 | ||
 | Obama referendum: no winner, one loser | |
| Holder abandons Stevens prosecution | |
| Arrests mount in G-20 protests | |
| Embattled Brown hugs Obama | |
| Employee Free Choice Act: Rebuttals | |
| NY-20: A Photo Finish | |
| VA Gov Poll: Moran Holds Slight Lead | |
| NH Sen Poll: Hodes +6 | |
| Afghan Mission Creep | |
| More News from Detroit |
| Israel Faces a Soul Searching Double Standard | |
| Angela Merkel: Voice of Reason | |
| Why Catholics Are Worried About Obama | |
| The Ship is Sinking: Quick, Add Water | |
| Sell the Roads! |
March 11, 2009
Panel on Obama and Earmarks
Special Report With Bret Baier(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
PRESIDENT BARACK OBAMA: This piece of legislation must mark an end to the old way of doing business and the beginning of a new era of responsibility and accountability to the American people have every right to expect and demand.
SEN. JOHN MCCAIN, R-ARIZ.: There's lots and lots of spending in it. And Americans are having to tighten their belts, and here in Congress, we are on a spending spree that is committing generational theft.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BRET BAIER, HOST: So what about earmark reform? President Obama signing today a $410 billion spending bill that had around 8,000 earmarks in it, but then talked about earmark reform.
Let's bring in our panel to talk about this: Jim Vandehei, executive editor of The Politico; Mara Liasson, national political correspondent of National Public Radio, and syndicated columnist Charles Krauthammer.
Charles, do you see hypocrisy in today?
CHARLES KRAUTHAMMER, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Hypocrisy squared. Look, anybody who believed Obama last year that he was going to reform government, remake Washington, bring to heel the grandees and the pubahs of the Congress, and that he was going to usher in a new era of citizen government deserves a disappointment.
It's the joys of being a cynic: You expect nothing, you get less, and you remain serene.
And this is one of many hypocrisies. He talked about not hiring lobbyists. Of course, if he needed a lobbyist here and there, he hired one. He talked about reaching across the aisle -- he knows he has a large majority in the House and Senate, and he pushes
through without support of Republicans what he needs. Anybody would do that. It is just that he promised otherwise last year.
The real test here -- it's really interesting, because last year, almost on this day, he voted against -- he voted in favor of a measure to abolish earmarks for the year 2009. And, as you said, he signed 8,000 of them today. And then he gave a speech in which he gave an interesting defense of earmarks in general.
So the real interesting event is going to be what is going to happen in the budget next year. He says he's going to crack down. I suspect he's going to lose again to his own big shots in the Democratic Party in Congress.
MARA LIASSON, NATIONAL POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: It is kind of like an alcoholic saying "This is my last drink, I really promise." He said "This is the end of business as usual. I'm going to sign one more business as usual bill, and then we're going to do something different."
Look, you could argue that this is what happens when you make process your biggest priority, you know. The promising not to have lobbyists? Well, it's hard not to do that if you want Tom Daschle to be your HHS secretary.
And promising to do something about earmarks? Well, it's really hard to do that if your legislative strategy is if you are going to defer to the Democratic majority in Congress because you have things that you care about more, really, than earmarks, like health care and energy and all the other things you want them to pass.
I thought the statement was pretty incredible. He kept on talking about how earmarks have to be open to public scrutiny. Guess what? If they went through the regular authorization process, they would be. An earmark is something that is put in without being authorized. That's the definition of it.
I would say the bottom line is, though, as much as John McCain talks about it and as much as it has become a kind of symbol of excess, I don't know how many people really get exercised about earmarks in the end.
BAIER: Jim?
JIM VANDEHEI, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, POLITICO: It is kind of a sideshow. There is no doubt there is hypocrisy, but when people get all fired up and you have conservative conservatives talk about this as a way to bring the budget back in line, it is kind of absurd.
You are talking about the tiniest sliver of the federal budget. You are talking about projects that you know members of Congress are never going to give them up.
Think about it: If you're a member of the House, especially if you're not a commitment chairman, you're basically anonymous. You have no power, despite what people might think.
The only power you have is the ability to bring home some of these funds and then say "Look, I created jobs. Look, I got funding for universities. I got funding for pig research," and all these other silly things that we're talking about. They're never going to forfeit that. He was a senator. He knows it. He had in this situation to buckle because he wants their support elsewhere.
The truth is for the people that are fired up at the budget, start looking at the tough ones. Start looking at Medicare. Start looking at means testing, Social Security and all the things that actually eat up the federal budget.
If you look at the Obama budget, a blueprint that he has put out, by 2019 we will double the amount of federal debt to $23 trillion. You think getting rid of a couple of earmarks will take care of that problem? It is, in some ways, I think, a big distraction.
BAIER: Well, two things: One is it fires up the public when they talk about all of the specific projects. And, two, isn't it disingenuous a little bit to talk about earmark reform and then sign this bill, 8,000...?
VANDEHEI: There's no doubt. I don't think anyone here is going to argue that it's not disingenuous. You read that statement, and parts of it are laughable.
It sounds like it was written by the old bulls on Capitol Hill, saying if a project is worthy -- that's my favorite line -- "if it's worthy."
What the heck is worthy? If I'm trying to get a project for my constituents, of course I think it's worthy.
BAIER: Charles?
KRAUTHAMMER: But this hypocrisy is particularly notable, because Obama was elected as a new kind of candidate, a man who would usher in new politics. And people in the mainstream media were waxing poetic about how he is going to change the way Washington happened.
I never believed it, but a lot of people did. And that explains in part why he was elected. And that's why his hypocrisy, I think, stands out a little bit more.
