John McCain, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama are all at least superficially supportive of an earmark moratorium.
That's a great sign that maybe earmarks (and the corruption that often accompanies them) have finally become a significant political issue.
Presidential candidate earmark records for the 2008 budget:
As I said - "superficially" supporting.
I appreciate Sen. Obama's efforts with Sen. Coburn and Sen. McCain to at least create more openness around earmarks in the Senate, but there are still people clamoring because (as I understand it) he won't release his own earmark lists from earlier in his Senate term.
AnF: Please cite your source. My data differs:
Clinton: $340M (top 10)
Obama: $91M (bottom quartile)
McCain: 0. (one of five)
That said, we wouldn't know any of that without the Obama-Coburn Government Accountability bill, that established the earmark database.
Looks like McCain does not just talk like the others do.
It's one of the few issues on which Sen. McCain and I agree.
What else would help you like him more how about a good VP? How about John Boehner from Ohio?
"What else would help you like him more how about a good VP?"
I'd like him to renounce McCain-Feingold, which he's not going to do.
His VP selection will not matter very much to me. My problems with McCain are his positions on particular issues, and his choice of VP isn't going to change either his positions or mine.
With McCain's age, his choice in VP is significant. (I imagine there's a good chance it will be Romney as a reward for being a team player). McCain is 72 if I recall correctly, which means he'll be 81 by the time he's out of office. There is not a small chance his health fails, so in this case, the VP choice has a decent shot of becoming President on short notice without foul play.
Granted, the positions won't change and the VP probably won't influence his policy, but I don't see it as a uneventful choice in McCain's case. Hillary and Obama would like live through their terms.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
"With McCain's age, his choice in VP is significant."
Meh. To me, his VP choice is insignificant, regardless of McCain's age.
To put it another way - I cannot think of a VP pick who will make me forget that John McCain thinks politically active groups of citizens need Federal permission to discuss Federal officials and candidates. Free speech is such a fundamental issue that it colors every other issue in our polity. His VP selection isn't going to override that.
I'm not disagreeing with you or saying his VP choice SHOULD make you forget those things... I'm just saying his VP choice is not politically irrelevant with the higher odds that the VP will become President.
--
j
Part-Time Pundit
I do understand pre-occupation with McCain Feingold. Of course I see much greater problems with Obama Clinton down the road if they are elected and the Multi-etude of much fancier laws they will create to make you unhappy. You don't think Cheney has had impact on Public Policy?
"You don't think Cheney has had impact on Public Policy? "
I can't think of a single instance in which Dick Cheney caused President Bush to reverse a previously held position.
To complete the threadjack: Hendrik Hertzberg, writing in The New Yorker, says that McCain should look outside the usual red-state or purple-state governors, and ask Condoleezza Rice. Money quote:
The "this list" comment refers to a previous list of names, excerpted from a Times article regarding the VP spot and who the paper thought would be on the short list of possible names; they're listed in the paragraph immediately prior to my quote.
I gotta admit: Rice as the VP nominee would be incredibly intriguing to me. My personal opinion is somewhere between IP's and Bambenek's posts above; namely that while the VP choice is sometimes strictly a tactical political move, and I vote for the Presidential nominee, not who the VP nominee is, I still think the selection says a lot about the Presidential candidate's outlook or viewpoint on certain things. Given McCain's age, his choice of VP nominee is more important to me than, say, Clinton's or Obama's...
HG
The GOP is in a bit of a bind with Rice. If she is chosen, no matter what the motivation, it will look like and be said that she was chosen only because she is a black woman.
On March 11th, 2008 at 12:46 PM, redstatewannabe said: The GOP is in a bit of a bind with Rice. If she is chosen, no matter what the motivation, it will look like and be said that she was chosen only because she is a black woman.
I agree that actually nominating Rice would open the GOP to charges of "it's only because she's a black woman", but you could say something similar about nominating one of the governors or ex-governors that Hertzberg listed. Oh, he only got the nod because he's govenor of an important state (like FL or PA), or he only got the nod to placate social conservatives (Huckabee), or he only got the nod because he has executive administrative experience (being a govenor), or, or, or...
I think that nominating Rice would bring a lot of positives to the Republican ticket, without adding too many negatives. Is Rice too close to the Iraq War, being the Secretary of State (and previous National Security Advisor)? Maybe, but closer than McCain is, especially with his stance on the surge? Is Rice too inexperienced to be VP? Maybe, but look at her current and previous positions; she's not exactly some Jane Doe off the street. To add to that, precisely because she's black, she could counter some of Clinton's and Obama's attraction to voters...
The other thing, maybe the most interesting to me, is that nominating Rice is not the conventional choice, the standard answer. It's different, it's fresh, dare I say, it's a change? :-) Sorry, couldn't resist. I just think that playing it safe has its time and place, and that, right now, maybe not playing it safe is the better course.
HG
So what would the charges concerning Rice be from Hillary (a woman):
"He is just doing that because she is black
or from Obama ( a black man):
"He is just doing that because she is a woman"
Well certainly those are convincing arguments, dare I use the old saying
The Pot calling the Kettle...........naw, I won't use it
I like to think he is just consolidating the political spin complaints and showing some efficiency.
I love this to:
"Obama: $91M (bottom quartile)
McCain: 0. (one of five)"
Yep, that made me feel a lot better about Obama, after all it is only $91,000.000 instead of $126,000,000
and really made me worry about McCain
Gosh he was only 1 of 5, he should have been one of one.
Wait, was Obama one of the other 5?
To that end, I am, and shall always remain;
Rex Bradfield
I can't think of a single instance in which Dick Cheney caused President Bush to reverse a previously held position. What you help put them in office you don't know what they do once they are there?
I think we are alright on the Foreign Policy, War fighting front. We need someone that will fight for the fiscal budget issues and come from the north east to pull those folks out to vote.