here's jim inhoff, here he's making the argument now to keep them. here's what he wrote in politico today, so a ban onner marks doesn't safe one dime. what it does is trashes the constitution, violates our oath of office, it seizes congress's power to appropriate to the president and it gives cover to big spending. can they win that argument, dana? >> it's unclear, and there is going to be a test of this on tuesday, there's going to be a vote inside the republican conference, it is going to be a vote of new members like mike lee and members who have been there a while like tim inhoff who don't necessarily agree with that. but it's going to be a secret ballot, though, so we're not going to know who votes which way. >> i tell you the people who are pushing this, a la jim demint, it's his resolution, people close to him are making it clear that they believe this is the first true test of tea party ideals. >> guess who's going to be opposed to earmarks? the democrats. barack obama admits that he made a big mistake by not vetoing a measure that had a bunc

senator jim inhoff put out a huge paper defending the earmark process saying this whole issue about banninggus. he says by banning it, in other words, republicans are resolving not to appropriate or authorize spenneding, which is what the constitution directs members of congress to do. he calls a moratorium on spending and doesn't save money, sends it to the executive branch. in other words, president obama and the administration decide where exactly it will go. what about this issue of earmarks? back with the panel? steve? >> well, i don't agree with him. if you would have told me a week -- >> bret: but the explanation. >> it's a fair explanation. we got into this last night. technically you can say earmarks add earmarks don't add to bottom line of spending. what earmarks do and the reason so many of us find them insidious is they grease the wheel for bad spending. you may have senator "x" who doesn't care whether h.u.d. gets a 20% budget increase in any given year, but he has a project, $37 million. in his district or his state that is going to be the senator "x" center excellence for con

. >> chris: another one of your republican colleagues, jim inhoff, he says basically you're being hypocritical because over the years you put in for earmarks for multi-million dollar road projects in the state of carolina. >> i am a recovering earmarker. we have support groups all over the country, called tea parties. people realize if you try to play the system and reform it at the same time, it doesn't work. four years ago i decided to go cold turkey on this because i saw it was destroying our country. we have can't spend all our time trying to rob the federal treasury to get money for the states and congressional districts and be serious about the big issues like reforming the tax code and fixing social security and fixing medicare. we have to focus on the interest of the nation not on our parochial issue. >> chris: as i discussed with david axelrod, the president's debt commission, the co-chairman came out with a plan this week to cut the national debt by $4 trillion over the next decade. it was a mix of spending cuts to tax increases of 3-to-1. your fellow deficit hawk, senator tom coburn