How Vulnerable Are Obama, Clinton On Earmarks?

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - How Vulnerable Are Obama, Clinton On Earmarks? stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 02-22-08 01:06 PM   |   Updated: 03-28-08 02:46 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Earmarks

Last night's Democrat debate may have been one of the final indicators for how the primary election will play out. But it also provided some telling insight into what a hypothetical general election with Sen. John McCain might look like.

On several occasions, the moderators pressed both Sen. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton to address their possible Republican counterpart (not each other) on key policy issues. One exchange that will likely give the Democrat nominee some fits in the future involved earmarks, the federal loot members of Congress try to secure for their districts.

Each candidate has his or her perceived weakness.

CNN's John King, playing off of a recent report from the nonprofit Taxpayers for Common Sense, noted that Obama had structured much of his candidacy on advocating transparency and fiscal responsibility. And while the $91 million in earmarks secure by the Illinois Democrat put him at the lower end of the spectrum, King added, "You have refused to say where the money went."

Obama denied the question's premise: "We've actually disclosed, John, all our earmarks." And he was, to a large extent, correct. Obama has made public all the earmarks he requested in the fiscal year 2008 as well as those he has secured while in office "He goes one step further where he discloses everything he's asked for," said Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense.

However, as noted by Ellis, Obama has not released the earmark requests he made to the appropriations committee in 2005 and 2006.

Already, McCain, who rejects earmarks entirely, has blasted Obama on the matter (a bit disingenuously), declaring: "And the senator from Illinois, who says that he wants transparency in government, will not reveal the number of earmarks that he received in 2006 and 2005. Is that transparency in government? I don't think so. I don't think so!"

Clinton, likewise, was challenged during the debate on the earmark issue. As King noted, the New York Democrat was among the Senate's top 10 earmark recipients, securing more than $340 million worth of home-state projects. Would that not leave her vulnerable to McCain?

"Well, no, not at all," she replied. "Because he supported the wasteful tax cuts of the Bush administration and the Iraq war, with the billions of dollars..."

It was a graceful pivot but not one without dangers. For starters, as Obama's camp noted, Clinton also supported the Iraq war. But, in addition, the are questions of transparency: the former first lady has declined to release her earmark requests for any year, or her tax returns, while the list of donors to her husband's foundation remain private.

Thus, while McCain has as recent stories have illuminated, has some money-in-politics issues of his own, it seems all but certain that he will mount a strong challenge on earmarks to both Clinton and Obama. (Nevermind that many earmarks, such as those funding health clinics, education or transportation projects, are extremely popular.)

"In any general election candidates are looking to hype the differences," said Ellis. "And clearly because Sen. McCain doesn't ask for earmarks or take earmarks, he is going to heighten that distinction with the Democrats. And if you look on the campaign trail, his opposition to earmarks is one of his biggest applause lines."

Last night's Democrat debate may have been one of the final indicators for how the primary election will play out. But it also provided some telling insight into what a hypothetical general election w...
Last night's Democrat debate may have been one of the final indicators for how the primary election will play out. But it also provided some telling insight into what a hypothetical general election w...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
12
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:

BARACK OBAMA (D)
Top Contributors
Goldman Sachs -- $421,763
Ubs Ag -- $296,670
Lehman Brothers -- $250,630
National Amusements Inc -- $245,843
JP Morgan Chase & Co -- $243,848
Sidley Austin LLP -- 226,491
Citigroup Inc -- 221,578
Exelon Corp -- 221,517
Skadden, Arps Et Al -- $196,420
Jones Day -- $181,996
Harvard University -- $172,324
Citadel Investment Group -- $171,798
Time Warner -- $155,383
Morgan Stanley -- $155,196
Google Inc -- $152,802
University of California -- $143,029
Jenner & Block -- $136,565
Kirkland & Ellis -- $134,738
Wilmerhale Llp -- $119,245
Credit Suisse Group -- $118,250

Obama is owned by corporations too!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:42 PM on 02/23/2008

Harvard? Scary...

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:17 PM on 02/23/2008
- BOfever I'm a Fan of BOfever 2 fans permalink

What's scary is their tutition is enormous and they still need free handouts.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:34 PM on 02/23/2008

It's a list of the stock traders and investment brokers who brought us the sub-prime mortgage crisis and now want a government bailout! Question is how big a sub-prime mortgage bailout, with taxpayers money, will Obama be giving his stock trader and investment broker pals.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:09 PM on 02/24/2008
- Boadicea I'm a Fan of Boadicea 68 fans permalink

You're right, of course, and while both Democratic candidates will have to address the issue, it seems obvious that Obama will be in a much better position on this issue.

HIllary's refusal to release her tax return should be a big red flag for Democrats. The talk is that they contain proof she has been making big bucks from companies whose only enterprise is to move jobs from the United States to India. If this is true, we need to know NOW. Nothing would deep six a Democratic candidate faster than that.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:40 AM on 02/23/2008
- Kantinflas I'm a Fan of Kantinflas 3 fans permalink

Billary / Barack Star is totally vulnerable. Billary / Barack Star is totally invulnerable. Take your pick. Move on. Let's over-discuss something truly important like plagiarism. Or how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. Yea! Now I'm fired up and ready to go.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:36 AM on 02/23/2008

No one cares how much Clinton has taken from the budget for her special projects or how much her special projects has donated to her campaign. This is a standard practice by career politicians. Hillary is in the top ten with her over 600 earmarks. Obama has realased his earmarks and tax returns. No one expects Hillary to to release anything. We all know she will not. I do not trust either Clinton. Secrets, secrets, and more secrets all for me. If she did release the information of earmarks, tax returns or the list of donors to Clintons foundations she would lose support. Now the question is should they be vulnerable. Hell yes they should be held accountable but it won't happen.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:01 PM on 02/22/2008

Release the following hillary or you show yourself to be more secretive than Bush and Cheney:

1. earmarks
2. tax returns for you and Dollar Bill
3. secret records of the 1993 healthcare plan
4. secret records of your time as first lady

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:39 PM on 02/22/2008
- BOfever I'm a Fan of BOfever 2 fans permalink

Obama hasn't released his earmarks from 2005 or 2006 yet. Ask him while you're at it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:07 PM on 02/22/2008
- Amhet I'm a Fan of Amhet 3 fans permalink

I vote for Hillary to be coronated the Queen of Earmarks.... Anyone that wants federal money for a "Woodstock Museum" is pretty well out there.
BTW, Only her GF knows for sure if she has peirced ears.... or anything else.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:34 PM on 02/22/2008

This is the worst kind of subtle sexism. Just because Hillary Clinton has pierced ears is no reason to put her down. (apologies to Emily Latella)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:00 PM on 02/22/2008

I dont think it was an attack on her gender as much as it was her sexuality and pork barrel politics.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:07 PM on 02/22/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect