News
Aug 07 2006
Coburn Probing Colleges Earmarks
Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) quietly has begun an investigation into six years of earmarks won by more than 100 colleges and universities, a sector that has collected billions in federal awards in recent years.
According to Coburn's spokesman, the Senator, an opponent of earmarks, is looking for corruption, spending mismanagement and a better understanding of how the process works, especially since the probes of Jack Abramoff and former Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-Calif.) showed that appropriations have been used for criminal purposes.
The little-known investigation already has stirred up controversy on K Street and raised questions from Coburn's Senate colleagues.
Higher education lobbyists said their clients were blindsided when they received letters late last week from Coburn asking detailed questions about their earmarks and work with lobbyists to secure the politically popular funds. Several lobbyists said they immediately became suspicious of the Senator's intentions and have recommended that their clients not cooperate.
"I am advising them not to respond on the basis that I think the letter itself is disingenuous," said one Republican contract lobbyist whose clients received the letter and then promptly faxed it to the lobbyist. "I think it's a trap."
In the letter, Coburn wrote that the schools, which his spokesman, John Hart, said were selected in part because they receive large amounts of the earmarked money, carry out "the research that often translates into life-changing" discoveries.
"Although this is a very gracious and nice sounding letter, this is going to be a very messy September and October," said another lobbyist familiar with the letter. (Coburn's request is not a subpoena, but he asked the public and private schools to provide the information by Sept. 1.)
Hart said Coburn - who chairs the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee on federal financial management, government information and international security - possibly would hold hearings on the education earmarks. He also plans to evaluate the appropriations of local governments and other entities in the future.
But at least some of Coburn's Senate colleagues - including those with a stake in his probe - had been kept in the dark about the Oklahoman's plans.
Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), chairman of the Appropriations Committee, said Coburn had not consulted him on the matter.
"Any Senator has a right to find out whether federal funds are being used in an appropriate manner," Cochran said. "That's what I assume Sen. Coburn is trying to learn."
Bill Ghent, a spokesman for Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), who serves as ranking member on Coburn's subcommittee, said his boss was unaware of Coburn's agenda.
"We've not been privy to Sen. Coburn's intentions," Ghent said. "As far as we know there's nothing on the calendar for September for him to do a hearing on this issue."
And a spokesman for Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who chairs the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said the full panel had no plans to hold hearings on the matter.
Coburn has been an outspoken critic of earmarks, even when they are the pet projects of fellow Republicans, and has raised the ire of such colleagues as Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). But Coburn's colleagues last week approved an amendment he sponsored that would require the Defense Department to detail all earmarks by Congressional district.
This year, earmarks have become increasingly controversial, with Members saying they plan to reform the process.
For example, House Appropriations Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) has been linked to a federal probe involving the appropriations lobbying firm formerly known as Copeland Lowery Jacquez Denton & White. Press accounts have detailed that in one instance, Loma Linda University in California received more than $200 million in federal funds thanks to Lewis' help. His office did not return a call seeking comment.
Hart said Coburn's earmark research was not intended to hurt universities.
"We're not suggesting there's anything nefarious that universities are doing, but we're more concerned with what politicians are doing to universities," he said. "We want to see if earmarking has a negative impact on universities themselves because the process tends to reward people disproportionately based on how much they spend on lobbyists and give in political donations."
Perhaps another reason Coburn is interested in examining the sector is that the business of lobbying for college and university earmarks has grown dramatically in recent years, said lobbyists and officials with budget groups who track the appropriations process.
Keith Ashdown, vice president for policy and communications at Taxpayers for Common Sense, said education lobbying was "the first sector of appropriations lobbying that was commodified. It really became the hip K Street appropriation practice" pioneered by firms such as Cassidy & Associates.
And campus officials, Ashdown said, "were the first entities to really pick up on this idea of having to keep up with the earmark Joneses."
Ashdown said his group does not have figures for how much federal money education institutions won last year. But the most recent Chronicle of Higher Education survey said Congress earmarked more than $2 billion in 2003 for colleges and universities.
House Appropriations spokesman John Scofield said the bulk of federal research dollars doesn't go to earmarks but to the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.
"I'm not saying the universities that get earmarks aren't doing good stuff, but for all the attention it draws, it's a small part," he said.
Hart said Coburn's effort will help ensure that federal dollars are spent wisely and said his boss refers to earmarks as "the gateway drug" to overspending.
"A lot of the money that's earmarked to universities does go to worthy projects, but he's more concerned with how that money is delivered," Hart said. "It puts university presidents under the thumb of politicians, and we have a major problem with that."
One longtime education lobbyist said he plans to comply with Coburn's request and will draft his client's response.
"They have meritorious projects that are a great use of federal investment," he said. "It's an opportunity to put on the record, the good things that earmarks have done for universities."
According to Coburn's spokesman, the Senator, an opponent of earmarks, is looking for corruption, spending mismanagement and a better understanding of how the process works, especially since the probes of Jack Abramoff and former Rep. Duke Cunningham (R-Calif.) showed that appropriations have been used for criminal purposes.
The little-known investigation already has stirred up controversy on K Street and raised questions from Coburn's Senate colleagues.
Higher education lobbyists said their clients were blindsided when they received letters late last week from Coburn asking detailed questions about their earmarks and work with lobbyists to secure the politically popular funds. Several lobbyists said they immediately became suspicious of the Senator's intentions and have recommended that their clients not cooperate.
"I am advising them not to respond on the basis that I think the letter itself is disingenuous," said one Republican contract lobbyist whose clients received the letter and then promptly faxed it to the lobbyist. "I think it's a trap."
In the letter, Coburn wrote that the schools, which his spokesman, John Hart, said were selected in part because they receive large amounts of the earmarked money, carry out "the research that often translates into life-changing" discoveries.
"Although this is a very gracious and nice sounding letter, this is going to be a very messy September and October," said another lobbyist familiar with the letter. (Coburn's request is not a subpoena, but he asked the public and private schools to provide the information by Sept. 1.)
Hart said Coburn - who chairs the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs subcommittee on federal financial management, government information and international security - possibly would hold hearings on the education earmarks. He also plans to evaluate the appropriations of local governments and other entities in the future.
But at least some of Coburn's Senate colleagues - including those with a stake in his probe - had been kept in the dark about the Oklahoman's plans.
Sen. Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), chairman of the Appropriations Committee, said Coburn had not consulted him on the matter.
"Any Senator has a right to find out whether federal funds are being used in an appropriate manner," Cochran said. "That's what I assume Sen. Coburn is trying to learn."
Bill Ghent, a spokesman for Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), who serves as ranking member on Coburn's subcommittee, said his boss was unaware of Coburn's agenda.
"We've not been privy to Sen. Coburn's intentions," Ghent said. "As far as we know there's nothing on the calendar for September for him to do a hearing on this issue."
And a spokesman for Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), who chairs the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, said the full panel had no plans to hold hearings on the matter.
Coburn has been an outspoken critic of earmarks, even when they are the pet projects of fellow Republicans, and has raised the ire of such colleagues as Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska). But Coburn's colleagues last week approved an amendment he sponsored that would require the Defense Department to detail all earmarks by Congressional district.
This year, earmarks have become increasingly controversial, with Members saying they plan to reform the process.
For example, House Appropriations Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) has been linked to a federal probe involving the appropriations lobbying firm formerly known as Copeland Lowery Jacquez Denton & White. Press accounts have detailed that in one instance, Loma Linda University in California received more than $200 million in federal funds thanks to Lewis' help. His office did not return a call seeking comment.
Hart said Coburn's earmark research was not intended to hurt universities.
"We're not suggesting there's anything nefarious that universities are doing, but we're more concerned with what politicians are doing to universities," he said. "We want to see if earmarking has a negative impact on universities themselves because the process tends to reward people disproportionately based on how much they spend on lobbyists and give in political donations."
Perhaps another reason Coburn is interested in examining the sector is that the business of lobbying for college and university earmarks has grown dramatically in recent years, said lobbyists and officials with budget groups who track the appropriations process.
Keith Ashdown, vice president for policy and communications at Taxpayers for Common Sense, said education lobbying was "the first sector of appropriations lobbying that was commodified. It really became the hip K Street appropriation practice" pioneered by firms such as Cassidy & Associates.
And campus officials, Ashdown said, "were the first entities to really pick up on this idea of having to keep up with the earmark Joneses."
Ashdown said his group does not have figures for how much federal money education institutions won last year. But the most recent Chronicle of Higher Education survey said Congress earmarked more than $2 billion in 2003 for colleges and universities.
House Appropriations spokesman John Scofield said the bulk of federal research dollars doesn't go to earmarks but to the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.
"I'm not saying the universities that get earmarks aren't doing good stuff, but for all the attention it draws, it's a small part," he said.
Hart said Coburn's effort will help ensure that federal dollars are spent wisely and said his boss refers to earmarks as "the gateway drug" to overspending.
"A lot of the money that's earmarked to universities does go to worthy projects, but he's more concerned with how that money is delivered," Hart said. "It puts university presidents under the thumb of politicians, and we have a major problem with that."
One longtime education lobbyist said he plans to comply with Coburn's request and will draft his client's response.
"They have meritorious projects that are a great use of federal investment," he said. "It's an opportunity to put on the record, the good things that earmarks have done for universities."
