DNC Plays Spending Chicken With McCain (UPDATED w/ RNC Obama hits)

Being anti-pork is great until the bridge you're on collapses into the Mississippi. Thanks for holding your convention in Minneapolis, GOP!!!!

I'm still trying to figure out how building bridges in Iraq with taxpayer's dollars = good nonpartisan investment that benefits Americans

while

building bridges in New York = evil partisan attempt to steal money from "the people."

McCain lives in Bizarro America.

This is not the first time that the DNC has come after McCain on his opposition to federal spending. The interesting thing is that the McCain camp seems to welcome this sort of attack.

I'm guessing that the McCain camp didn't welcome the attacks when it was pointed out that his promise to cut all earmarks included US funding for Israel and military housing. Indeed McCain quickly backed down on his earlier promise when these were pointed out.

Source:
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/17/military-family-housing-earmark/

McCain seems to have a habit of having campaign appearances at places funded by earmarks. Senator Straight Talk is opposed to earmarks except when he's in favor. Same for lobbyists. And so on.

A couple more examples of McCain's splendid consistency on earmarks:

"McCain Falsely Claims He Has ‘Never Asked For A Single Earmark Or Pork Barrel Project’ For His State"
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/01/06/mccain-earmark/

"Despite Promise To Abolish Earmarks, McCain Uses Earmark-Funded Ferry As Campaign Trail Backdrop"
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/04/21/mccain-ferry-earmark/

This of course is the same Charlie Black who until recently was running his lobbying business from the Straight Talk Express.

Actually, he voted FOR earmarks BEFORE he voted against them.

Hmmmm.

We've seen this movie.

Michael Scherer - This is why I have such a problem with pundits who go on television and make derisive comments about "pork". The term has become derogatory but, because it is never specifically defined by the actual request (except for the occasional earmark selected as an example of absurdity) the pundits almost always end up damning many worthwhile projects.

I think it was Atrios who said that the Minnesota bridge collapse should be the official image of the GOP convention in St. Paul...

In the fine print, McCain says he does not mind some of this spending as long as it goes through the regular budget process, a fact that seems to undermine his claims of billions in savings.

Exactly. Look I hate the Bridge to Nowhere as much as the next guy. There is some wasteful spending in there, no question. But railing against in the abstract and citing the total dollars paid for by the most expansive definition of earmarks is easy. Actually finding serious specific dollars to cut (and paying for earmarked projects in some other way is not a cut) is much harder. There's no reason to think that McCain would be any better at that than Obama. And in any event, the (vague) dollars we're talking about are chump change compared to the costs of the (specific) tax cuts McCain wants, to say nothing of the Iraq War and whatever other wars McCain might get us into.

To have any effect, the DNC has to do more than blog about this or issue press releases.

What you need is a coordinated, media-friendly way of sending the message...say, really large banners with goofy pictures of McCain and his positions placed strategically alongside the East River.

Like Chicken George and The Kiss Float, these kinds of attacks work because they are funny. They also go beyond the substance of the attack and make the campaign appear to be under siege and the paint the candidate as too weak to control his own media message.

NYC is exactly the sort of infrastucture nightmare that actually needs federal support. Most of the bridges are part of the Interstate system.

But then again, if they let New Orleans drown it's unsurprising that NYC would also get the short end of stick.

Michael,

Adopting McCain's messaging on this is not careful writing. Equating earmarks with "pork" is not accurate. And calling it "fine print" rather than a flipflop or a contradiction is presenting McCain spin.

He's not against federal spending on local projects. He's against pork. Well, that's not a controversial position. The controversial part if defining what's pork and what are worthwhile federal projects identified by Congressman who know their districts.

On the DNC list, the second looks like pork to me, while the other two don't. But it's hard to know. Is McCain saying, as president, he's going to scrutinize appropriations of under a million dollars?

Michael, did you ask Charlie Black which if any of these projects McCain might oppose? I mean I get that he would like to change the process by which we spend, but as you point that doesn't actually save any money unless you cut something.

Is it me or does MS writes on most tangential issue ( DNC's minor attack as opposed to kerfuffle involving McCain lying about voting for Bush)to buck up McCain? While MS mentions McCain's opposition to earmarks but fails to mention he is helping his friends in land-swipe at the expense of taxpayers (for reference see today's Washignton Post and previously NYT). Michael being in the tank for McCain doesn't mean you have to spend all your time on your knee notwitstanding enriching knee-pad companies.

This is just hilarious:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/08/AR2008050802999.html?hpid=news-col-blog

A majority of the House GOP has voted against motherhood... [T]he House had just voted, 412 to 0, to ... "[c]elebrat[e] the role of mothers in the United States and support[] the goals and ideals of Mother's Day," when Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), rose in protest... setting up a revote. This time, 178 Republicans cast their votes against mothers.

It has long been the custom to compare a popular piece of legislation to motherhood and apple pie. Evidently, that is no longer the standard. Worse, Republicans are now confronted with a John Kerry-esque predicament: They actually voted for motherhood before they voted against it.

Republicans, ... have been using such procedural tactics as this all week to bring the House to a standstill, but the assault on mothers may have gone too far. House Minority Leader John Boehner, asked yesterday to explain why he and 177 of his colleagues switched their votes, answered: "Oh, we just wanted to make sure that everyone was on record in support of Mother's Day."

By voting against it?

If Boehner's explanation doesn't make much sense, he's been under a great deal of stress lately.

Man the Onion is going to have their work cut out for them satirizing this.

Michael:

When are you going to talk about the recent McCain flubs? (His admitting the Iraq war was about oil.
Cindy McCain saying that she will never release her tax returns. McCain caught lying about voting for Bush in 2000.)

Do you seriously believe that if these things were attributed to a Democratic candidate, the press wouldn't be all over it?

2nd Land Swap deal involving McCain.

McCain Pushed Land Swap That Benefits Backer

PRESCOTT, Ariz. -- Sen. John McCain championed legislation that will let an Arizona rancher trade remote grassland and ponderosa pine forest here for acres of valuable federally owned property that is ready for development, a land swap that now stands to directly benefit one of his top presidential campaign fundraisers].

Initially reluctant to support the swap, the Arizona Republican became a key figure in pushing the deal through Congress after the rancher and his partners hired lobbyists that included McCain's 1992 Senate campaign manager, two of his former Senate staff members (one of whom has returned as his chief of staff), and an Arizona insider who was a major McCain donor and is now bundling campaign checks.

When McCain's legislation passed in November 2005, the ranch owner gave the job of building as many as 12,000 homes to SunCor Development, a firm in Tempe, Ariz., run by Steven A. Betts, a longtime McCain supporter who has raised more than $100,000 for the presumptive Republican nominee. Betts said he and McCain never discussed the deal.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/05/08/AR2008050803494_pf.html

[about] 75 percent think the federal government spends too much and wastes a lot of money

Well, no sh!t. Another recent study revealed that 95 percent of Americans oppose Bad Things and support Good Things.

McCain's blunderbuss opposition to "earmarks," except, as Crust notes, the ones that he likes, is a quintessentially cowardly political move.

He announces his opposition to something that sounds bad, but fails to (1) explain how it fits into the larger context of the overall budget, or (2) account for the cuts that would come as a result of his proposal.

He's said, when confronted with facts about earmarks that do good things, that he just opposes the process. Needless to say, he hasn't skeched out which earmarks he opposes and which he supports-- none of his "plans" reflect any concern for or familiaity with any details about how things work on the actual planet.

So he doesn't even have the courage to oppose all the projects funded by earmarks. Just a willingness to say "pork is bad," and a refusal to take responsibility for anything specific, except for opposing the Bridge to Nowhere and bear DNA studies.

Michael, how about the story today in the Post about McCain doing more special favors for lobbyists? (Link)

Does he welcome that kind of attack as well?

Wouldn't it be great if earmarks for bills were published on the internet before the vote for said bill, so the public could look over them and expose the pork?

Oh yeah, that's Obama's idea...

And as far as bridges go, come on. They don't need more money, they're already built! Duh!

disenfranchised lib....you slay me. funny and poignant post...
anyone who doesnt think we need more money for roads just needs to drive the 7 miles of I76 right by my house. i have low profile racing rims on my acura (oh yeah, that's how i roll) and i cannot drive that road or i will be replacing rims after each trip. granted, this isnt falling into the frozen mississippi, but i do so love my coup!! seriously though, if we would fork up the money for concrete highways rather than blacktop that needs repairing and replacing so often (or god forbid we find a different substance to use through r&d..)we wouldnt spend so much in the long run...oh, how i love lowest bid gets the job...

This is great from Uncanny Valet:

"Wouldn't it be great if earmarks for bills were published on the internet before the vote for said bill, so the public could look over them and expose the pork?

Oh yeah, that's Obama's idea..."

Since McCain is making all kinds of disapproving noises about what he calls 'pork' then I guess he supports Barack Obama's plan for greater transperancy in the appropriations process. Because, you know, if he did not then he must have something to hide! What do you have to hide John McCain?!?

But it seems incredibly logical that he would support it. Therefore:

Thank you John McCain for supporting Barack Obama's proposal for revamping the appropriations process!

...Speaking in gymnasiums and fairgrounds in rural towns, Bill Clinton returned repeatedly to the words "people like you and places like this" as the keys that could help his wife stop Obama's momentum...

...

What a legacy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080509/ap_ca/on_the2008_trail

No earmarks would not mean no bridge repairs. Instead, it would mean that bridge repairs would be prioritized by civil engineers at DoT, rather than by politicians. If there's not enough bridge repair going on in general, then Congress can appropriate more money for bridge repair. That's their job.

Yes, we have been neglecting our infrastructure, but that's not a partisan issue. It's been a concern for decades, through Administrations and Congresses from both parties.

"Wouldn't it be great if earmarks for bills were published on the internet before the vote for said bill, so the public could look over them and expose the pork?

Oh yeah, that's Obama's idea..."

...

which stands no prayer with the dnc dregs of passing, so why not run it up the french flag pole, eh

BTW, as a hypersensitive Earo-American, should Obmama really be discussing earmarks at all?

He may blow any chance of another vital BIG DIG, if this keeps up.

= UNION WELFARE ACCOMPLISHED =

Obmama's not bad, obamish. But since mother's day is coming up could you use O-mama! instead?

Anyone that thinks the DNC Senators have our best economic interests at heart should take a drive thru West Vagina this week with Blozo or Obmama.

More new roads to nowhere than in Iraq.

More guns too.

One man/woman's pork is another man/woman's economic stimulus plan.

I've always found McCain's campaign against "pork" ludicrous.

And GySgt, thanks for posting about the landswap deal. I was wondering if Michael or anyone else would diary it here.

With the massive waste of blood and dollars in Iraq to "build infrastructure" and create jobs/graft that are of no benefit to any of us, it is simply beyond stupid to be in favor of that spending but not spending for better bridges and roads in America.

Good god, he may be the worst candidate to ever run in a general for President in our lifetime.

Todd and in Charge -

Where does it say that he is opposed to "spending for better bridges and roads in America"? He is opposed to earmarks, and prefers that the Department of Transportation decide which structures need work.

(off topic) I can't resist asking - is there a story behind your name?

"...Obama should choose a running mate who "is in tune with his appeal for the nobler aspirations of the American people," Kennedy said. "If we had real leadership — as we do with Barack Obama — in the No. 2 spot as well, it'd be enormously helpful..."

...

Obmamma will make his limp VEEP choice as soon as he's back from Yukon Cornelius -- capital of Toronto -- where he'll discuss the Supertrain quarantine with the president of Canuckistan.

"I was wondering if Michael or anyone else would diary it here."

Pffffffhahahahahahahaha! Aaahahahahaha!

Is it me or do our resident trolls seem off their meds today?

Robert, that is an excellent question. My sense is McCain has never called for money otherwise earmarked for needed construction, improvement, and road projects to be instead funded through an increase in the DoT budget in commensurate amounts.

Is anyone aware of what McCain's reaction was to the Huckabee call for improved infrastructure? That might give us some guidance.

Rather, McCain implies that by cutting off earmarks the money will flow back to the taxpayer and the budget will be reduced.

BTW, it's a stupid pun on Todd Rundgren, a favorite musician of mine.

Update:

Reasonably detailed Google search found no instances where McCain called for improving our infrastructure. Notably, he has not supported the Hagel/Dodd bill creating a National Infrastructure Bank, while both Clinton and Obama are co-sponsors.

http://tinyurl.com/5efg4z

Here's Paul Heise analyzing McCain's detailed policy statements for any mention of our nation's crumbling infrastructure:

The word infrastructure does not appear in McCain’s economic plan, which is, for all practical purposes, a list of the taxes he would cut. Infrastructure does turn up in several of his speeches. He would, for instance, use tax cuts to encourage extending broadband to small towns.

http://tinyurl.com/6pf3da