but they’re taking away the very data that lets us know what’s really happening,” says Oklahoma Sen. Tom Coburn. “I’m convinced the appropriations committees are flexing their muscles with CRS.”

Indeed, the shift in CRS policy represents a dramatic break with its 12-year practice of supplying members with earmark data. “CRS will no longer identify earmarks for individual programs, activities, entities, or individuals,” stated a private Feb. 22 directive from CRS Director Daniel Mulhollan.

When Sen. Coburn and Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina submitted earmark inquiries recently, they were both turned down. Each then had heated conversations with Mr. Mulhollan. The director, who declined to be interviewed for this article, explained that because the appropriations committees and the White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB) were now preparing their own lists of earmarks, CRS should no longer play a role in the process. He also noted that both the House and Senate are preparing their own definitions of earmarks. “It is not appropriate for us to continue our research,” his directive states. Read more…

Sen. Coburn Discusses Earmarks with John Gibson of Fox News Channel

One piece of legislation this year which attracted much interest is House Bill 1804. HB 1804 is the immigration reform bill sponsored by Representative Randy Terrel (R-Moore). This bill is viewed as one of the most aggressive pieces of state legislation in the nation dealing with immigration reform.

A few weeks ago after much debate, the bill passed the house on a vote of 88-9. It is now in the hands of the Senate where it appears it faces a strong challenge. Some may wonder what changed between house passage and senate consideration to make the bill more vulnerable.

A key point of contention appears to be an attempt in the bill to hold employers accountable for hiring illegal aliens. The idea is that if employers stop being complicit in offering jobs to illegals, then illegals seeking employment will re-channel their energies into securing legal status.

The bill requires any business working under a state contract to verify social security numbers of their perspective employees in order to ensure they are legal. The bill encourages other businesses (those not under state contract) to verify social security numbers of perspective employees through the following means–it allows American employees who are terminated at a business which does not verify social security numbers to file an action with the Department of Labor if they were terminated while an illegal alien remains on that business payroll.

It is this provision that seems to have drawn the wrath of the Research Institute of Economic Development (RIED). Each year RIED publishes an index that grades legislators on how friendly they are to business interests. Each issue is graded on a scale of -20 to +20. In one of their latest updates, RIED indicated they will be grading immigration reform as a -20 vote. In other words, any lawmaker who votes for immigration reform will likely have a very hard time getting a real strong REID index score.

This is why immigration reform may face an uphill climb in the Senate. If the bill does pass the Senate, it may be a watered-down version which may not prevent employers from turning a blind eye to illegal immigration in their hiring practices. The sad reality of the situation dictates that unless we dry up the jobs, then illegal immigration will probably continue to be a major problem.

One piece of legislation this year which attracted much interest is House Bill 1804. HB 1804 is the immigration reform bill sponsored by Representative Randy Terrel (R-Moore). This bill is viewed as one of the most aggressive pieces of state legislation in the nation dealing with immigration reform.

A few weeks ago after much debate, the bill passed the house on a vote of 88-9. It is now in the hands of the Senate where it appears it faces a strong challenge. Some may wonder what changed between house passage and senate consideration to make the bill more vulnerable.

A key point of contention appears to be an attempt in the bill to hold employers accountable for hiring illegal aliens. The idea is that if employers stop being complicit in offering jobs to illegals, then illegals seeking employment will re-channel their energies into securing legal status.

The bill requires any business working under a state contract to verify social security numbers of their perspective employees in order to ensure they are legal. The bill encourages other businesses (those not under state contract) to verify social security numbers of perspective employees through the following means–it allows American employees who are terminated at a business which does not verify social security numbers to file an action with the Department of Labor if they were terminated while an illegal alien remains on that business payroll.

It is this provision that seems to have drawn the wrath of the Research Institute of Economic Development (RIED). Each year RIED publishes an index that grades legislators on how friendly they are to business interests. Each issue is graded on a scale of -20 to +20. In one of their latest updates, RIED indicated they will be grading immigration reform as a -20 vote. In other words, any lawmaker who votes for immigration reform will likely have a very hard time getting a real strong REID index score.

This is why immigration reform may face an uphill climb in the Senate. If the bill does pass the Senate, it may be a watered-down version which may not prevent employers from turning a blind eye to illegal immigration in their hiring practices. The sad reality of the situation dictates that unless we dry up the jobs, then illegal immigration will probably continue to be a major problem.

Governor Henry made a rare visit to the Democrats’ caucus meeting Monday. One veteran lawmaker remarked that in their recollection, this was the first time Henry had ever attended a caucus meeting since being elected in ‘02.

Why now the sudden urge to bond with his Democratic compatriots? Did he simply want to hand out souvenirs and show photos from his recent Mexican vacation?

Sources tell OKPNS that Henry promised at the meeting to raise 100k if they would help sustain his line item veto for funding an independent performance audit of the Department of Corrections.

There is a familiar pattern here. Last week in Washington, House Democratic leaders had to resort to bribing their own members with pork projects in order to pass a war supplemental bill mandating troop withdrawal timetables. Now, here comes Governor Henry bribing his own Democrats’ to sustain his veto. OKPNS will continue to investigate.

By Elana Schor

Fresh from his face-to-face tussle with former Vice President Al Gore, Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) is vowing to stall Gore’s hotly anticipated Capitol concert to draw attention to global warming.

Inhofe’s belief that climate change is “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people” is common knowledge in the capitol, and environmental groups cheered the new prospects for carbon-capping legislation when he ceded the Environment and Public Works Committee gavel this session. But Inhofe’s parliamentary powers can block indefinitely the resolution that would permit Gore to choose the capitol’s West Front for the U.S. leg of his seven-continent Live Earth concert tour — a collaboration between Gore and promoter Kevin Wall, who masterminded previous blockbuster charity concerts Live Aid and Live 8.

“There has never been a partisan political event at the Capitol, and this is a partisan political event,” Inhofe said yesterday. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) attempted late last week to pass the authorizing measure for Live Earth by unanimous consent. But Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) raised an objection on the floor, seeking more time for his side to look at the resolution.

Inhofe appeared to see little room for an accommodation that could allow the concert to go forward. “There’s no compromise. Either we change the rules or we don’t.” Read more

Gov. Brad Henry announced his first line-item veto of budget funding today, saying he will use his veto pen to strike down $1 million in supplemental funds earmarked for the Legislature’s Legislative Services Bureau. The governor said the appropriation duplicates the work of existing state authorities and contains no accountability measures to ensure it will be spent responsibly.

Henry said it is critical for the state to conduct regular performance reviews of state agencies such as DOC, but state law assigns that duty to the State Auditor and Inspector, the Oklahoma Legislature and the Office of State Finance. Paying a private consultant an additional $1 million to do the same work assigned to other state authorities would be duplicative and a waste of taxpayer money, according to the governor.

“We must hold agencies accountable for every dollar they spend so we can get the best bang for taxpayers’ bucks,” said Gov. Henry. “That’s why we fund a state auditor, a state finance office and legislative committees and staffs. That’s why we passed a zero-based budgeting law that charges the Legislature with doing an in-house, top-to-bottom financial review of every state agency on a regular basis.

“If they’ve complied with the zero-based budgeting statute and done their regular oversight duties, legislative leaders should already have the information and data they need to determine an appropriate course of action for corrections and any other agency.”

Gov. Henry noted that after he signed Oklahoma’s zero-based budgeting law in 2003, one of the first agencies audited by the Legislature’s zero-based budgeting committee was the Department of Corrections.

Republican leaders questioned today Gov. Brad Henry’s line-item veto of funding for an independent performance audit of the Department of Corrections – which the governor described as his “first” line-item veto of HB 1234, the bipartisan general appropriations bill overwhelmingly approved by the Legislature last week.

“What is the governor trying to hide with this veto? Is Gov. Henry afraid that an independent performance audit might uncover his mismanagement of a critical public safety agency? Independent performance audits at public school districts have proven very effective at improving efficiency and saving taxpayers’ money. We believe independent performance audits can have the same positive impact on the Department of Corrections and other state agencies,” stated Senate Co-President Pro Tempore Glenn Coffee, R-Oklahoma City.

“Perhaps the governor is worried that a more efficient Department of Corrections would interfere with his plans to implement the early release program that he outlined in his State of the State Address?” queried Coffee.

“Today Gov. Henry has taken a stand against fiscal responsibility. We hope that he does not decide to take a stand against bipartisanship, too, with additional line-item vetoes the bipartisan general appropriations bill. If additional vetoes occur, the governor will poison the bipartisan atmosphere at the Legislature and will set the stage for a possible government shutdown,” stated Sen. Mike Johnson, R-Kingfisher, the co-chair of the Senate Appropriations Committee.

Rep. Rex Duncan, the House leader on public safety, expressed his frustration and disappointment after Governor Henry tried to kill a plan to conduct a top-to-bottom audit and outside review to fix problems in Oklahoma’s state prisons.

“After four years of failed policies to address our state prisons crisis, Governor Henry has shown the worst kind of arrogance today by killing attempts at reform. Governor Henry is apparently not interested in accountability to the taxpayers. The governor is now playing partisan gridlock games. What is the governor trying to hide by vetoing this plan?”

Duncan said the root of the state’s prison crisis stems from the failure of the governor and his financial adviser Scott Meacham to budget appropriately for costs at the Department of Corrections over the past several years, consistently low-balling estimates for the DOC by millions of dollars each year. In each case, the Legislature appropriated millions more for state prisons than recommended by the executive branch, and then had to make supplemental appropriations on top of that year after year.

The independent outside audit was part of a historic bipartisan budget agreement passed by an overwhelming margin last week in the State Legislature. The DOC audit has been supported by legislative leaders in both parties, and would cost $1 million — a mere fraction of the DOC’s massive half-a-billion-dollar budget.

“This audit has the strong support of leaders in both parties. It’s a solid effort to reform a broken system,” said Duncan. “If this is the governor’s first ’symbolic’ line-item veto, he is sending a terrible message about business as usual at the State Capitol. The governor makes disingenuous claims that the state auditor or his finance office could perform this audit, but that undercuts his entire argument. His administration has failed to solve the problems in our prisons. Clearly we need some outside expertise, people who don’t have a political agenda
like the governor does.”

Duncan said he found it ironic the governor and Meacham apparently are working on hiring an outside consultant for the EDGE initiative, yet they don’t see the value in hiring outside expertise to help resolve the state’s prison crisis.

“We have a real problem in our state’s prisons right now, and it’s only been made worse by the failed policies of the governor. It’s time to stop the harmful cycle of band-aid supplemental spending on our state’s prisons, but apparently the governor is comfortable continuing to write blank checks into a broken system.”

From the Saxum Perspective:

“Taking control of the message is all-important when communicating (especially in a crisis)…

Perception: Governor Henry has sour grapes for being left out of this crucial budgeting situation. Message Control: Governor Henry should ‘thank’ legislators publicly and rip them privately. People love him and there is no reason to expend political capital publicly.”