A Clinton-Obama Slugfest

Ka-Pow! Boffo!
Obama and Clinton traded more personal swipes when Obama attacked Clinton's one-time membership on the board of directors of the world's largest retailer:

Obama: Because while I was working on those streets watching those folks see their jobs shift overseas, you were a corporate lawyer sitting on the board at Wal-Mart.

It's true that Clinton sat on the Wal-Mart board for six years while her husband was governor of Arkansas, where the chain has its corporate headquarters. She was paid about $18,000 a year for doing it. At the time, she worked at the Rose Law Firm, which had represented Wal-Mart in various matters. According to accounts from other board members, Clinton was a thorn in the side of the company's founder, Sam Walton, on the matter of promoting women, few of whom were in the ranks of managers or executives at the time. She also strongly advocated for more environmentally sound corporate practices, board colleagues and company executives noted. She made limited progress in both areas, but she never voiced any objections to the company's anti-union stand, they said. But in 2005 she returned a $5,000 contribution to her campaign from Wal-Mart, citing "serious differences" with its "current" practices.

Clinton hit back at Obama, reminding voters of his relationship with a longtime contributor who is now under federal indictment.

Clinton: ...I was fighting against those ideas when you were practicing law and representing your contributor, Rezko, in his slum landlord business in inner city Chicago. ...

CNN's Wolf Blitzer: Senator Clinton made a serious allegation that you worked for a slumlord. And I wonder if you want to respond.

Obama: I'm happy to respond. Here's what happened: I was an associate at a law firm that represented a church group that had partnered with this individual to do a project and I did about five hours worth of work on this joint project. That's what she's referring to.

According to an investigation last year by the Chicago Sun-Times, Antoin Rezko was involved in developing at least 30 low-income housing buildings in Chicago, in partnership with several community groups and using a combination of taxpayer and private funds. A number of the buildings fell into disrepair, collecting housing code violations, and Rezmar, Rezko's company, was sued on many occasions.

Obama was associated with a law firm that represented the community groups working with Rezko on several deals. There's no evidence that Obama spent much time on them, and he never represented Rezko directly. So it was wrong for Clinton to say he was "representing ... Rezko." That's untrue.

Obama has known Rezko, however, since he left Harvard Law School, and Rezko has been a major contributor and campaign fundraiser for him since Obama's first campaign for the Illinois state Senate. Earlier, we looked into questions about a land deal in which the two wound up with adjacent parcels. No wrongdoing was found in connection with that transaction, though Obama has said it was "boneheaded" for him to be involved in it when he knew Rezko was under investigation. Rezko has since been indicted on fraud and other charges. Obama, who returned some contributions from Rezko and his associates long ago, returned another $41,000 over the weekend in an effort to distance himself from the businessman.

Borrowed Time
Clinton and Obama battled over their votes on bankruptcy bills and an amendment to cap interest charged on credit.

Clinton: There was a particular amendment that I think is very telling. It was an amendment to prohibit credit card companies from charging more than 30 percent interest. ... I voted for limiting to 30 percent what credit card companies could charge. Senator Obama did not.

Obama: It is a fact, because I thought 30 percent potentially was too high of a ceiling.

Obama did vote against – and Clinton voted for – an amendment that would have placed a 30 percent cap on the interest rate that could be charged on any extension of credit. The amendment failed by a vote of 74 to 24 in 2005. We could not find any public statements made by Obama regarding the amendment. The Clinton campaign points to a Chicago Tribune article that says Obama changed his mind on the vote in a move the paper attributes, in a none-too-flattering way, to the freshman senator's learning curve:

Chicago Tribune (June 12, 2007): To some liberals, the proposal was a no-brainer: a ceiling of 30 percent on interest rates for credit cards and other consumer debt. And as he left his office to vote on it, Obama planned to support the measure. ...