Kirk talks about new routine, focus as a senator
Mark Kirk's stance as a moderate Republican — fiscal conservatism and a centrist social agenda — helped him win over the independent voting 10th Congressional District five times over the last decade, and, this November, the Senate seat held previously by President Barack Obama.
Now in the Senate, that stance puts him in a unique position to work with factions of both parties that are the most at odds with one another — progressive Democrats and tea party Republicans — on perhaps the single biggest issue facing Congress next: the country's debt ceiling.
Kirk, over coffee, spoke about this and his work behind the scenes to spark bipartisanship in a new, more Republican Congress. He also talked about the politics behind his recent committee assignments, and how he's adjusting to life as a senator, including the social circle he's joined and where you'll find him eating and staying on the road.
Here's a glimpse at Kirk's vantage point from the upper chamber.
Q. Are you pleased with the committees — appropriations, banking, and health, education, labor and pensions — you were assigned to?
A. Completely. My only disappointment was not getting agriculture. I had requested that. Appropriations and banking are kind of two top tier committees in the Congress, directly related to its central power — power of the purse. Since I started working on appropriations as a staffer in 1984, I know that best.
Banking is key to Chicagoland for two reasons. Obviously we're the financial capital of the Midwest. And, it has a quirk. The committee has jurisdiction over all mass transit and therefore Metra. So, when we write a mass transit bill, it's written by the banking committee. And health, education, labor and pensions, could be a real fulcrum.
Q. What determines who gets selected for what spots?
A. It's the ratios of the Democrats and Republicans in the Senate. But there are complications. We just went from a 60 Democrat, 40 Republican ratio to 53 Democrats and 47 Republicans.
A normal way of thinking about this would be that all committees have to be at a 53/47 ratio, but the way the majority ... in this case the Democrats, always does it, lets them have a very high percentage on the committees (they prioritize) — finance and appropriations — and a very low percentage (on others) that don't control the purse strings or the true powers of Congress. So it all equals out as 53/47. This battle on committee assignments was delayed because of the lame duck session.
Q. What advantage did you have, being sworn in six weeks earlier than your peers?
A. Two of the Democratic freshmen got sworn in ahead of me, but that didn't matter in terms of committee assignments because that was decided by party. I was the senior Republican freshman. They sort it out based on key determinations of what you say your state's interests are, and what your personal interests are. What others have said. At a key moment they called me up and said do you want health or small business? I picked health because I felt it had a larger portfolio. Now the question is what subcommittees am I going to get on ... In the subcommittees, that's where the real power of the Congress lies, and you are expected to develop an expertise. My main shot is on the committee that funds the VA (Veterans Affairs) and medical construction. We're shooting for that. We'll see how it works out.
Q. So, you're saying that it's in the subcommittees that you get the opportunity to do more on the ground work, and establish your own track?
A. Yes. The real power of being on a subcommittee is, you see and can change the first draft of a bill before anyone else. And then it works through the process.
Obviously we get a vote on every issue in the Senate, but there's an appetite for only a certain number of issues to be worked out on the floor.
Q. You talked during the campaign of your history of writing legislation and pushing it through under Democrats' names to have a better chance of passage in the House. Do you feel are you still going to have do that in the Senate?
A. Correct. That's why it's important for (Democratic Sen. Dick) Durbin and I to team together. You don't want the legislation to overtly have the opposition of the Senate leadership.
Q. Talk about your position as a Republican moderate. In some ways, you're positioned well as your party takes more control of Congress, at the same time coming from a state with a Democratic-leaning history.
A. You can be the convener or maker of the agreement or there are flaming arrows on both sides. And, yes, I've felt both already. You really want to play that role. For me the No. 1 issue for the Congress is spending and debt. A vast amount of what I've been doing behind the scenes is on the debt limit extension bill. And defining what anti-spending reforms we can put on the bill. Democrats want to (raise the debt ceiling), and Republicans do not. It looks like the biggest struggle of this Congress. The earlier you work on it, the better chance you have of a bipartisan agreements.
Q. How are you dealing with tea party Republicans like 8th District Rep. Joe Walsh who say the country can in no way afford to extend the debt limit?
A. There are always going to be people that say no. And in some sense, there's a certain number where it's OK for them to say no. We have a group of mainly GOP freshmen that we meet with regularly on this issue, along with outside groups who are concerned about the budget. And then reaching out to the key players in the House.
Q. What do you think the tea party's effect is going to be on this?
A. It's going to have a substantial effect. Most of it is completely helpful. And it does mean it's the No. 1 vote of the Congress.
Q. Can you talk about the split within your own party, visible with the two different responses to the State of the Union? Will this ultimately hurt Republicans moving forward? Where do you see it taking the party?
A. If the Republicans had taken full control of the House there probably would have been more of a battle between moderates and conservatives. The structure of the Congress is, you have a one-party state, then the strongest faction runs the Congress. ... In this Congress, the American people didn't give total control to Republicans, which means there's much more unity, because you still face the White House and Harry Reid.
Q. Who's been easy to get to know in the Senate?
A. (Senate Republican leader) Mitch McConnell, he's easy to get to know. And there's a sort of a group of us freshmen that spend a lot of time together. Me and (Wisconsin Republican) Ron Johnson and (Ohio Republican) Rob Portman. (South Carolina Republican) Lindsey Graham, too. And (West Virginia Democratic Sen.) Joe Manchion and I have started to do a bipartisan lunch. There's a room in the Senate where senators are supposed to come and have lunch just with other senators. Under the one-party state, that completely broke down. All Democratic senators had lunch together, all the Republicans had lunch together.
Q. President Obama made a lot of overtures to bipartisanship during the State of the Union address. Do you think it was enough? What did you think of that speech?
A. The speech I think had a number of areas where Republicans would agree.
I had dinner with Bill Daley the other night and I said I could lay out a list of things that Republicans would agree with that we could get working on right away. And I think that the White House should be in a rebuilding mode after health care. My hope is that Bill Daley moves the White House to the common ground areas, to early areas where there's agreements.
Q. How are you adjusting to the logistics of being a senator?
A. My normal battle rhythm is the same (as a representative). One weekend a month in the Pentagon, three weekends here. The big change for me is travel. It was easy to get around the 10th District. You could always get to sleep at your house. Now, I'm a preferred customer at Hampton Inn. The best thing about Hampton Inn is you may be in “somewhere, Illinois,” but the moment you walk in, that room is exactly the same.