Economic rescue plan splits Oklahoma's conservatives

By Chris Casteel

Published: September 28, 2008

WASHINGTON — Less than a month ago, Republicans at their national convention adopted a party platform that stated: "We do not support government bailouts of private institutions.”

Under a section titled Rebuilding Homeownership, the platform goes on to say that "government interference in the markets ... causes the free market to take longer to correct itself.”

That principle, long-held by free-market conservatives, is being tested now as Congress grapples with the Bush administration's call for quick action to bail out the financial industry.

Six of the seven members of Oklahoma's congressional delegation are Republicans who score high in the ratings by conservative groups, and they were torn last week between their philosophical opposition to massive government intervention in the financial markets and President Bush's warnings of dire consequences if the government didn't come to the rescue.

"There's big resistance from conservatives to doing this,” said Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Muskogee, adding that he would likely face wrath "if I wind up voting for this thing.”

But Coburn, arguably the most tight-fisted conservative in Congress, said lawmakers had to take quick action to rescue the economy.

"We don't have an option other than restoring confidence in our system because right now we have a crisis on our hands,” Coburn said.

House Republicans developed an alternative plan that would rely on private money to boost financial institutions rather than having the government take direct responsibility for troubled investments.

"We're trying to work our way through something that is consistent with our principles but is the right thing to do for the country,” Cole said.

Cole said he didn't come to Washington "to abandon my principles.” But, he said, "Nobody's being asked to raise taxes. Nobody's being asked to increase the size of government. We're being asked to do an asset purchase that might yield more than we put into it.”

Rep. Frank Lucas, R-Cheyenne, a senior member of the House Financial Services Committee, which worked on the details of the plan, stressed last week that the consequences of inaction could quickly make their way to his own rural district far from Wall Street.

"I want to make sure that my constituents never have the kind of economic hard times we had in the 1980s,” Lucas said. "It took 15 years for farm land prices and oil and gas property prices to return to pre-crash levels.

"And we also have in my district about 20 percent of my constituents are 70 years and older,” Lucas said. "A lot of those people remember the Great Depression. I don't want that to happen on my watch.”

Cole, Coburn and Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Tulsa, said they wouldn't vote for the proposal as first written, but many Democrats said the same thing.

Coburn, a fierce critic of government debt who has single-handedly held up dozens of bills because they called for relatively small amounts of new spending, was at least open to the idea of authorizing $700 billion, depending on the final details, to aid private financial institutions.

"What's happening now is what Congress is supposed to be doing, coming to grips with a financial crisis and figuring out the right thing to do,” Cole said.

Cole, who came to Congress nearly six years ago, said the vote on the rescue package would be "probably the most important vote I've cast.”

Comments