I came by this week's bloggers briefing at Heritage expecting to see some fireworks as Representative Jo Bonner, the newest member of the House Appropriations Committee joined us to talk about earmarks and spending.

As I said, I was expecting a rough reception - given many bloggers well-stated preference for Rep. Jeff Flake to fill the available seat on Appropriations and Bonner's poor record on earmarks.

Working the Room
Bonner got things off on the right foot though by walking into the room and introducing himself to everyone present, taking the time to shake our hands and make small talk. Standard political fare to be sure, but it was a nice touch and helped put people in a friendly mood.

Quin Hillyer helped arranged the meeting as he was a former neighbor of Bonner's and used to write at a local paper in Bonner's home district of Mobile, Alabama.

Quinn described Bonner as a "quiet reformer" who works from inside the system to get things done.

Bonner then explained that as a former hill staffer of 18 years, he "understands that there are many different ways to skin a cat."

Bonner was self-deprecating, noting that he isn't a national figure, but that he wears the label of a "reformer" with pride.

He described his commitment to transparency, and referenced a document from his office detailing his "Commitment to Reforming a Broken Process."

Earmarks
* A disconnect remains between House Republicans and the conservative base. We need to bridge it.
* No consensus on earmarks in the GOP caucus. Some want to abolish earmarks, others want a one year moratorium, and others like earmarks - think it's a Congressional responsibility.

Transparency
*Bonner articulated his support for and plan to increase transparency in the appropriating process. He argued that Congressmen ought to be required to publicly stand by their earmarks and explain why the American taxpayer should fund the earmark, not just put their name on a piece of paper in the dark of night.

Question - What's the benefit of a one-year hiatus? If you're opposed to earmarks, you're opposed to earmarks.

The purpose was to get the Democratic leadership on board with the ban. This failed.

Also, what is an earmark? Many members of Congress feel that the President's budget request to Congress is basically composed of earmark requests.

Bonner also noted that President Bush in his State of the Union asked Congress to cut its earmark requests by half, and that's just what Bonner has done, cutting his requested earmarks this year to 21, from 42 last year.

My Two Cents
Rep. Bonner's emphasis on increasing government transparency is spot-in. It's an issue that can garner bi-partisan support, and helps reduce government waste and spending.

Regarding earmarks, it's one thing to argue that we need to take incremental steps towards a goal, while keeping our eyes on the larger goal. As a conservative I understand the prudence of baby-steps in policy-making.

Therefore I can accept a one-year moratorium on earmarks with the understanding that this is step one on the path to abolishing the current earmarking policy and restoring the GOP's brand when it comes to fiscal responsibility. But I'm not convinced that Rep. Bonner sees a one-year moratorium as a first step, but instead as a bone to throw out to the base to get us to go away.

Bonner acknowledged that Republicans have to "earn back our brand" as Leader Boehner puts it, but he doesn't follow through on this point. Because Republicans don't win back the trust of voters by promising to earmark 50% less then the Democrats, or to not earmark for 12 months. We win back voters' trust by saying we're different then the Dems, not Democrat-light.

While I didn't walk away convinced that Rep. Bonner was right on earmarks, I am convinced that he's a sincere and intelligent legislator and I commend him for coming by to talk to us, and share his views.

At the end, Bonner said he was pleased be the first appropriator to come by the bloggers briefing this year, but that he won't be last. Cheers to that.