Will the MSM pick up on this: HRC's $2.3 billion in earmarks?

[onenote]

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/clinton-2.3b-in-earmarks-2008-04-28.html

The Hill is reporting that "Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) has requested nearly $2.3 billion in federal earmarks for 2009, almost three times the largest amount received by a single senator this year."

Moreover, neither McCain nor Obama requested any earmarks.

Does this have the potential to put HRC on the defensive? Will SDs look at this as creating a vulnerability for HRC vis a vis McCain?

[geiger]

1. speaking as an Obama supporter, what is your point?

there is nothing inherently wrong with this; it's the job of a representative to bring home the bacon.

[Bread and Circus]

3. that would be true if earmarks weren't quid pro quo, which you will find out they are

when you study the matter closely.

[geiger]

6. freedom of association aguaranteed right for all citizens.

[Bread and Circus]

9. Please say that in English.

[geiger]

13. a pattern of proof of quid pro quo intent would be difficult to come by

[Bread and Circus]

14. Then it's obvious you haven't read very much at all on the topic.

[polmaven]

18. I disagree.

I was at a "Town Hall Meeting" with my Congressman recently, and "earmarks" were brough up. He pointed out that one of the earmarks he secured was for federal dollars to help my city with flood mitigation in the downtown area. We have flooded for years, without the money to really help stop the problem. 2 years ago next month, on Mother's Day, flooding was widespread and FEMA was called in.

The Congressman was able to secure money to help with that problem, and that money is considered to be an "earmark". The term is NOT simply for frivolous projects. Maybe before we start making that accusation we should learn for what the money was used. Maybe we should also ask why Senator Obama found nothing from which he thought the state of Illinois could benefit.

[Bread and Circus]

19. Again, you are someone who appears not to really understand how the whole earmark thing works...

but yes, they aren't just for "frivolous projects". However, they often are. Furthermore, the money is often funneled to private entities (individuals and businesses) that turn around and give large sums of monetary and logistical support to the politician that "brought them the bacon." It's a way of scoring points with monied interests in one's state and further corrupts democracy.

I think you'd be amazed what a source of abuse this can be and it occurs on both sides of the isle, everyday and Clinton is more guilty of it than most.

Anyone who doesn't understand the problem is either forcing them self to remain ignorant and/or has a corrosive view of Democracy, at least in my opinion.

In comparison to the federal budget, earmarks are a small percentage. However, in comparison to discretionary spending it is quite large. The real harm of it is the quid quo pro aspect of it, because it further ingratiates politicians to special well-healed interests all on the average taxpayers dollar.

[polmaven]

24. No, obviously I am, as a Clinton supporter,

just too stupid to understand the way you do.

Please.....I do understand that there are, of course, frivolous earmarks....My suggestion was that each one be reviewed and those that are frivolous be added and those that are not be added. Please prove that "Clinton is more guilty of it than most".

My question again is, why have both Senator Obama and Senator McBush found nothing at all in their respective states worthy of asking for help?

I am really offended by your assumption that I am stupid because I point out that not all earmarks are frivolous.

[onenote]

7. I'm an obama supporter myself.

And I'm not trying to pass judgment on whether earmarks are good, bad, indifferent.

But because of some past abuses (the bridge to nowhere, abramoff, etc), they are an issue. And McCain is very identified with the "earmark reform" position and has refused to "bring home the bacon" through earmarks.

My question simply is whether this will become a story? Should it? Its certainly newsworthy when one presidential candidate is the leading user of earmarks and the other two aren't using them at all. That doesn't mean that HRC's earmarks aren't defensible -- they may well be very defensible. But that doesn't mean it might not become something that takes her off-message.

[tabasco]

22. LOL. Pork is often doled out to financial supporters,

not as a valid effort to help the people back home. That is why they should be scrutinized. Earmerk requests indicate who a politician is "fighting for." Hillary claims to be fighting for working people but will not disclose her earmark requests from past years in the Senate. Why is this?

Obama has disclosed all of his earmark requests from his time in the Senate.

Hillary supporters had the audacity to attack Obama on his earmark requests (which were above board) when Hillary hasn't even disclosed hers!

[leftofcool]

2. Gee! Because she wants money for her state?

I wish our Senator worked as hard to get money for our state.

[hedgehog]

16. One of her earmarks is to provide funding for a giant mall expansion in

Syracuse, New York. Local politicians were either against it or ambivalent. Becaue of the mall, neighborhood developmnet and renovation in Syracuse has been tabled. I couldn't figure out why Destiny was the beast that wouldn't die until I found out that the developer and his family had donated the maximum amounts possible to Hillary.


http://coburn.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=LatestNews.NewsStories&ContentRecord_id=c64638b3-802a-23ad-40ed-c04fd89a4843&Issue_id=

[libnnc]

21. can't have enough malls though

Malls, Wal-Fart, outsourcing decent jobs to India...

Yep. Hillary's ALL about what's good for 'murika.

Sickening. :puke:

[Aloha Spirit]

25. Malls will save this economy of ours.

[tabasco]

23. Federal money doesn't always go "back home"

and often goes to political contributors for projects that do not serve the community. Ever heard of the "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska?

Why has Hillary refused to disclose her earmark requests from past years in the Senate? Is she afraid it will show who she is really "fighting for?"

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.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/15/clinton-wont-release-ear_n_91681.html

[PBS Poll-435]

4. Nope. Keating Five / S&L Meltdown.

[Bread and Circus]

5. Yes, but only if she's officially nominated. Right now, the issue doesn't benefit the Republicans...

but with Obama out of the way, it will and then the floodgates open.

[bigbrother05]

8. Wow Hillary really likes to spend other people's money

[hendo]

12. that she does.

She can't even spend her own money responsibly, I wonder what she is wasting ours on.

[bigbrother05]

17. Saw yesterday that some was going to Puerto Rico

for an Observatory

[Onlooker]

10. I hope she defends earmarks

Earmarks are often good, helping to prevent factories from closing, rebuild poor areas, improve roads, and other good things.

[Kittycat]

11. 3x's is just disgusting.

I understand legislators getting earmarks for their states, but there should be a knowing limit to what they request. I'll be the first to criticize Hastert's Highway, and that's in my district (actually most of us here think it's idiotic). But it does raise the question of what she's getting for it - where it's all going, and who is benefiting. Sorry if I don't trust her, she's a proven liar - by her own admission.

[BeyondGeography]

15. Anything short of Hillary pulling a gun on a reporter won't make be making headlines now

We have entered the,"How can the Dems nominate a black guy who poor whites aren't voting for" phase of the coverage, aided and abetted by Rev. Wright's re-emergence. Nothing can stop them now.

[LSK]

20. heres the thing about earmarks

One persons earmarks are another persons fixing of highways or schools or something.

Not all earmarks are bad, except to Republicans, who think all spending on America is bad.