Skip to comments.Fact Check: McCain misstates Palin earmarks record
Posted on 09/12/2008 3:50:25 PM PDT by EveningStar
John McCain continued to laud his running mate, Sarah Palin, as a budget cutter on Friday, this time erroneously asserting that as governor of Alaska she had not sought congressional earmarks for her state.
In fact, while Palin has significantly reduced the state's earmark requests, she asked for nearly $200 million in targeted spending for the 2009 fiscal year. And in an interview with ABC News aired Friday, she defended her earmark requests, emphasizing that she opposed "earmark abuse."
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
If you get a massive amount of dung,
And a big enough wall,
And you pitch all that dung at the great big wall...
Wadda you get?
I thought the rats always said a reduction in the growth rate was a draconian cut. This was an actual cut.
The only fact about the ‘media’ is they are nothing more than a Demonrat mouthpiece. They are a disgrace to freedom of the press and what the founders intended. Where are the tough questions and the ‘fact checks’ of Obama and Biden?! Hannity ran a nice little quote from Obama saying how he’d do away with out national defense last night while he LIES about how he’ll defend. These people are laughable in their attempts to smear Palin. They have lost all credibility.
The AP only writes “liberal” facts.
AP = Against Palin news organization
tried searching AP’s site with “Fact Check: Obama” and came up with no direct match. ‘Nuff said.
And Obama has requested close to a BILLION dollars in earmarks as a freshman Senator. $1,000,000 for the hospital at which his wife works. Is McCain saving this ad for later? Good plan, let Obama run with this a little longer and then release the ad.
MCCAIN HAS NEVER REQUESTED AN EARMARK!
Just how inept is the Obama campaign?
31 is less than 52 and $197 million is less than $256 million. Sure sounds like a cut to me!
Interestingly factcheck.org is staffed by the Annenberg group of liberals—read the bios on them. Wasn’t the Annenberg Challenge funded by same overall organization? They won’t be fair. If I recall the Annenberg Challenge called itself non-profit, non partisan.
what is the actual evidence that she sought $200M in EARMARKS??? Says who? And who said she asked for ‘earmarks’??
This is unprovable yet AP won’t bother to tell us that. It’s too good to check. And since most politicians would do this it ‘must’ be true.
Greta had the guy from “Fact Check” on last night. He’s an idiot. He agrees with the fact, saying that she fired the librarian after asking if she would ban books, if asked to, and then goes on and on and ends up saying that Palin never tried to ban any books and that the librarian was not fired.
lawdy lawdy, de sure be’s a lots of fact checkin alls of a sudenz....
what happened to fact checks the last 2yrs for Celebritician Obama?
i’m confused. i heard mccain say on The view (heard a clip of it on the radio) unequivocally that she didnt engage in earmarks as a governor. it would seem that that statement is inaccurate. (It will probably make a soros 527 ad soon).
But i am willing to become unconfused here.
How is what Mac said correct?
Didn’t anyone here click on the link and read the whole f’n article???
Lead story on ABC radio. Holy moley are they desperate.
I didn’t see The View, but all I’ve ever heard the McCain camp say is that she vetoed $x million in earmarks, and that she reduced them.
The issue of Palin’s earmarks comes up in tonight’s part of the Gibson interview.
The issue was addressed in the WSJ, yesterday. She approved the earmark at first, but after re-thinking the issue she withdrew the earmark and many others, as well. You have to realize that she was probably not on the job very long, when the earmark came up. Her view of earmarks developed quickly to opposing most earmarks unless they were of value to the whole country, not just the state of Alaska.
These are different earmarks.
I think he mispoke on the TV show.
We’ll have to wait and see how it is handled...
While that is what they HAVE been saying, sometimes McCain leaves out some words. Apparently this time he said she asked for NO earmarks, which is incorrect.
They are really quick to correct him, though.
But are they earmarks that benefited only the state of Alaska
This whole issue has been discussed and the left just keeps on digging and asking about yet another ear mark. The fact is she cut the number of earmarks, asked for by the state of Alaska by a dramatic amount and Obama cut nothing.
If Obama is the Messiah, he needs to go out into the desert and call on God to save him, because God is the only one who can at this point.
Every state asks for federal dollars forinfrastructure. The weather conditions in Alaska make infrastructure an expensive proposition. Any federal help is very much appreciated. When the bridge cost estimates went out of sight, it became apparent that the money could be better spent elsewhere; especially if it was a bridge to nowhere. Is that too hard for people to understand?
Oh! I forgot. They are called Dummycrats.
This was not the bridge to nowhere:
Palin, in an interview with ABC News anchor Charles Gibson, drew a distinction between “earmark abuse” and the spending requests that she has authorized for the state of Alaska. Gibson, noting that the state had asked for money to study the genetics of harbor seals and mating habits of crabs, asked: “Isn’t that exactly the kind of thing that John McCain is objecting to?”
Palin replied that those requests have been submitted through state fish and game and wildlife agencies and by state universities.
“Those research requests did come through that system, but wanting it to be in the light of day, not behind closed doors, with lobbyists making deals with Congress to stick things in there under the public radar,” she said. “That’s the abuse that we’re going to stop.”
“but wanting it to be in the light of day, not behind closed doors, with lobbyists making deals with Congress to stick things in there under the public radar,”
Until the media equated all requests for federal funds, this was the definition of earmarks. My understanding is that an “earmark” is generally some unrelated funding slipped into an unrelated bill hoping that it will pass and be signed without anyone noticing. I suppose any state’s request for federal funding can become an “earmark”, but it is not an earmark until congress members make it so.
That slid to 52 earmarks valued at $256 million in Palin's first year.
This year, the governor's office asked the delegation to help it land 31 earmarks valued at $197 million.
In December 2007, Palin's budget director put out a memo urging state officials who were assembling their department spending plans to reserve earmarks for compelling needs only, in an effort to "enhance the state's credibility."
"When she took office, we talked about the state's reliance on federal earmarks and she made it clear for several reasons she wanted to significantly cut back on that reliance," Katz said.
Senator McCain said Governor Palin learned that earmarks are bad, but in 2008 alone Gov. Palin requested $256 million in earmarks for Alaska, and her state received more earmarks per person that any other state, said spokesman Tommy Vietor. The fact is that Governor Palin isnt just good at getting pork projects, shes one of the most successful pork barrel politicians in history.
But if you look at the document you quickly get feel for the fact that many of the earmarks are requests for funding that are completely legitimate, and many relate to unfunded mandates imposed upon Alaska by federal legislation like the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act. Several examples are set forth after the jump.
Meets the increased needs under the Magnuson-Stevens Act for developing regional fishery coordinated databases.
This is an ongoing effort to collect data on the recreational hailbut fishery that is conducted by federal agencies though relying on the state for data.
Provides state funding for management of federal fisheries, including Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands king crab and tanner crab, weathervane scallops and groundfish.
To meet federal obligation to enhance Sockeye salmon production, the state operates an enhancement unit at an existing hatercy and conducts fish monitoring. The work is completed cooperatively with the Canadian government.
Provides ongoing funding for programs that mitigate that impacts of harvest reductions imposed by the Pacific Salmon Treaty on Alaskan fisheries and coastal communities.
Funds Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and Northwest Treaty Indian Tribes in meeting federal obligations under Pacific Salmon Treaty.
Funds monitoring of ice seal populations in Native Villages, research on species delineation and genetics of harbor seals to understand the declines in population and provide for population restoration, and continues research into Stellar Sea Lion population decline.
Allows State of Alaska to monitor Yukon River salmon and provide information necessary to support negotiations between US and Canada under Yukon River Salmon Agreement.
To continue necessary airport upgrading after transfer of the Naval Air Station (Adak) to the State.
Continued funding to address the challenges of NCLB (No Child Left Behind) as it relates to teacher quality and student achievement. It provides trained, full-release mentors for beginning teachers and principals.
Funds State of Alaska for implementation of federal obligations under Yukon River Treaty.
To complete a communication facility to support the 168th Air Refueling Wings 8 PAA KC 135 aircraft.
Nowhere in this list do we see anything like an earmark for the employer of Palins spouse. Compare this sequence of events:
Nov. 2004 Obama elected to Senate.
Michelle Obamas salary for the Univ. of Chicago Hospital $121,910.
Michelle Obamas salary in Spring of 2005 increased to $316,962.
B. Obamas earmark request for Univ. of Chicago Hospital Pavilion for 2006 $1 million.
Thats a 5-1 return on the raise they gave Michelle.
BUT TAKE A LOOK at the list of earmarks released by Obama under prodding during the Democratic primaries.
Good. That needs to be pressed. We have nearly two months to get our message across. That should be more than enough time if we use that time wisely.
The safety of the country is at stake and we have two good people who understand what it takes to preserve that.
Unfortunately your post is a bit irrelevant. The question is not who asked for the most earmarks. The question is, was John telling the truth when he said Palin never asked for earmarks as governor?
First, one should always question a statement with the words “never” or “always” and a good politicion should avoid them.
This interview is a good example of why, before he chose Palin, I was not going to vote in this election. His selection of Palin brought him up a couple of notches for me, but this is still an example of what annoyed me.
Don’t get me wrong, I think Obama and Biden are worse. Much worse. But McCain shot himself in the foot.
So she said, "No thanks" to the bridge, but "Yes please" to the money. Either way the tax payers were out a quarter billion and Alaska was ahead by the same amount.
So, the “bridge to nowhere” was proposed. It was estimated to cost $398 million. It was not long before Gov. Sarah Palin discovered the $398 million bridge would actually cost $329 million more than originally estimated. It had grown to a costly money pit. This tells me that Governor Palin was wise to put a brake on the project before work had began on it.
Governor Palin was wise to see that Alaska infrastructure had higher priorities and Alaska could get more bang for the buck in other projects. So, federal money that was to go for the bridge, went to the other projects.