Murtha: ‘If I’m corrupt, it’s because I take care of my district.’
Murtha: ‘If I’m corrupt, it’s because I take care of my district.’
Criticism of Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), whom Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) calls one of the “most corrupt members of Congress,” has been mounting recently over his aggressive efforts to steer money to his district. In a recent interview with the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Murtha used stark language to defend himself against charges of corruption:
Mr. Murtha, a 76-year-old Marine veteran schooled in the blunt-knuckle deal-making that defined politics here, is contrition-free when it comes to his success.
“If I’m corrupt, it’s because I take care of my district,” Mr. Murtha said. “My job as a member of Congress is to make sure that we take care of what we see is necessary. Not the bureaucrats who are unelected over there in whatever White House, whether it’s Republican or Democrat. Those bureaucrats would like to control everything. Every president would like to have all the power and not have Congress change anything. But we’re closest to the people.”
Murtha’s remarks recall another one of CREW’s most corrupt lawmakers, Rep. Don Young (R-AK), who defended his controversial earmarks on the House floor in 2007. “I was always proud of my earmarks. I believe in earmarks, always have, as long as they are exposed. But don’t you ever call that a scandal,” said Young.
- Comments
- 57
Obama calls out lawmakers who rail against earmarks but defend their own.
Obama calls out lawmakers who rail against earmarks but defend their own.
As ThinkProgress has observed, conservative lawmakers such as Sens. David Vitter (R-LA), Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Lindsey Graham (R-SC), and Jon Kyl (R-AZ) have slammed the omnibus spending bill for including earmarks — despite the fact that many of those earmarks were their own. In a speech today on earmark reform, President Obama called out legislators for having this double standard:
OBAMA: Now, let me be clear: Done right, earmarks give legislators the opportunity to direct federal money to worthy projects that benefit people in their district, and that’s why I have opposed their outright elimination. I also find it ironic that some of those who railed the loudest against this bill because of earmarks actually inserted earmarks of their own – and will tout them in their own states and districts.
Watch it:
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) tweets his response to Obama’s speech: “No time is better than the present to undertake earmark reform Mr. President”
Sen. Bennett Lashes Out At Sen. McCain: ‘We Ought To’ Infest Arizona With ‘Mormon Crickets’
Sen. Bennett Lashes Out At Sen. McCain: ‘We Ought To’ Infest Arizona With ‘Mormon Crickets’
Recently, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has tweeted a series of top 10 lists of “porkiest projects” in the omnibus spending bill, criticizing “beaver management” and even funding for school construction. Last month, one of his tweets was an earmark in the omnibus spending bill for “mormon crickets”
@SenJohnMcCain: #6 $1 million for mormon cricket control in Utah - is that the species of cricket or a game played by the brits?
The line has since been embraced by the right wing as an example of wasteful spending. Today, the earmark’s sponsor, Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT) explained his rationale in a tense interview with Fox News’s Megyn Kelly, who accused Bennett of abusing federal funds for pet projects. “Why is it an earmark to begin with?” she pressed. Bennett fired back at Kelly: “Okay, will you calm down for a minute?” The Utah senator then took a shot at McCain:
KELLY: The only debate I’ve heard is John McCain telling you that this is the sixth porkiest earmark he sees in the bill.
BENNETT: Well, that may be because the Mormon crickets only infest Idaho, Utah, and Nevada. Maybe we ought to shoot some of them over the border into Arizona. But they go wherever they go. And again, the authorizing committee that examines these things is fully aware of it.
Watch it:
So-called “Mormon crickets” are actually an invasive cicada species that decimates crops across the West regularly. In 2000, the infestations cost Utah alone $22 million in crop damages. The cricket infestation in 2003 caused at least $25 million in damages. “We are going to eradicate the crickets [with the funds]. And they infest at highest point 3.5 million acres — most of which is public lands. … The crops…are being destroyed on public lands,” Bennett explained.
Bennett noted that eliminating earmarks doesn’t save federal dollars, and he scolded Fox News’s reporting. “If the money were not earmarked for this purpose, it would still be spent. That is, the Dept. of Agriculture would spend it someplace else,” he said. “So do not deceive your listeners and your viewers.”
Vitter Stands By His $249 Million In Earmarks While Complaining That The Omnibus Bill Is ‘Bloated’
Vitter Stands By His $249 Million In Earmarks While Complaining That The Omnibus Bill Is ‘Bloated’
Republicans like Sens. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), have been attacking the $410 billion omnibus spending bill, claiming that it has too much spending and too many earmarks. One of the loudest voices calling for the bill’s defeat has been Sen. David Vitter (R-LA), despite his earmarks worth $249 million for 142 projects.
In an interview on Laura Ingraham’s radio show today, Vitter defended himself against charges that his position is hypocritical. “I don’t think it’s wrong to advocate for specific priorities in your state if it doesn’t change your opinion about an overall bill, which I think in this case is way too bloated,” said Vitter.
Pressed by Ingraham about whether it was “worth it to put these earmarks in,” Vitter said that “the important bottom line” was that he would vote against “a bloated bill, $410 billion”:
VITTER: Laura, I understand your argument. I think the important bottom line is when the vote comes, does David Vitter or Murkowski or Bond or anyone else vote for a bloated bill, $410 billion in this case. I can tell you what my answer is going to be. Ever since I’ve known the size and scope of this bill, I’ve said that’s way out of line. It’s 8 percent increase in these areas of the federal government, which is the most since Jimmy Carter.
Listen here:
Vitter continually said that the bill is too “bloated,” but he never suggested that he would be willing to do his part to slim it down by cutting his own earmarks. Considering that the bill is expected to pass, Vitter appears ready to take credit for the earmarked projects after voting against the bill.
Vitter claimed that “ever since” he learned the bill’s price tag, he has said that it was “way out of line.” This claim, however, is questionable. The House passed the $410 billion omnibus on Feb. 25, but as recently as March 1st he was telling his constituents that he was undecided about how he would vote on it.
Transcript: More »
Graham criticizes Obama for earmarks, but defends his own.
Graham criticizes Obama for earmarks, but defends his own.
On Meet the Press this morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) urged President Obama to veto the $410 billion FY09 omnibus budget because it has too many earmarks. Host David Gregory quickly pointed out that Graham’s friend and colleague, John McCain, has been highlighting Graham’s own $950,000 earmark for a convention center in Myrtle Beach, SC. Graham then pivoted from attacking earmarks to defending them:
“I voted to take all earmarks out, but I will come back in the new process and put that back in,” Graham insisted, saying that the convention center is important to stimulate the local economy. “I think I should have the ability as a United States senator to direct money back to my state as long as it’s transparent and it makes sense.”
Watch it:
Congress is expected to approve the omnibus appropriations bill this week.
In Twitter Fight, Rep. Blumenauer Slams Sen. McCain’s Attack On Solar Power Highway
In Twitter Fight, Rep. Blumenauer Slams Sen. McCain’s Attack On Solar Power Highway
When he was running for President, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) freely admitted that he was computer “illiterate” and that he relied on his aides to use a BlackBerry. But McCain recently increased his use of technology, using Twitter to mock what he thinks are the “the TOP TEN PORKIEST PROJECTS in the Omnibus Spending bill.”
Yesterday, his #1 porkiest project was the Oregon Solar Highway:
As Danny Glover points out at AirCongress, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, whose home state stands to benefit from the earmark, didn’t appreciate McCain’s sarcasm and he tweeted his displeasure:
The Oregon Solar Highway is “the nation’s first solar panel project on a major U.S. highway,” which seeks to use a row of solar panels about five feet wide and two football fields long to feed electricity directly into Portland General Electric’s systemwide grid. It is meant to “account for 28 percent of the energy needed to power lights that illuminate the highway’s sweeping interchange at night.”
When he was running for President, McCain declared that “no one in Arizona is against solar.” But, as The Washington Independent pointed out at the time, McCain’s voting record has not been supportive of solar energy. In May 2008, McCain trashed subsidies for solar power while simultaneously arguing for subsidies for the nuclear industry. (HT: Jonathan Singer)
McCain fumes over 9,000 earmarks in omnibus budget: ‘If it seems like I’m angry, it’s because I am.’
McCain fumes over 9,000 earmarks in omnibus budget: ‘If it seems like I’m angry, it’s because I am.’
During a presidential debate last fall, Barack Obama made an emphatic pledge on earmark reform: “When I’m president, I will go line by line to make sure that we are not spending money unwisely.” Now, the Obama administration is urging Congress to quickly pass a $410 billion budget that contains 9,000 earmarks in order to keep the government running for the rest of fiscal 2009. Yesterday on the Senate floor, John McCain (R-AZ) — who frequently railed against earmarkers on the campaign trail and pledged to “make them famous” — fumed over the Obama administration’s stance:
“If it seems like I’m angry, it’s because I am,” McCain said, taking the White House to task for treating the bill as leftover business — and not subject to the full measure of earmark reform promised by candidate Obama.
“Last year’s business?” McCain asked, incredulous. “The president will sign this appropriations bill into law. It is the president’s business. It is the president of the United States’ business. It is the president of the United States’ business to do what he said — stated — when we were in debate seeking the support of the American people — where he said he would work to eliminate earmarks.”
Watch it:
McCain, who did not request any earmarks himself, said, “I want to freely acknowledge that Republicans were guilty of this as well.” Indeed, Republican leader Mitch McConell “has more than $75 million worth of earmarks in the omnibus spending bill.” Obama, Rahm Emanuel, Joe Biden, and Ken Salazar also have earmarks in the bill. As ThinkProgress has previously noted, some earmarks serve very vital purposes.
Palin inadvertently criticizes herself for supporting Bridge to Nowhere.
Palin inadvertently criticizes herself for supporting Bridge to Nowhere.
In her first policy address, which covered special needs children, Gov. Sarah Palin claimed today that Congress spends “some $18 billions on earmarks for their political pet projects.” Palin then slammed the “Bridge to Nowhere” earmark, which, ironically, she strongly supported:
Congress spends some $18 billions on earmarks for their political pet projects. And that right there is more than the shortfall to fully fund IDEA. … You guys have heard some of the examples of where those dollars go. You’ve heard about the bridges, and you’ve heard about some of these pet projects that really don’t make a lot of sense.
Watch it:
Memo To Palin: Fruit Fly Research Has Led To Advances In Understanding Autism
Memo To Palin: Fruit Fly Research Has Led To Advances In Understanding Autism
This morning, Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK) gave her first policy speech urging the federal government to fully fund the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA), “a law ensuring services to children with disabilities throughout the nation.” In the speech, Palin cited the need to do more for children with disabilities such as autism:
For many parents of children with disabilities, the most valuable thing of all is information. Early identification of a cognitive or other disorder, especially autism, can make a life-changing difference.
Palin claimed that the amount that Congress spends on earmarks “is more than the shortfall to fully fund IDEA.” She then ridiculed some of the projects — such as “fruit fly research” — saying they have little or no value:
Where does a lot of that earmark money end up anyway? [...] You’ve heard about some of these pet projects they really don’t make a whole lot of sense and sometimes these dollars go to projects that have little or nothing to do with the public good. Things like fruit fly research in Paris, France. I kid you not.
Watch it:
Palin did not specify what fruit fly research earmark she was referring to (presumably a grant for olive fruit fly research), but she is apparently unaware that scientific research with fruit flies has led to valuable discoveries that have boosted autism research, as a study at the University of North Carolina demonstrated last year:
[S]cientists at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine have shown that a protein called neurexin is required for..nerve cell connections to form and function correctly.
The discovery, made in Drosophila fruit flies may lead to advances in understanding autism spectrum disorders, as recently, human neurexins have been identified as a genetic risk factor for autism.
The study of fruit flies has also been used for other autism research and “revolutionize[d]” the study of birth defects.
Palin’s tenure in Alaska filled with pet projects.
Palin’s tenure in Alaska filled with pet projects.
Politico reports on Gov. Sarah Palin’s prolific spending while governor of Alaska. “She supports spending taxpayer cash on initiatives that tickle her fancy,” Ken Vogel notes. “During her tenures as both mayor and governor, operating budgets ballooned by 55 percent in Wasilla and 25 percent in Alaska.” Some examples of Palin’s pet projects:
– $25,000 for the Juneau Christian Center, after Palin started worshipping there.
– $2 million for an academic conference meant to dispel the idea that climate change is threatening polar bears.
– $630,000 for a kitchen in a hockey arena complex the self-described hockey mom built during her second term as Wasilla’s mayor.
– At least $10,000 to help fund the snowmobile race Todd Palin has won several times.
Ultimately, Palin took Wasilla’s long-term debt from $1 million when she entered office to $25 million when she left.” “Anything she proposed is a good earmark,” said Bob Weinstein, mayor of Ketchikan, Alaska.
The Bridge To Nowhere Lie Returns: McCain Claims Palin ‘Stood Up Against’ The Project
The Bridge To Nowhere Lie Returns: McCain Claims Palin ‘Stood Up Against’ The Project
After the talking point was thoroughly debunked, the McCain campaign slowly backed away from the claim that Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin said “thank but no thanks” to the Bridge to Nowhere. But in Wisconsin today, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) brought the line back, claiming that Palin “stood up against” the project:
MCCAIN: Let me mention to you one more time, the earmarks and pork-barrel spending very quickly because, because, it is so important because it is not only gotten out of control, but it’s end up with members of Congress residing in federal prison cause it’s corrupting and it’s your money and they think it’s their’s. They think it’s their money, not yours. And we’ve had a Bridge to Nowhere, $233 million bridge in Alaska, which I’m glad, happy to say, this governor stood up against.
Watch it:
As ThinkProgress has noted, when Palin ran for governor, she supported the project and defended it against “the spinmeisters” who wanted to turn it “into something that’s so negative.” When she finally redirected funds away from the bridge, she lamented the fact that Congress had “little interest in spending any more money” on the project.
McCain’s claim today is at least the 37th time his campaign has lied about Palin and the bridge:
After Voting For Earmark-Laden Bailout Bill, McCain Seems To Call For Bush To Veto It
After Voting For Earmark-Laden Bailout Bill, McCain Seems To Call For Bush To Veto It
Last night, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) voted in favor of the $700 billion financial bailout bill, saying we “square in the greatest financial crisis of our lifetimes” and that he was “pleased” to be voting for the bill. McCain also told NPR he was “guardedly optimistic” the House would support the new version, which was packed with “sweeteners” aimed to bring House conservatives on board, as TP noted yesterday.
Though those “sweeteners” angered the MSNBC pundits this morning, McCain was hardly bothered, never mentioning them yesterday or during today’s cable news interviews. But when Joe Scarborough asked McCain about the pork projects, McCain flipped back to his standard anti-pork crusade, going so far as to suggest that that President Bush should veto the bill, “no matter what the stakes are:”
SCARBOROUGH: Why did these items have to be in this critical bill?
MCCAIN: Well that’s just the way the system is working in Washington and the reason why it’s got to be fixed, and it’s got to be changed. And no matter what the stakes are, you’ve got to stop this by starting to veto bills that come across the president’s desk. … It’s insanity and it’s obscenity, because it’s a waste of taxpayers’ dollars and it goes on, and until we stop it, until we get frankly a president who will say, I’m gonna veto these bills, I’m gonna make the people famous that put them on there, uh, famous.
Watch it:
Despite McCain’s constant railing against “pork barrel spending,” his actual voting record rarely matches his fiery rhetoric. He has scheduled many campaign events at venues that benefited from earmarked funding. When confronted with the realities of projects earmarks support — such as aid to Israel, military housing, and cancer treatment clinics, he has backtracked from his anti-pork crusade, saying it’s just “the process” he opposes. Even while criticizing the earmarks in an Iraq war funding bill, McCain still voted for it.
If a President McCain would veto the bill because of pork, why was the bill good enough to earn Senator McCain’s vote?
After Attacking Earmarks, Graham Unable To Defend His Own Pork: ‘I’m Part Of The Problem’
After Attacking Earmarks, Graham Unable To Defend His Own Pork: ‘I’m Part Of The Problem’
During the presidential debate on Friday, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) responded to a question about how he would “lead this country out of the financial crisis” by railing against the tangential issue of “earmark pork-barrel spending.” “The first thing we have to do is get spending under control in Washington,” said McCain, adding that earmarks are “evil.”
Asked on Fox News Sunday today about McCain’s “narrow focus” on earmarks, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) claimed that “if you believe earmarks is a narrow problem, then you don’t understand what’s happened because of earmarks.”
But asked by host Chris Wallace, “If earmarks are so bad, why did you ask for 71 projects totaling $305 million dollars in the last fiscal year?,” Graham could only respond by saying that he has “been part of the problem” and would change:
GRAHAM: I have been part of the problem. I — my earmarks have been authorized, number one. They’re out there for you to look at. And, I’m part of the problem, I’d like to be part of the solution because the good part of earmarks has been overwhelmed by the bad part. Let’s just start over. Let’s start over because the $3 million to DNA to bear studies in Montana, the $250 million bridge in Alaska for fifty people is drowning out some of the good things I’ve done and John’s done. So I’m willing to start over. But there’s one guy in this town who hasn’t gotten a penny. I’m willing to follow his lead because he’s convinced me that the greater good would be achieved if we all just had a time out on this.
Watch it:
Considering that McCain has demagogued against earmarks for years, it’s laughable for Graham to claim that he is just now “willing to follow” McCain’s lead even as he continues to request pork.
In fact, despite Graham’s previous vote for an earmark moratorium for fiscal year 2009, Graham recently placed $20 million in earmarks into the 2009 Defense Authorization bill.
Palin misrepresents her record on the Bridge to Nowhere for 11th time.
Palin misrepresents her record on the Bridge to Nowhere for 11th time.
Tonight during his interview with Gov. Sarah Palin (R-AK), Sean Hannity asked her, “Did you originally support [the Bridge to Nowhere] and did you change your view on it?” Failing to note that she originally supported the bridge, Palin claimed simply, “I killed the Bridge to Nowhere.” Watch it:
Palin, as ThinkProgress and others have repeatedly documented, was a strong advocate for the Bridge to Nowhere and repeatedly expressed her desire to renew federal funding for the project. The McCain-Palin campaign has now misrepresented Palin’s record with regard to the Bridge to Nowhere at least 36 times:
Would McCain veto Graham and Lieberman’s request for over $50 million in earmarks?
Would McCain veto Graham and Lieberman’s request for over $50 million in earmarks?
The budget watchdog Taxpayers for Common Sense has released an analysis of earmark requests in the 2009 Defense Authorization bill, finding 435 earmarks worth $5.2 billion. Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain asked for any earmarks. Joe Biden had an $11.6 million earmark. The Washington Times reports that McCain supporters Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Joe Lieberman (I-CT) requested milllions:
Lieberman requested $35 million for “Technology development for F135 engine” for beneficiary Pratt and Whitney. Graham has $20 million in solo requests, including a $9.9 million earmark for a “Physical Fitness Center” at Shaw Air Force Base in South Carolina.
“Would McCain veto those if he were president?” the Times asks. Reporter Christina Bellantoni called the McCain campaign to see if he would veto the earmarks. “Update, 5:45 p.m.: Silence from Team McCain,” she writes.
McCain repeats Bridge to Nowhere lie on CNN.
McCain repeats Bridge to Nowhere lie on CNN.
This morning on CNN, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) defended Gov. Sarah Palin’s record on requesting hundreds of millions of dollars worth of earmarks, and repeated the lie that Palin had opposed the Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska. “I’m proud of her record as opposing — including the Bridge to Nowhere in Alaska,” he said. Watch it:
McCain’s statement brings the total number of times his campaign has repeated the lie to 35 times. Just yesterday in Colorado, Palin herself declared that she “did tell the Congress, ‘Thanks but no thanks for that Bridge to Nowhere.’”
McCaskill: ‘Sarah Palin Has Been An Earmark Queen In Alaska. That’s The Facts.’
McCaskill: ‘Sarah Palin Has Been An Earmark Queen In Alaska. That’s The Facts.’
This week on “The View,” Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) claimed that Sarah Palin had never requested earmarks as governor. Today on ABC’s “This Week,” campaign spokeswoman Carly Fiorina repeated the lie, claiming Palin did not request earmarks for Alaska:
FIORINA: Sarah Palin as governor stood up and said, I know earmarks are corrupting. We must ask for less of them–
STEPHANOPOLOUS: But she still requested them.
FIORINA: As governor she did not. [...]
MCCASKILL: Sarah Palin has been an earmark queen in Alaska. That’s the facts.
Stephanopolous corrected Fiorina when she falsely claimed that Palin had “rejected the money for the Bridge to Nowhere.” Watch it:
As ThinkProgress has documented, Palin has aggressively pursued earmark funding for her state as governor, requesting nearly $750 million in federal funds, “by far the largest per-capita request in the nation.” Just last March, Palin wrote an op-ed in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, explaining that her “role at the federal level is simply to submit the most well-conceived earmark requests we can.”
Fiorina’s assertion that it is a “fact” that Palin “rejected the money for the Bridge to Nowhere” is wrong. Once Congress removed the designation for the bridge from the earmark, Palin took the money and redirected it to other projects.
As Keith Ashdown, chief investigator for the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense, pointed out, Palin’s constant claim to have said “thanks but no thanks” to the bridge earmark is simply a lie: “To say ‘thanks but no thanks’ would imply that they didn’t take the money. And they got every dime of it.”
Cantor Defends McCain’s Lie By Lying: Palin ‘Rejected The Monies’ For The Bridge To Nowhere
Cantor Defends McCain’s Lie By Lying: Palin ‘Rejected The Monies’ For The Bridge To Nowhere
On MSNBC today, Norah O’Donnell asked Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) if Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was misspeaking or distorting the facts when he falsely claimed on “The View” today that Sarah Palin never asked for an earmark as the governor of Alaska. “The proof is in the pudding,” replied Cantor. “And the fact is Sarah Palin, when she was governor of Alaska, rejected the monies that came from Washington to construct the Bridge to Nowhere.” Watch it:
In fact, Palin never “rejected” the funds from Congress. While Congress killed federal funding for the bridge in November 2005, Palin supported continuing the project when she ran for governor in 2006. When she finally let it die in September 2007, she lamented that Congress had “little interest in spending any more money” on the Bridge to Nowhere. The McCain campaign has now repeated this lie 31 times:
Cantor also claimed that “Palin rejected the earmarking that went on here in Washington,” but, as ThinkProgress noted earlier today, in her two years as governor, Palin “requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation.”
Transcript: More »
On ‘The View,’ McCain Falsely Claims Palin Never Requested Earmarks As Governor Of Alaska
On ‘The View,’ McCain Falsely Claims Palin Never Requested Earmarks As Governor Of Alaska
Appearing on “The View” today, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) falsely claimed that Sarah Palin never requested earmarks as the governor of Alaska. “Not as governor she didn’t,” McCain told Barbara Walters after she noted Palin “took some earmarks”:
WALTERS: What is she going to reform specifically, senator?
MCCAIN: Well, first of all, earmark spending, which she vetoed a half a billion dollars worth in the state of Alaska.
WALTERS: She also took some earmarks there.
BEHAR: A lot.
MCCAIN: No, not as governor she didn’t, she vetoed…
WALTERS: As Mayor.
MCCAIN: Well, look, the fact is that she was a reform governor.
Watch it:
McCain’s claim that Palin never accepted earmarks as the governor of Alaska is divorced from reality. In fact, she actively sought them:
– Though Palin did reduce Alaska’s earmark requests, “in her two years in office, Alaska has requested nearly $750 million in special federal spending, by far the largest per-capita request in the nation.”
– In March 2008, Palin wrote an op-ed in the Fairbanks Daily News-Miner, saying that her “role at the federal level is simply to submit the most well-conceived earmark requests we can” and that her reduction of requests was a response “to the changing circumstances in Congress.”
– In February 2008, Palin’s office sent Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK) “a 70-page memo outlining almost $200 million worth of new funding requests for the state.”
– In her most recent earmark requests, “Palin requested millions of federal dollars for everything from improving recreational halibut fishing to studying the mating habits of crabs and the DNA of harbor seals.”
As ThinkProgress has noted, Palin has requested earmarks of the very type that McCain routinely mocks while on the campaign trail. As Walters pointed out, Palin was also a big fan of congressional pork as the Mayor of Wasilla, even hiring a lobbyist to help secure them.
McCain Willing To Overlook Palin’s Quest For Earmarks To Study Harbor Seal DNA
McCain Willing To Overlook Palin’s Quest For Earmarks To Study Harbor Seal DNA
At a rally in Virginia yesterday with Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin at his side, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) launched into one of his routine stump lines about earmarks, saying “We’re never going to spend $3 million again to study the DNA of bears in Montana.” “I don’t know if that was a paternity issue or a criminal issue, but it’s not going to happen again,” joked McCain. Watch it:
McCain’s recitation of this canned line is ironic in the presence of his new running mate. As Politico’s Ben Smith reported yesterday, Palin sought a similar earmark this year to fund research on the “genetics of harbor seals”:
“We’re not going to spend $3 million of your tax dollars to study the DNA of bears in Montana,” McCain has said during this year’s campaign, referring to a study he’s mocked for years of whether grizzlies need to keep their status as an endangered species.
Palin, meanwhile, has requested $3.2 million to be spent in part researching the “genetics of harbor seals,” in one of the state’s many requests for federal funding of research into Alaska’s fauna.
Perhaps if McCain wants to know whether the harbor seal study is “a paternity issue or a criminal issue,” he could simply ask his running mate.
Additionally, this isn’t the first time McCain’s efforts to make earmarks “famous” have conflicted with Palin. CNN reports today that “McCain criticized two of his future running mate’s hometown projects in broadsides in 2001 against congressional ‘pork-barrel’ spending”:
In a 2001 statement opposing a transportation spending bill McCain singled out for criticism about $3 million worth of those projects. McCain’s list of “objectionable” spending included a $2.5 million road project for the town that then had a population of 5,500, as well as a $450,000 appropriation for an agricultural processing plant there.
The McCain-Palin campaign defended the conflict in a statement, saying that “Palin was forced to work within the current system to obtain critical funding for a growing city.” Somehow, projects that McCain once considered “objectionable” are now deemed “critical” by his campaign.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll