Rand Paul Flip- Flopping on Earmarks?
COOPER: Well, one of the things we plan to watch very carefully over the next several months is how well newly-elected politicians live up to the promises they made on the campaign trail, in other words, "Keeping Them Honest." I mean, we all know that politicians, Democrats and Republicans, make a lot of promises when they're running for Office and then have a way of not exactly following through on those promises. And this election year, we have certainly heard a lot of politicians saying they're not going to compromise when they get to Congress. But can they live up to that promise? We'll soon see. We have already been tracking how a lot of Republican candidates who have gotten elected promising to cut taxes, cut spending and cut the deficit haven't given many specifics and still aren't giving many specifics. Rand Paul is really one of the few new members of Congress who said that he'd be open to cuts in the defense budget. But, tonight, he's being accused of flip-flopping on one of the key promises of his campaign. The senator-elect from Kentucky, who had the full backing of the Tea Party, has been very, very vocal on his desire to end the earmarks, the type of spending that basically lets lawmakers direct funds to their pet projects in their state, classic pork barrel waste. They are very controversial though they're not always waste, frankly. They're very controversial, though, and a pretty easy target for someone running on fiscal discipline. Take a look at the headline on Mr. Paul's campaign Web site: "Earmark Ban Coming" it says. It says: "Rand Paul has made a ban on wasteful earmark spending in Washington, D.C. one of the key points of his campaign." And that's certainly true. He has certainly talked about it a lot on the campaign trail. Take a look.</s>RAND PAUL (R), KENTUCKY SENATOR-ELECT: I would not engage in earmarks. I think we need to end earmarks. So, I'm philosophically opposed to earmarks. Earmarks is part of the problem, and we must stop it. I'm very frugal. I'm very conservative. I don't believe in earmarks. I think the whole system of earmarks represents and is in some ways symbolic of what's gone wrong with Washington. Earmarks, absolutely, are a problem and we must end earmarks.</s>COOPER: All right, it seems pretty clear, which is why an article about Paul in "The Wall Street Journal" this weekend stunned a lot of people. In the article, the reporter, Matthew Kaminski, wrote: "In a bigger shift from his campaign pledge to end earmarks, he tells me they are a bad symbol of easy spending, but that he will fight for Kentucky's share of earmarks and federal pork, as long as it's doled out transparently at the committee level, and not parachuted in, in the dead of night. 'I will advocate for Kentucky's interests,' he says." So, that was from the article. "Keeping Them Honest," it certainly sounds like a pretty clear change from what Paul had been promising. I talked about it with James Carville, CNN political contributor and Democratic strategist; as well as with Erick Erickson, CNN contributor and editor in chief of RedState.com.</s>COOPER: So, James, what do you make of Senator-Elect Rand Paul now saying that, basically, he will fight for Kentucky's share of earmarks, as long as they're transparent. Is that a flip-flop?</s>JAMES CARVILLE, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, of course it is. I mean, look, there's going to be a lot more. It's -- it's -- it's -- this is what happens. You have an election, and everybody is going to come in as an outsider and they are going to change Washington, and they don't even get to the other side of the Potomac before they change. And he was the most anti-earmark, anti-spending guy to ever run for office maybe anywhere. And it's pretty typical of what happens in every cycle.</s>COOPER: Eric, is that the way you see it?</s>ERICK ERICKSON, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, first, I'm not sure that the quote is 100 percent accurate. I have traded some e-mails with the Rand Paul campaign, and they are suggesting to me that -- that maybe that's not quite right. But -- if it -- assuming that it is right --</s>COOPER: Or is that them trying to walk it back?</s>ERICKSON: You know, it may very well be, but he did -- did run his entire campaign against earmarks, in fact, had -- Mitch McConnell, the Senate majority -- minority leader and also from Kentucky, backed his opponent in the primary. But, you know, at the end of the day, it's almost academic, because Mitch McConnell has made it very clear that the Senate Republicans will not in any way, shape or form go along with an earmarks ban.</s>COOPER: But -- but you -- I remember you, on election night, saying --</s>ERICKSON: Right.</s>COOPER: -- specifically that earmarks would be the big issue for Tea Party activists.</s>ERICKSON: Yes.</s>COOPER: Before January, they were going to go for this, and that it was a gateway drug to bigger government.</s>ERICKSON: It is. It is very much is a gateway drug to bigger government. And if Rand Paul is backing away from it, he's in big trouble, I think, with the Tea Party Movement, and he's going to have a lot of demonstrations, I would expect, on the ground. It's disappointing, that if he has backed -- backed away from it. And he will feel the ire of the Tea Party Movement.</s>COOPER: Do -- do you think this is the first -- I mean, you know, they came in saying no compromise.</s>ERICKSON: Right.</s>COOPER: It seems like now, already, we're looking at compromises.</s>ERICKSON: Yes, everybody gets in and starts talking compromise. We'll see if they actually do it. Tom Coburn, John McCain, Jim DeMint, and others, they're going to make a stand on earmarks. We will see if Rand Paul joins them. I suspect he and Ron Johnson and some of the others that are incoming probably will wind up supporting them.</s>COOPER: Because, James, there's a big difference between saying I'm against earmarks altogether and, well, as long as they're transparent, then that's ok.</s>CARVILLE: Well, I think that -- I think the House Democrats made them transparent. I think they changed the rules, if -- if -- to -- my memory serves me correctly. And, you know, they -- they come in, and spending is the big thing. Well, we're going to see what's going to happen on -- on -- on spending. My guess is, is at the end of -- at the end of two years, not very much. So, we'll see. You know, Washington tends to absorb people who come in. They're going to radical -- bring radical change and a different way of doing things, and it -- it seems like it's going to be more of the same. So, but, you know, I don't know. I think it's going to be interesting and, in some ways, it's kind of fun to watch.</s>COOPER: Before I let you guys go, I want to get, Eric, your -- your thoughts on Republican Congressman Spencer Bachus of Alabama. In a speech, he seemed to -- to take a dig at Sarah Palin and the Tea Party. He said -- quote -- "The Senate would be Republican today except for states in which Palin endorsed candidates, like Christine O'Donnell in Delaware." According to "The Shelby County Reporter," he went on to say: "Sarah Palin cost us control of the Senate." Now, the congressman's office has kind of walked that back, tried to clarified, saying --</s>ERICKSON: Yes.</s>COOPER: -- that he also had good things to say about the Tea Party and Sarah Palin in his speech.</s>ERICKSON: They always try to walk it back.</s>ERICKSON: When they say something critical of Sarah Palin, they -- always try to walk it back. Here is the problem.</s>ERICKSON: I don't believe that the Republicans would have taken the Senate this year, looking at the way the map fell in the races. And, frankly, if you look at the races, the Republicans didn't have a good ground game. The -- the RNC totally botched their 72-hour program. Republicans did very well in -- in seats where the Republican Governors Association was contesting a governor's race.</s>COOPER: So, you're saying Sarah Palin is not to blame?</s>ERICKSON: Yes, I don't necessarily think she is. I think, frankly, some of the decisions the Senate Republicans made have a lot to do with the blame. But God forbid they ever blame themselves for their own fault.</s>COOPER: James, is she to blame?</s>CARVILLE: Well -- well, I don't know, but there's a lot of walking back going on.</s>COOPER: That's my new favorite term, by the way, walking --</s>CARVILLE: Maybe, some time, somebody will run forward, but -- I know, yes.</s>COOPER: That's my favorite term, walking it back.</s>CARVILLE: I know.</s>CARVILLE: We're going to -- right. Rand Paul was walking it back. And Bachus was walking it back.</s>ERICKSON: That's what senators do.</s>CARVILLE: And, yes, there's a lot of things that, you know, it came out the wrong way.</s>COOPER: Well, that's what all politicians do. I'm not going to say it's just Republicans who walk back.</s>CARVILLE: Yes, no. It's nothing new. No, the Republicans did not invent that. I will stipulate that. There's a lot of walking back going on, on a lot of sides now. But now that they have -- they have promised a lot and they have a lot of power, I think we're going to see a lot of walking back.</s>COOPER: Right.</s>ERICKSON: They will use, Anderson, your favorite phrase: "I was taken out of context."</s>COOPER: Yes, exactly.</s>CARVILLE: Right. That's right. I remember when I said something, I said, I was -- I was quoted accurately and in context. They got it just right.</s>COOPER: Yes, we rarely hear that, do we? Erick Erickson, James Carville, guys, thanks.</s>ERICKSON: Thank you.</s>CARVILLE: Thank you. I appreciate it.</s>COOPER: Well, after we taped that discussion this evening, we got an explanation from Rand Paul's office. A spokesman told us "The Wall Street Journal" reporter is a good guy and a -- quote -- "thoughtful writer," but he -- quote -- "misunderstood" the part of the discussion he had about earmarks. The spokesman for Rand Paul also told us that senator-elect Paul was saying that he will advocate for Kentucky's interests and -- quote -- "submit request for funding through the appropriations process, but he will not request earmarks." We put in a call to "The Wall Street Journal" to see if they stand by their reporting. We haven't heard back from them. We will continue to watch what happens when Rand Paul gets to Washington. Up next: President George Bush in his own words. Nearly two years after leaving the White House, he speaks out for the first time, revealing part of a shocking story. He says his mother, the future First Lady, had a miscarriage when he was a teenager, and she showed him the fetus. What impact did that have on the teenage George Bush? Find out tonight. And a Connecticut jury recommending the death sentence for the convicted killer who brutally murdered that Connecticut mom and her two daughters three years ago; what happened today inside the courtroom is ahead in "Crime & Punishment."