Clinton Won't Release Earmark Requests Like Obama

Newsday:

Close observers of yesterday's reports on the efforts of McCain and Obama to get Sen. Clinton to disclose her earmark requests going back to 2001 may have noticed a strange thing about the statement her office issued at the end of the day.

It said all manner of things about earmarks, and moratoriums, and funding, and accountability. But it never said whether she would disclose her earmark requests going back to 2001.

We spent today back-and-forthing a few more times by e-mail with her press office, and the exchanges made it pretty clear that the oversight was intentional. The plan seems to be that since the NY press has never obsessed over Hillary's earmark requests, she can safely not release them as long as she doesn't say she won't and doesn't say why she won't.

Keep reading

-or-

Read how Clinton donors are threatening to withhold funds from the DNC

-or-

Read how Obama has admitted more extensive ties to Tony Rezko

-or-

Read a HuffPost blog written by Barack Obama.

Read the whole story: Newsday

Comments

[geobushono]

Well then, what does she stand for?....and who are the dems who want *this* for leadership?
She would take the bush unitary executive and use it on her enemies., and she sees enemies everywhere including Barack Obama.................now THAT is reason enough to send her packing...................she has already lost and she needs a doctor.

[Sidewinder603]

Sure... everybody cackle after the first Pied Piper..... Donah////

[atila]

this answer speak VOLUMES.....everybody knows why she is not going to release her tax returns and her earmarks.....

[partyofone]

It is easier for Hillary to combat the criticism for not releasing them than to confront the firestorm that would result if the contents were actually revealed.

[ObamaSeeChange]

Why am I not surprised....!!!

[jabob7]

The reality with Hillary is she's secretive, manages a poor campaign, resorts to negative tactics to deflect from her inadeqaucies in various areas, is self serving to a fault and willing to destroy the Democratic party by any means necessary! Hey Hillary! Show your taxes, your earmarks, your husband's donor list, your ability to win without going negative, your ability to manage a campaign that could beat the underdog! Can you do that?

[zorrobozo]

Do we really want to elect another secretive President like George Bush II?

Let light into the swamp!

This country has too much work to do. . .leave this creepy, secretive types behind.

Onwards!

[SUNRAI]

There it is all in a nutshell.

[rosal]

Thank you, I couldn't say it better. She is not going to release anything knowing that once blue collar workers learn who she caters to, they will never vote for her.

[nacilbuper]

'once blue collar workers learn who she caters to, they will never vote for her'

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

you've nailed it!

[queensboro]

c
Right on the head, nuff said.

[scottarino]

all these traits are par for the course from a candidate who's behind. So what else is new here?

[partyofone]

What is new here is that we have suffered for eight years with an administration built on lies, family ties, corporate dollars, loyalty over competence, and spin spin spin. We do not need more of the same from the Clintons. We have an opportunity to elect a brilliant, visionary, charismatic, inspiring, leader who is focused on the future not the past. Hillary and her mean machine are working day and night to prevent the nation from an opportunity to elect Obama and move foward. This election is too important for the nation and the world to let the nean-spirited, dishonest Clinton and their cronies spoil it.

[ariadne1]

transparency? the woman does not know the meaning of the word. when she was working on health care, in the clinton administration, the project failed miserably with the dems controlling both the house and the senate. she/the whole project was shrouded in secrecy. her obdurate insistence that it was 'her way or the highway' coupled with the secrecy are what doomed it to failure. she has not learned one bit from her failures.

if she can't even work within her own party how the hell will she ever be able to work with the repugs?

[scottarino]

As i've state before bacuse of this very same post, I am not a Clinton supporter BUT Clinton's health care project in the 90s was derailed BECAUSE of a multi-multi-multi-multi- millions dollar campaign (unprecedented at the time) set forth by the health care lobby, insurance lobby ect. that created false facts through scare-tactic commercials that ran 'round the clock on television and newspapers to spread dis-information about her plan. disinformation that stated under the Clinton plan "no one could keep their doctor of choice" "its socialized medicine, which is proven does not work" "it will stop research for new drugs" "people will DIE sick and uncared for in hospital hallways and stairwells"................of course this was all a LIE. I would expect someone who would spout off about her health care plan in the 90s to at least know a little bit of why it failed, it was not Hillary bumbling and screwing up and being stupid and secretive and ignorant. The plan was a work in progress when it was nuked by the insurance lobby and the stupid public who believe eveything that comes across the TV. It was not "her way or the highway" which is just a plain ignorant comment. It was killed by the very people who are screwing over the public's health care today, it was killed because it would hinder the insurance carriers ability to bilk their clients. It was killed because of greed. We have shitty health care today because of this lobby's ability to kill it back then, and the public ignorance, which I can read from your post means YOU! I can't support her newfound love of this lobby, nor do I support it, but you are just flat WRONG about the series of events during Bill Clinton's presidency and Hillary's health care plan. Under that plan we would all be in better shape physically and finacially today in regarding health insurance. Posts like yours make me wonder WHY you would begin to post on a subject you know NOTHING about, it shows your foolishness and serious lack of judgement and decision making skills.

[escapement]

It was also derailed because she kept the negotiations for it secret, refused to work with congress and refused to compromise.. She wanted it to be know as the 'Hillary Clinton Health Care Reform'.... If it wasn't all hers then she wanted nothing to do with it. Kind of sounds familiar doesn't it?

And to all the people who say it's easy to look up earmarks, it's not! The information is not on the internet.. the earmarks go in in the conference committee and they are encoded. PBS did a show about it. They had a staff researching for a while on just 1 congressman's earmarks (not a senator who has a hell of a lot more) and it took forever to get to the bottom of it. In the end they weren't even sure it was complete.

[riverhouse]

Well, that's what the story line from the Clinton campaign is these days but if you recall her advisors and committee members were composed by insurance executives, HMOs, PPOs. She denied providers such a physicians and hospital CEOs and medical school deans a place at the table. She also turned it into a partisan exercise, including no Republicans who had expressed a desire to work with her the accomplish a health care plan. She was secretive and encapsulated during the process and her divisiveness and argumentative nature, along with that offensive arrogance and holier than thou attitude, did the idea in.

[ariadne1]

today on face the nation bradley agreed with MY basic premise... not yours. he should know he was there. also, he told tim that dole sent a note to moynahan stating that they would have a moynahan/dole health care bill. it seemed like a go 'til hillary screwed it up.

yes, the insurance companies came out with guns blazing BUT hillary's secretive, dismissive, and divisive approach had it dead in the water before it even got out of the gate.

btw, we have a business that supplies home health care equipment/supplies and i know exactly what i am talking about. i looked up your profile... what you seem to be about is ad hominem attacks... all vitriol, no substance.

[Sidewinder603]

Another always know it all better ??..... Donah////D

[GiggidyGeshmoygen]

EARMARKS - CLINTON VS. OBAMA (Part1of2)

Earmarks have a real impact on expanding the budget deficit by billions of dollars every year. And as part of the earmarks industry, lobbyists are hired to obtain the billions of dollars at stake. Washington now has almost 35,000 registered lobbyists, more than double the number in 2000 when George Bush became President.

Hillary Clinton's position is that lobbyists are an integral part of the democratic process and should remain so. Meanwhile, Ryan Alexander, President of Taxpayers for Common Sense, noted on Bill Moyers' website: "the earmarking process is a breakdown in democratic decision-making in the Congress."

John McCain, who has a strong record of attacking earmarks and government waste, declared during a Republican presidential debate on October 21, 2007, "I have fought against out-of- control and disgraceful spending that's been going on and I have saved the American people as much as $2 billion at one stroke... I will have this debate and win because she is a liberal Democrat and I am a proud, reliable, consistent conservative Republican."

In the fiscal 2008 omnibus appropriations bill, Hillary Clinton received 261 earmarks, more than five times the number of any other presidential candidate. Keith Ashdown, research director for the Taxpayers for Common Sense, told the Los Angeles Times that "Clinton has made aggressive use of the pay-to-play earmark game" and received 360 earmarks worth $2.2 billion from 2002 to 2006. This record establishes her as by far the worst abuser of earmarks among all presidential candidates in both parties.

In the fiscal 2008 defense authorization bill, Clinton pushed for more war-related earmarks than any other senator except the chair of the Armed Services Committee. Clinton received 26 earmarks worth about $148.4 million... Clinton has been particularly active in obtaining earmarks for defense companies in New York, helping them sidestep the normal competitive system for contractors. She's also raised more than $270,000 for her campaigns from these defense contractors. By contrast, Obama had only one earmark, requested with several other senators, to help children with severe disabilities.

[Sidewinder603]

At least one guy who can saqy it better than MY CACKLE !!.... Donah////

[GiggidyGeshmoygen]

EARMARKS - CLINTON VS. OBAMA (Part2of2)

Obama, unlike Clinton, refuses to endorse any earmarks that directly benefit a private corporation. Since coming to the Senate, the Los Angeles Times discovered, Clinton had gotten $500 million in earmarks specifically benefiting 59 corporations, and she received donations from employees at 64% of those companies.

Unless the press continues to ignore the subject of earmarks for the next year, any Republican presidential candidate could make a devastating critique of Hillary Clinton on this issue. If she is the Democratic nominee, it is certain that the Republican candidate will rail against her as a symbol of corruption in Washington. In an election when Democrats should be able to win easily by denouncing the corruption and waste of the Bush Administration, the reverse may occur if Clinton is the nominee. The anti-Washington sentiment raging across the country could easily turn against the Democrats (Congress already has ratings lower than Bush) unless their nominee is a clear reformer.

While Clinton has aggressively exploited earmarks for political gain, Obama has led the fight to expose earmarks and change the system. Reason magazine noted that Obama's role in passing the Federal Funding and Tranparency Act "can't be overstated."

Earmarks are much more than a symbolic issue about corruption in Washington. They represent a decisive difference between the two leading candidates in the Democratic race, and if Hillary Clinton emerges as her party's nominee, earmarks could be a critical issue helping Republicans retain the presidency.

(This post is a concise restatement of 'Clinton By Far Worst Abuser Of Earmarks' - - posted on HuffPo by John K. Wilson, January 30, 2008)

[Sidewinder603]

Another WISEGUY ?? 'Name's Johann Karl WILSON ?? Where has He been all these few hundred years.... Did anyone see his face on HOLLIWOOD HILLS ??
Donah////

[TruthBeTold4us]

Hillary Clinton won't release information about her earmarks, even though she one of the biggest users of earmarks in Congress.

She won't release her tax returns.
She won't release her White House records.
She won't get Bill to release his list of library donors.

She voted for the Iraq war.

Sounds more and more like George Bush every day.

[OpusIsUnderTheBed]

No earmarks info, no White House info, no tax info. Be a fool. Vote for Clinton!

[cinnysmom]

she will not release the earmarks,tax records or any thing else, because she has something to hide and the world knows it. Let's jump all over Obama though.....his pastor, Rezko, on and on...but it seems like people forget that the Clintons have ties to Rezko also, and other less than desirable people. So in Hillarys words let's get real about the issues here.. Like what are they going to do about Iraq, the declining economy the high price of gas, jobs, our seniors, the homeless, when can we get back to that????

[janvoght]

secrets hillary?...really, what are we to assume when you are so unwilling to divulge information? are you asking us to accept another president that prefers to deliberately deceive, rather than to show the american people that you have nothing to hide? i for one am not willing to entrust this great country with the missing content of character that it takes to keep us on the great path that our forefathers meant to lead us to. accountability, honesty, integrity are very necessary components wouldn't you agree, for the leadership of america? instead what we learn from you is that if you can be skillful enough to hide evidence leading to responsibility and accountability, that's what really counts....35 years of helping in public service is not worth the paper you would publish it on...if now in the days when it really counts, you appear to feel that the truth is negotiable!

'08 OBAMA

[MrGill]

I hope someone brings this up on CNN and the other outlets as well.

More specifically, I would LOVE to see Barack Obama or the moderator ask her point blank in the next debate about this and the issue of her tax information. What is she hiding?

[MichelleB]

Of course, Hillary will not release neither her tax returns nor earmarks requests. She is above it all. Imagine if the situation were reversed!

[108idealist]

Why doesnt Clinton open herself up to close inspection?
It will be up the free press of Harrisburgh and Pittsburgh and Wilkes-Barre to ask her about that one.
She picked Penn State as the most important state, carefully choosing her important state from among 12 that will actually be voting in the next two months. She and Bill Clnton carefully chose Texas, saying she HAD to win Texas or else she should quit. That turned into a primary win that she gloated over and then it turned into a Texas caucus loss the same night and now that the votes have been added up, Texas was a loss for Clinton and a pretty good one, by delegate count, 99 for Obama, and 94 for Clinton, All told Texas was a similar loss to Mississippi, delegate-wise.
Of course if we ask Bill what he meant by 'win' Texas, he might define WIN for us.
I always thought the idea was to win the most delegates.
As far as Texas is concerned, their complicated fun with elections indicates that Hillary Rodham Clinton has now lost four in a row, in a way, the way I use the word WIN. Clnton lost the caucus in Texas, she lost the total delegate count of Texas, the caucus of Wyoming and the primary of Misssissippi.
She is now on another losing streak, which will be broken in Penn State, and then she will lose the entire nomination to Obama before the convention, since Florida and Mich are now in play.
Obama needs 390 or so, right now. That's delegates, not old Dem machine states like Mass and NJ where any Dem breathing will win in the fall. There are 12 states left to vote and several are in play for Obama, so she better do as well as she did in Ohio as she wants to in Penn or we wont even be excited about Florida and Michigan, because it will be mathematically a cinch for Obama by then unless she wins an impossible number of delegates in Penn State.
Backl to the blog question: She will never show her papers. She wont open her "first lady' papers either, lest we notice how she was only 3rd in decor to Lady Bird and Jaquline Kennedy, and not at all Kissinger-lite. She was a good mom who carefully selected excellent tutors for Chelsea.
Dont hold your breath for any signs of openness from the Clintons. The closets are too full.

[Yasmine]

and YES Senator CLINTON absolutely should disclose her EARMARKS.
Why won't she accept to do so right away ???