Obama has 63 Nobel Laureates working on his policy team. They are developing a plan to push America back to the top. Who is responsible for McCain's planning? Americans would be shocked to find that Douglas Holtz-Eakin is the sole person responsible for planning McCain's policy for America's future. Holtz-Eakin is also McCain's economic advisor, filling two full time positions on McCain's team. How can one single man (an economist) be responsible for developing a viable technology plan for our future? Obama has an enormous pool of the most intelligent, talented men and women in America working for him. Soon, they will be working for US.
And let's not forget that the McCain campaign spent more on Palin's makeup artist than it did on it's foreign policy advisor. When you pay your makeup artist DOUBLE what you pay your foreign policy advisor, it is time to start examining your priorities.
You look just fine without makeup, John. And Sarah is young enough not to need any. So cut the crap, and start paying some good ECONOMIC ADVISORS so you can have a fiscal plan to present to America. We're in the middle of a huge global financial meltdown, and you are worried about hair and makeup? PLEASE start worrying about the middle class, John. Please.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next Page »
FactCheck.org: "Outrageous" Exaggerations
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
But the three examples of spending highlighted in the ad – a "bridge to nowhere," a study of bear DNA and a museum dedicated to Woodstock – seem chosen more for their impact than for any direct involvement McCain had in attacking them. In fact, he voted in favor of the bill that included the bear study funding; he was absent for key votes on the Woodstock museum (including one on an amendment he co-sponsored); and he never specifically tried to eliminate the bridge earmark and missed some crucial votes on that one, as well.
For what it's worth, we'll note that the three projects together cost a little under $300 million, which is a tiny fraction of yearly earmark activity. The Office of Management and Budget reports that the fiscal 2005 budget included 13,492 earmarks totaling $18.9 billion dollars. The taxpayer watchdog group Citizens Against Government Waste gives a higher estimate for that year – 13,997 projects for a total of $27.3 billion – and estimates that 2006 earmark activity cost $29 billion. That would make earmarks account for about 0.2 percent of the gross domestic product.
A Bridge to Nowhere
McCain's ad cites "$233 million for a bridge to nowhere," calling the cost "outrageous." Funding for the "bridge to nowhere," also known as the Gravina Island bridge in Alaska, was tacked on to a 2005 transportation bill, along with projects from many other states. Whether it was truly a "bridge to nowhere" is debatable: Gravina Island, while it has almost no permanent population, is also home to the Ketchikan International Airport, which processes about 200,000 passengers a year. Alaskan officials hoped that the bridge would simplify airport access and allow development on Gravina, according to Alaska's Department of Transportation. The bridge was not the only or the most expensive project attached to the transportation bill, and it may not have been the most frivolous. But it became a symbol for government pork.
The transportation bill did include a total of $223 million (not $233 million, as the ad says) earmarked for the Gravina bridge – $100 million for construction, plus $18.75 million a year for four years, and an additional $48 million to build an access road. McCain tried, unsuccessfully, to add a "sense of the Senate" amendment to the bill, stating a general objection to earmarks; in the end he voted against the legislation. Several months later, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) tried to divert the Gravina funds to a bridge in need of repair over Lake Pontchartrain near New Orleans. McCain was not present to vote on Coburn's amendment proposing this change, which did not pass. Instead, Congress removed Gravina's earmarks, tossing that money into Alaska's general transportation pot to be used however the state chose. McCain wasn't there for that vote, either.
In light of the furor over the "bridge to nowhere," Alaska's governor opted to use the money for other pursuits. The bridge was never built, but McCain has been using it as his prime pork example since 2005, even blaming it for the Minneapolis bridge collapse in August 2007. (He cited it as an example of a pet project that diverted money from necessary highway maintenance.)
Paternity Tests for Bears
The ad goes on to criticize an earmark that provided "$3 million to study the DNA of bears in Montana." This is not the first time McCain has poked fun at the bear project. He first mentioned it on the Senate floor, while discussing the 2003 Omnibus Appropriations Bill that included funding for the project:
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next Page »
Discuss