Obama Camp Memo on Clinton Earmark Transparency

From the Obama campaign: 

Clinton on Earmark Transparency – let's have a chat after the election

The Clinton campaign's response to the growing bipartisan movement to make earmarks more transparent is crystal clear: Maybe-we'll-think-about-it-but-don't-ask-us-until-after-the-election.

Saying she supported a moratorium but not agreeing to one and suggesting Clinton is for transparency but providing none, leaves this issue as just one more part of a pattern of Hillary Clinton saying one thing, but doing another.  Clinton has refused to put out her tax returns, she will not release records of her time in the White House and her unwillingness to give even the most basic information about the special funding she has requested as a United States senator leaves many Americans wondering what it is she has to hide.  On earmarks, is she hiding information about donors she requested earmarks for?  The role lobbyists and corporations played in her office as she requested more than a billion dollars for their pet projects?  Favors she's now embarrassed to be associated with?

Short of actually releasing the information that Senator Obama has already released, she should answer the following the questions to shed some light on the projects that she has requested:

*       Taxpayers For Common Sense has estimated that Senator Clinton has received $2.2 billion in earmarks over her Senate career.  What earmarks has she requested during that time period and for what programs?

*       Since Clinton now says she plans to release her requests for FY 09, why isn't she releasing them for previous years?

*       We know that Clinton has requested at least two earmarks linked to top fundraisers and donors – GM lobbyist Steve Ricchetti and billionaire Alan Gerry.  Will her campaign release the other earmark requests she has made that are linked to fundraisers, campaign donors, or donors to the Clinton Library?

*       Has Senator Clinton proposed any earmarks that Bill Clinton has personally advocated for?

*       Last year, Senator Clinton voted against an amendment sponsored by Senator Durbin and supported by Senator Obama to require public disclosure of earmark requests.  If that amendment were to be offered again, would she support it?

CLINTON, WHO HAS REQUESTED MORE EARMARKS THAN HER PRESIDENTIAL RIVALS, GAVE MILLIONS IN EARMARKS TO A LOBBYIST AND “HILLRAISER” AS WELL AS DONORS TO HER CAMPAIGN

Clinton Co-Sponsored 66 Earmarks The Defense Bill And 220 Earmarks In 6 Other Spending Bills. In the defense bill, for example, The Seattle Times found that Clinton sponsored 66 earmarks totaling $150 million. Obama sponsored six earmarks totaling $34 million; all were for nonprofit organizations. McCain didn't ask for any earmarks this year. In contrast to McCain, Clinton boasts about scores of earmarks she delivers each year throughout her home state of New York. In the defense-bill earmarks Clinton sponsored, she mostly handed out business to defense contractors with operations in New York. The Seattle Times counted more than 220 earmarks for Clinton in six other recent spending bills. Those who get earmarks usually donate to election campaigns. Clinton's campaign has received $60,000 from those to whom she gave earmarks — a pittance of the $116 million she's raised. She received a like amount from those same donors for her Senate race. [Seattle Times, 2/8/08 <http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2004171198_earmarks08m.html> ]

Clinton Secured $2.2 Billion In Earmarks From 2002-2006. “Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group, has calculated that Clinton landed 360 earmarks worth $2.2 billion from 2002 to 2006 in various spending bills. The beneficiaries have ranged from defense giant Northrop Grumman Corp. to New York-based Telephonics, which won $5 million for helicopter equipment.” [AP, 6/14/07]

Clinton Secured The Second Most Earmarks Of Any Senator For The Defense Authorization Bill.  Clinton has secured more earmarks in the fiscal 2008 defense authorization bill than any other Democrat except for panel Chairman Sen. Carl Levin.  By contrast, Sen. Barack Obama has only one request in the defense bill.  Clinton received 26 earmarks worth about $148.4 million total, most of which were also sought by Sen. Charles Schumer…Clinton's beneficiaries include defense giant Northrop Grumman, which secured $6 million for the AN/SPQ-9B radar; New York-based Telephonics, which won $5 million for a standardized aircraft wireless intercom system for the National Guard Black Hawk helicopter fleet; Plug Power Inc., another New York state company, which got $3 million for fuel cell power technology; and Alliant Tech Systems (ATK), which won $3.5 million for the X-51 B robust scramjet research.  [The Hill, 6/13/07]

Clinton Defended Giving Earmarks To Campaign Donors.  Clinton and Senator Charles Schumer directed $123 million from the Department of Defense budget to New York projects that were not specifically requested by the Pentagon.  A spokesman for Clinton, Philippe Reines, defended the funding that the senator asked members of the Joint Conference Committee on Defense Appropriations to include in the 2006 defense budget. Many of the pet projects were secured for companies with political action committees that had contributed to Clinton's and campaign committees.  Beneficiaries ranged from a Buffalo nanotechnology firm slated to receive $2 million to a cancer research program in Cold Spring Harbor that got $1.5 million.  “Senator Clinton has asked the Appropriations Committee to support defense projects for New York firms and institutions which will promote our national security,” Reines said.  “And she is pleased that the conference committee agreed in providing funding for these vital projects.”  [New York Sun, 12/28/05]

Ø      Clinton Arranged A $3M Earmark For GM Lobbyist And “Hillraiser” Steve Ricchetti. “Clinton arranged a $3 million earmark this spring for the development of hydrogen-fuel and hybrid technology by General Motors, whose lobbyists include one of her biggest fundraisers. … Clinton, over the past three years, has secured $8 million in earmarks for General Motors for hybrid, hydrogen and fuel-cell research. The latest installment came in May, when she announced that she had secured $3 million for GM in the fiscal 2008 Pentagon spending bill. One of GM's main lobbyists on the issue is Steve Ricchetti, a deputy chief of staff in the Clinton White House and one of Hillary Clinton's ‘Hillraisers' who are committed to raising at least $100,000 for her presidential campaign. As a donor, he has given $4,600, the maximum allowed, to the campaign. Ricchetti's firm reported earning $120,000 in the first half of this year from lobbying for GM on issues that included the ‘development and promotion of hydrogen fuel cells and hybrid vehicles.'” [Washington Post, 10/12/07 <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/11/AR2007101102524.html?nav=rss_email/components> ]

Clinton Got $29,200 In Contributions >From A GOP Billionaire Backer Who Got A $1M Earmark For His Woodstock Concert Museum Project In Return. “Days after a Senate committee approved $1 million for a Woodstock concert museum, the project's Republican billionaire backer and his family contributed $29,200 to help the Democrats who requested the money, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles Schumer. It's neither illegal nor unusual for contributors to benefit from congressionally directed spending known as earmarks. But the timing of the June donations is grist for critics who see a link between legislative pet projects and campaign money. … The man behind the project is Alan Gerry, a former cable television mogul and registered Republican. State government pitched in $15 million for the $100 million project, most of which was funded by Gerry himself through a foundation. … Most of the Democratic recipients helped the Woodstock venture. Since 2005, the Gerrys have donated $150,000 to the Schumer-led Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and $18,600 to Clinton. … The million-dollar earmark was included in a Senate education spending bill that came out of committee on June 21. On June 26, the Gerrys and two of their children who sit on the foundation's board made $20,000 in contributions to the Schumer-led Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee.” [USA Today, 10/17/07 <http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-10-16-earmarks_N.htm?csp=34> ]

Ø      The Senate Voted To Remove An Earmark That Clinton Placed For An Upstate New York Woodstock Museum. “Clinton and her Senate colleague Chuck Schumer thought they had safely placed a $1million earmark for an upstate New York Woodstock Museum in a health and education appropriations bill -- but then the GOP pork patrol caught wind of it, and now the party's over. Democrats today failed on a 42-52 vote to stop an amendment by Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) to cut the funding. [Washington Post, 10/18/07 <http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2007/10/18/post_138.html#more> ]

Clinton Has Taken More Than $46K From Defense Lobbyists During The Presidential Election. Clinton has taken $46,400 from Defense lobbyists in the 2008 election cycle through January 2008. [Center for Responsive Politics; Senate Lobbying Records]

CLINTON REFUSED TO RELEASE HER EARMARKS

Clinton Has Refused To Respond At All To Requests By The Media To Identify Her Earmarks. “When it comes to earmarks, an issue that voters responded to more than any other in the last election except for Iraq, her record is about as bad as it gets. If Dennis Hastert was the king of earmarks, Hillary Clinton was his queen. Republicans had their ‘bridge to nowhere.' Hillary has her knitting mill…The Clinton campaign refused to respond at all to requests that she identify her earmarks.” [Kevin Hassett, Bloomberg, 10/8/07 <http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory=aXWIZU3DOyr4 <http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=washingtonstory&sid=aXWIZU3DOyr4> > ]

Clinton Opposed Obama's Efforts To Require Open Scrutiny Of Earmark Requests. “Clinton and other legislators only have to reveal the earmarks that are approved, not all of their requests, and Clinton has opposed Obama's efforts to require open scrutiny of these requests.” [John K. Wilson, Huffington Post, 1/30/08 <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-k-wilson/clinton-by-far-worst-abus_b_84102.html> ]