Richard Tafoya
Sep 15th, 2008, 11:44 PM
TPM:
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/a_new_frontier_in_mccains_dish.php
Speaking to reporters today, McCain defended his running mate, Sarah Palin, for lying about her opposition to the Bridge to Nowhere with the following claim, as reported by the Associated Press (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/09/mccain_says_obama_didnt_call_p.php):
"The important thing is she's vetoed a half a billion dollars in earmark projects -- far, far in excess of her predecessor and she's given money back to the taxpayers and she's cut their taxes, so I'm happy with her record." McCain had said a similar thing (http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/mccain_himself_faults_obama_fo_1.php) on ABC's The View Friday morning: "Earmark spending; which she vetoed half a billion dollars worth in the state of Alaska."
...
But governors don't "veto" federal earmarks. As Palin's own gubernatorial spokesman, Bill McAllister, told TPMmuckraker: "She can choose not to submit the request, but once Congress makes them, they're there."
The provenance of McCain's half a billion figure appears to be related to this claim (http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/and_she_wont_stop_cuz_she_cant.php), which Palin made this morning during a speech in Colorado:
"Nearly half a billion of excessive spending in our state budget, that's what vetoes are for." It's true, as the Boston Globe reported (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/09/13/fueled_by_oil_taxes_alaska_spending_soared_under_palin/) over the weekend, that as governor, Palin vetoed over $500 million in state legislative spending requests over two fiscal years.
But generic spending requests, which Palin rejected through the use of her line-item veto power (http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/may/23/palin-vetoes-millions-state-budget) as governor, aren't remotely the same thing as earmarks. As McAllister told us: "It's called line-items, generally. [Earmarks],that's not common parlance." And the money that Palin cut didn't come from the federal government, which is the starting point for the whole earmarks debate. So that $500 million figure has nothing to do with earmarks.
In other words, McCain has taken a statistic from one issue, and applied it to defend Palin's record on a different one -- under the assumption that the press won't look closely enough at the details to call him on it.
http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/a_new_frontier_in_mccains_dish.php
Speaking to reporters today, McCain defended his running mate, Sarah Palin, for lying about her opposition to the Bridge to Nowhere with the following claim, as reported by the Associated Press (http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/09/mccain_says_obama_didnt_call_p.php):
"The important thing is she's vetoed a half a billion dollars in earmark projects -- far, far in excess of her predecessor and she's given money back to the taxpayers and she's cut their taxes, so I'm happy with her record." McCain had said a similar thing (http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/mccain_himself_faults_obama_fo_1.php) on ABC's The View Friday morning: "Earmark spending; which she vetoed half a billion dollars worth in the state of Alaska."
...
But governors don't "veto" federal earmarks. As Palin's own gubernatorial spokesman, Bill McAllister, told TPMmuckraker: "She can choose not to submit the request, but once Congress makes them, they're there."
The provenance of McCain's half a billion figure appears to be related to this claim (http://tpmtv.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/09/and_she_wont_stop_cuz_she_cant.php), which Palin made this morning during a speech in Colorado:
"Nearly half a billion of excessive spending in our state budget, that's what vetoes are for." It's true, as the Boston Globe reported (http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/09/13/fueled_by_oil_taxes_alaska_spending_soared_under_palin/) over the weekend, that as governor, Palin vetoed over $500 million in state legislative spending requests over two fiscal years.
But generic spending requests, which Palin rejected through the use of her line-item veto power (http://www.newsminer.com/news/2008/may/23/palin-vetoes-millions-state-budget) as governor, aren't remotely the same thing as earmarks. As McAllister told us: "It's called line-items, generally. [Earmarks],that's not common parlance." And the money that Palin cut didn't come from the federal government, which is the starting point for the whole earmarks debate. So that $500 million figure has nothing to do with earmarks.
In other words, McCain has taken a statistic from one issue, and applied it to defend Palin's record on a different one -- under the assumption that the press won't look closely enough at the details to call him on it.