When the history of this period is written, Sen. Jim Bunning (R-KY) is likely to stand out from the pack of big spenders as a taxpayer advocate who helped point the way to fiscal renewal at his own political expense. Unfortunately, Bunning’s principled, economically sound stand against extending unemployment benefits does not go over well with big government apologists at The New York Times…
Americans who have rightly called out the federal government for reckless over-spending and mismanaged entitlement schemes have a friend in Jim Bunning of Kentucky the former Philadelphia Phillies ace turned conservative U.S. Senator. In his own seemingly small way, Bunning fought tenaciously and successfully for fiscal restraint earlier this month.
Senators in both parties who routinely operate as though there is a bottomless pit of money were scandalized when the Kentucky Republican took a principled stand against the extension of unemployment benefits without offsetting budget cuts. The New York Times chimed in with disinformation and misleading terminology that gave cover to profligate lawmakers, while belittling and dismissing Bunning as a mere obstructionist.
“After holding up the bill since last Thursday, Mr. Bunning retreated under pressure from members of his own party as well as intense criticism from Democrats, who had threatened to keep the Senate in session while lawmakers unloaded on the Kentucky Republican,” The Times reports. “The agreement essentially allowed Mr. Bunning the vote that he could have had last week but refused. His proposal was defeated on procedural grounds, but the senator stuck by his position that the $10 billion costs of the unemployment pay should not be added to the deficit.”
As financial guru Larry Kudlow explains in a blog post, was not attempting to filibuster the unemployment measure. Instead, he was asking Senate colleagues to vote on the record as being for or against one of their own budget rules.
“Sen. Jim Bunning was right all along,” Kudlow wrote. “He was just trying to get the Senate to enforce its own pay-go budget rule and actually find $10 billion of spending cuts out of a $3.5 trillion budget to pay for extended unemployment benefits and other items in a catch-all spending bill. For this, an act of integrity, everyone in Washington and the media piled on him. So I’ll defend him. Bunning actually favors unemployment benefits, but he wants Congress to find $10 billion in a $3.5 trillion budget to pay for it.”
Just over a month ago, Congress passed the “pay as go you go bill.” Is it too much to ask that other members uphold their own rule for at least a few weeks? The hard economic realities associated with extending unemployment benefits do not find expression in the reporting. Instead, The Times remained fixated on removing the very modest restraints on spending that Bunning pursued. It also took the opportunity to celebrate an uplift Susan Collins (R-Maine), a long-time media favorite.
“And Senator Susan Collins of Maine, a moderate Republican colleague of the conservative Mr. Bunning, joined Democrats in trying to force the measure through, calculating that perhaps a plea from a fellow Republican would get him to change his position.”
How is that big spending are characterized as “moderate,” while taxpayer advocates are lampooned?
“While trying to blame Democrats for mishandling the entire matter, other Republicans also distanced themselves from Mr. Bunning, whom Democrats were holding up as the embodiment of what they say has been a maddening pattern of Republican obstruction in the Senate,” The Times declared.
Those “other Republicans” who are too quick to apologize for federal expenditures may want to revisit the 2006 and 2008 election returns. The strong reaction against their party’s betrayal of small, government libertarian principles has not abated as evidenced by the Tea Party movement.
Popularity: 1% [?]
