After facing attacks from the right and left, Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell is fighting back against accusations that he’s gone soft on spending. The veteran appropriator outlined a proposal today that would fund the troops and complete 11 of 12 budget bills. His plan would cap domestic spending at President Bush’s level of $933 billion with an across-the-board cut, but also salvage 10,000 earmarks in the process.

For an appropriator like McConnell, the idea of a 1% across-the-board cut is revolutionary. But what bothered conservatives, as I documented earlier, was the fact he didn’t single out earmarks.

The news was disappointing because just 24 hours earlier, a Democrat, House Appropriations Chairman David Obey actually proposed eliminating all earmarks from the omnibus spending bill. I scratched my head after hearing the McConnell proposal, wondering why the Senate’s top Republican wouldn’t embrace Obey’s idea. Here’s an exchange from a press conference earlier today:

Question: “On this appropriations scenario, as you know, Congressman Obey suggested taking money out of lawmakers‚Äô projects and dedicating it to education or help the surge. Under your scenario, would this haircut still anticipate that members would get these billions of dollars in earmarks?”

McConnell: “My understanding of what Chairman Obey was recommending was that the president’s number be met on the 11 appropriation bills. If that were the case and it came over at the president’s number, I would seek to offer an amendment to add more on Iraq. We would seek to get $70 billion, without strings attached, for Iraq.”

Eliminating earmarks goes hand in hand with fiscal restraint, but for some members of Congress, the pork is too good to pass up. While it’s safe to assume that McConnell likes his pork as much as the next guy, I do want to clarify one point from my earlier post. A statement released by McConnell’s office tonight said he would support an earmark-free bill if that’s what the House sent him — which remains a big “if” at this point.

Thus, if the House sent over a bill that met the president’s funding request (but did not exceed it) and was also stripped of earmarks, all that would be offered would be funding for Iraq, and nothing else. Essentially, that bill would be acceptable on the domestic side, but would just need to be amended to fund the troops, since House Democrats have said they would not do so.

Bottom line: If Obey sends that bill, it would be acceptable, except for Iraq funding, which Sen. McConnell would fix.

Here’s my beef with McConnell: He’ll take what’s given to him from Obey, but he won’t stand up and call for the outright elimination of earmarks on his own. Countering with an across-the-board cut is a nice touch that would save taxpayers their hard-earned money, but I was hoping for more.