Clinton, McCain in different corners on earmarks

Timothy Carney:

...

Earmarks, and their use of tools of corruption, could play a large role in the 2008 presidential contest if the current front-runners succeed in grabbing their respective parties’ nominations. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., is a leading opponent of pork and one of the only lawmakers to forswear earmarks, while Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., is Congress’ leading porker.

Clinton’s earmarking is not merely offensive to procedural purists who demand spending go through standard channels. It also is not merely a transgression against fiscal conservatism. Clinton’s earmarks often directly benefit specific corporations and businessmen, who, in turn, make large contributions to her campaign. This “pay-to-play” earmarking, as one left-leaning budget watchdog group put it, highlights the truly dirty side of earmarks and plays to McCain’s most famous theme: the corrosive effects of money in politics.

...

Clinton’s most eye-catching earmarks might be the two $5 million line items for a mall in upstate New York. The Syracuse mall, called DestiNY, made a grand entrance into federal politics in 2005, when Clinton, together with local congressman James Walsh, Republican, put $10 million of earmarks for the project into the highway bill. Syracuse City Councilwoman Stephanie Miner, who is supporting Clinton for president, called government funding for the mall “corporate welfare.”

The developer behind the project is New Yorker Robert J. Congel, who has been a generous contributor to politicians, mostly Republicans. They make an exception for Clinton, however. Federal Election Commission records show Congel and his wife have contributed $26,700 to Clinton’s campaigns and political action committees. Clinton has also pocketed thousands in contributions from Congel’s family and business associates. The Los Angeles Times reports that Congel also held a fundraiser for Clinton that netted $50,000.

Many of Clinton’s other earmark beneficiaries are also her campaign contributors, fundraisers or prominent endorsers. Clinton secured $1.6 million in the 2006 defense appropriations bill for the New School on Social Research, where one trustee was Clinton fundraiser Norman Hsu, who raised $850,000 for Clinton before being indicted on fraud charges in December. Clinton has since returned the money.

It might be impossible to track down how many more Hsus and Congels are out there filling Clinton’s coffers and pocketing taxpayer dollars. Taxpayers for Common Sense (TCS), a left-leaning organization, says Clinton has secured 360 earmarks worth $2.2 billion, and many of them benefit Clinton donors. That’s why TCS research director Keith Ashdown told the L.A. Times, “Clinton has made aggressive use of the pay-to-play earmark game.”

For McCain, it’s easy to keep track: He doesn’t earmark. While earmarking is not the only avenue of corporate-political corruption, it’s the most blatant and the easiest way for lawmakers to make friends and woo donors.

...

Earmarks will definitely be an important issue in the election, but the real contrast will be on the war and the desire of Clinton and the Democrats to lose it and McCain desire to win it. Both issues are McCain's strongest assets in the coming campaign and if he wins it will be because of those two issues.