ThinkProgress Logo

Stories tagged with “Tom Coburn”

NEWS FLASH

Coburn: ‘Not Surprising At All’ That Personhood Was Defeated | Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) dismissed last night’s defeat of Mississippi’s personhood amendment — which defined life as beginning at fertilization and could have banned common forms of birth control and in vitro fertilization — during a Politico event this morning and admitted that the measure was poorly worded. “I think it probably wasn’t written well to accomplish what they wanted, created some doubt in terms of oral contraceptives and other contraceptive devises and I think when you raise that question and put it up, you’re going to run into some difficulties,” he said, adding, “It’s not surprising to me at all.” Watch it:

Health

Coburn Doesn’t Think He Has To Offer Coverage Alternatives To Seniors He Kicks Out Of Medicare

By Igor Volsky on Nov 9, 2011 at 10:30 am

Politico’s David Nather pressed Tom Coburn on his proposal to raise the Medicare eligibility age and wondered if the senator was at all concerned that younger seniors (those between the ages of 65 and 67) would go uninsured if the exchanges in the Affordable Care Act were also repealed. Coburn notes that his latest proposal with Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) assumed that the law remains enact, but said he wouldn’t mind increasing eligibility even if seniors had no clear alternative for obtaining coverage:

NATHER: You say you made a choice to assume that the Affordable Care Act survives in your legislation with Sen. Lieberman, but you don’t have to. What is your feeling if the eligibly age becomes a point of compromise on the deficit, is it necessary for Republicans to assume that at least the exchanges and guarantee issue survive?

COBURN: It doesn’t have to. The fact is we have a difficulty right now with people who are retiring — if they’re retiring before 65 or they’re retiring before 67 which we would propose eventually getting to — they have a difficulty buying an insurance product. But again, our big problem in health care is that a third of the dollars we spend in health care doesn’t help anybody.

Watch it:

Note that rather than discussing strategies for expanding coverage to those he would literally push out of Medicare, Coburn embarks on a rant about identifying waste in the system and reducing spending. One wonders if Romney — who also repeals the health law while increasing the Medicare age — would agree with this answer.

Economy

Coburn Relents On Block Of FAA Re-Authorization Package Under Pressure From Republican Colleagues

By Travis Waldron on Sep 15, 2011 at 5:30 pm

Until late this afternoon, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) was single-handedly blocking the transportation bill that would temporarily reauthorize the Federal Aviation Administration, keep 80,000 people in their jobs, and avoid another costly shutdown like the one that occurred in August. Coburn had said he was blocking the bill due to the “indefensible threat to public safety” caused by a provision in the bill meant to increase trees and bike paths alongside roadways.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) had repeatedly chided Coburn, saying “the junior senator from Oklahoma” was acting like “a dictator.” Coburn reportedly removed his block of the bill this afternoon, but not before several Republican senators joined in that criticism, urging Coburn to relent on his blockade so the Senate could vote on the transportation package and avoid another shutdown:

“We need to reduce spending and cut out special interest provisions, but we should not let a gap in the construction program go forward,” said [Sen. Mark] Kirk [R-IL], whose state has the very busy O’Hare International Airport. “The economy is already teetering on the edge of a recession. So Congress should not repeat what happened with the FAA in August.”

Texas Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who blasted her Republican colleagues and said the August shutdown was “not honorable,” joined Kirk, saying she wanted the package to “pass without any delays. It’s too costly.” She was echoed by Sen. Dean Heller of Nevada and the Senate GOP’s Conference Chair, Lamar Alexander (TN), who said simply, “We need an FAA extension.”

The August FAA shutdown was costly for both workers and the government. For nearly two weeks, 4,000 FAA employees were involuntarily furloughed and the government lost more than $200 million a week in tax revenues. Now, just when it seemed both sides had reached an agreement to keep the agency funded for another four months, Republican extremism struck again in the form of Coburn’s block. If Coburn hadn’t heeded his colleagues’ advice, nearly 80,000 Americans could have been out of work, and the blame for another FAA shutdown would have again laid at the feet of the Republican Party.

Update

The Senate voted 92-6 to approve the transportation bill, which includes a temporary re-authorization of the FAA. The House has already approved the bill.

Economy

Coburn Holds FAA Bill Hostage, Claiming Trees And Bike Paths Pose ‘An Indefensible Threat Against Public Safety’

By Marie Diamond on Sep 15, 2011 at 10:50 am

Yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) took Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) to task for blocking a critical transportation bill — an action that could put 80,000 people out of work by this weekend. The GOP-controlled House has already passed the bill, which temporarily extends funding for the Federal Aviation Administration and highway projects, in order to avert another FAA shutdown.

The bill needs to be signed by President Obama by Friday, but Coburn is threatening to let the deadline pass. He’s even found a novel excuse for holding the bill hostage — his objection to bike paths and trees:

Coburn spokesman John Hart said Wednesday that the senator “makes no apologies for doing everything in his power to force his colleagues to cut wasteful spending instead of inflicting further damage on our economy through unnecessary borrowing.

“Congress’s refusal to live within its means has created an economic disaster and a debt that is now our greatest national security threat,” he said.

Hart said Coburn was also opposed to provisions in the transportation bill designed to increase the number of bike paths and trees along roadways.

“The beautification mandate is an indefensible threat against public safety that forces states to prioritize bike paths over bridge repair,” he said.

Earlier this summer, Republican refusal to reauthorize the FAA without passage of an anti-union provision shut down the agency for weeks. Their action furloughed 4,000 FAA workers, forced others to work without pay, halted $2.5 billion in airport construction projects, and cost the government about $200 million a week. Coburn is threatening to repeat that event by refusing to let the Senate vote on the bill by Friday.

Adding insult to injury, Coburn is also holding up a bill to fund the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which must be voted on first before the Senate can take up FAA authorization. Coburn objects to the price tag of the $6.9 billion FEMA bill. This emergency disaster aid is, of course, important to pass quickly in the aftermath of Hurricane Irene and other natural disasters. Reid even compared Coburn to a dictator for holding up the bill.

Justice

Once Again, Tom Coburn Feeds The Judicial Vacancy Crisis In His State

By Ian Millhiser on Sep 12, 2011 at 2:00 pm

Earlier this year, President Obama nominated Arvo Mikkanen, who would become the only sitting Native American federal judge in the country if he is confirmed, to a federal court in Oklahoma. Almost immediately, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) placed Mikkanen on double-secret probation — vowing to block Mikkanen’s nomination, but refusing to tell anyone why.

Just six months later, Coburn is back to his same obstructionist tricks:

Sen. Tom Coburn shot down the impending nomination of the dean of the University of Tulsa law school for the vacant seat on the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, according to Oklahoma attorneys who said Coburn was concerned about Janet Levit’s background in international law. [...]

Levit is a Yale Law School graduate with a distinguished resume that includes serving as a clerk for the former chief judge of the 10th circuit court and arguing cases before the court. She has been dean of the University of Tulsa College of Law since 2008.

Levit’s academic specialty is international law, and she is a member of the American Society of International Law.

Coburn is one of the leading proponents of a paranoid fantasy that claims that activist judges are on the cusp of replacing American law with some kind of international legal new world order, but his decision to block Levit is bizarre even by Coburn’s standards. Apparently, merely knowing something about international law disqualifies you from service on the federal bench.

Coburn’s veto over judicial nominees within his state stems from a process known as “blue slipping” that effectively enables home-state senators to block nominees within their state that they disapprove of — although this rule somehow doesn’t apply when there is a conservative president. And it is unlikely that any nominee will survive Coburn’s effective veto given his deeply radical views of the Constitution. Coburn believes that Medicare, Medicaid, and education programs such as Pell Grants, federal student loans and Title I are all unconstitutional.

In other words, this is just one more example of how the Senate’s broken rules are failing the country. It makes no sense whatsoever to give a single senator with radical and idiosyncratic views the ability to prevent any new judges from being confirmed within his state.

Justice

Five Questions About The Constitution For Tonight’s Tea Party Debate

By Ian Millhiser on Sep 12, 2011 at 9:50 am

Tonight, the Tea Party Express will co-host yet another debate among the eight Republican presidential candidates, where they will no doubt push the candidates to align their views with Tea Party orthodoxy. Because few issues define the Tea Party more than its plan to radically rethink the Constitution into an anti-government manifesto, we suggest the following five questions:

  1. Social Security: In the book Fed Up!, Texas Gov. Rick Perry writes that Social Security is “something we have been forced to accept for more than 70 years” and that it exists “at the expense of respect for the Constitution and limited government.” Raise your hand if you agree with Gov. Perry that Social Security exists at the Constitution’s expense.
  2. Medicare: Once of the Tea Party’s leading supporters, Sen. Tom Coburn, recently suggested that Medicare is unconstitutional because “that’s a family responsibility, not a government responsibility.” Do you agree with Sen. Coburn that we should leave it up to families to care for their parents and grandparents on their own?
  3. Workers’ Rights: Tea Party Sen. Mike Lee believes that federal child labor laws are unconstitutional because the Constitution “was designed to be a little bit harsh,” and Gov. Perry questions the constitutional basis of “national labor laws” in Fed Up!. Do you agree with Lee and Perry that the Constitution was designed to be a little bit harsh to American workers?
  4. Disaster Relief: Sen. Lee also believes that the federal government should not play a role in disaster relief because “states will prepare differently if they understand that it’s their responsibility rather than that of the federal government.” Do you agree with Lee that states ravaged by hurricanes, earthquakes or tornadoes should be left to fend for themselves?
  5. Citizenship: The Fourteenth Amendment guarantees that all persons born in the United States “are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside,” with a very narrow exception for children of ambassadors and other people who aren’t subject to U.S. law. Yet 96 members of Congress, including Rep. Michele Bachmann, co-sponsored legislation declaring that the children of undocumented immigrants no longer enjoy birthright citizenship. Do you agree with Congresswoman Bachmann that Congress has the power to strip people of their citizenship?

Other possibilities include whether the candidates agree with Perry that it is unconstitutional for Congress to try to avoid another banking crisis like the one that triggered the Great Recession. And whether the candidates agree with Sen. Coburn’s claim that all federal education programs — from Title I to Pell Grants to federal student loans — violate the Constitution.

Health

Tom Coburn: America Was Better Off Before Medicare

By Igor Volsky on Aug 19, 2011 at 9:02 am

Tom Coburn is really on a roll this summer. He has suggested that taking care of the elderly is unconstitutional, speculated that President Obama is created a culture of dependency because of his race and now Kevin Drum notices that ‘s even said that American health care system was better off before Medicare was enacted in 1965:

He went on to say that government programs such as Medicare are primarily responsible for rapidly rising health-care costs, and that Medicare has made the medical system worse.

“You can’t tell me the system is better now than it was before Medicare,” he said.

Coburn agreed that some people received poor care — or no care — before Medicare was enacted in the 1960s, but said communities worked together to make sure most people received needed medical attention.

He also conceded that doctors and hospitals often went unpaid for their efforts, or accepted baked goods or chickens in partial payment.

Here are the facts: since 1965, “the health of the elderly population has improved, as measured by both longevity and functional status,” and senior poverty rates have plummeted. According to a study from Health Affairs, life expectancy at age 65 increased from 14.3 years in 1960 to 17.8 years in 1998 and the chronically disabled elderly population declined from 24.9 percent in 1982 to 21.3 percent in 1994.”

Prior to Medicare, “about one-half of America’s seniors did not have hospital insurance,” “more than one in four elderly were estimated to go without medical care due to cost concerns,” and one in three seniors were living in poverty. Today, nearly all seniors have access to affordable health care and only about 14 percent of seniors are below the poverty line.

And so, the system isn’t only “better off” with Medicare, but the program is so popular that seniors continue to support it in overwhelming majorities and would expand it to younger populations.

NEWS FLASH

Coburn: Obama Wants To ‘Create Dependency’ Because He Benefited From Government Programs ‘As An African-American Male’ | Fresh off his outlandish suggestion that Medicare and Medicaid violate the Constitution, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) offered an equally outlandish theory about how President Obama’s race influences his priorities:

Responding to a man in Langley who asked if Obama “wants to destroy America,” Coburn said the president is “very bright” and loves his country but has a political philosophy that is “goofy and wrong.”

Obama’s “intent is not to destroy, his intent is to create dependency because it worked so well for him,” he said.

“As an African-American male,” Coburn said, Obama received “tremendous advantage from a lot of these programs.”

In the past, Coburn has touted a strong personal friendship with Obama.

Update

Greg Sargent has the full transcript of Coburn’s remarks:

“No, I don’t… He’s a very bright man. But think about his life. And think about what he was exposed to and what he saw in America. He’s only relating what his experience in life was…

“His intent isn’t to destroy. It’s to create dependency because it worked so well for him. I don’t say that critically. Look at people for what they are. Don’t assume ulterior motives. I don’t think he doesn’t love our country. I think he does.

“As an African American male, coming through the progress of everything he experienced, he got tremendous benefit through a lot of these programs. So he believes in them. I just don’t believe they work overall and in the long run they don’t help our country. But he doesn’t know that because his life experience is something different. So it’s very important not to get mad at the man. And I understand, his philosophy — there’s nothing wrong with his philosophy other than it’s goofy and wrong [laughter] — but that doesn’t make him a bad person.”

Justice

Coburn Suggests Taking Care of The ‘Frail Elderly’ Is Unconstitutional Because ‘That’s A Family Responsibility’

By Ian Millhiser on Aug 18, 2011 at 9:50 am

Sen. Coburn Suggests This Woman's Medicare Is Unconstitutional

Last week, ThinkProgress reported that Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) believes that Medicare and Social Security are unconstitutional. Turns out, he’s not he only one. At a town hall in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) appeared to embrace Perry’s claim that providing for America’s seniors is unconstitutional:

QUESTION: With more and more cuts in Medicare and Medicaid on the horizon, I’m really worried about protecting our frail elderly in the Medicare and Medicaid facilities. So I would like to know how Congress proposes to balance the budget and still make sure our frail elderly in these facilities are protected and have trained care staff.

COBURN: That’s a great question. The first question I have for you is if you look in the Constitution, where is it the federal government’s role to do that? That’s number one. Number two is the way I was brought up that’s a family responsibility, not a government responsibility.

Watch it:

The answer to Coburn’s first question is Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution. The Constitution gives Congress the power to “to lay and collect taxes” and to “provide for the…general welfare of the United States.” No plausible interpretation of the words “general welfare” does not include programs that ensure that all Americans can live their entire lives secure in the understanding that retirement will not force them into poverty and untreated sickness.

While Coburn’s first question reveals his need to actually read the Constitution before he pretends to know what’s in it, his second question betrays his utter disconnect from the reality ordinary American families face. The annual cost of nursing home care in Tulsa is $47,815.00. So Coburn apparently thinks that it is a family’s responsibility to either wipe out their savings or face crippling debt in order to ensure that their parents and grandparents are cared for.

Older

Newer

Switch to Mobile
ThinkProgress Signup Overlay Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress Skip and Continue to ThinkProgress

Sign Up