In This Article
Subscribe to Politics Updates
Scientist Counters McCain’s Mockery of Bear Study
by
findingDulcinea Staff
Sen. McCain ridicules earmark-funded research that uses DNA analysis to track grizzly bears. The study’s head says pork barrel spending isn’t all bad.
30-Second Summary
The call to end pork barrel spending has become a refrain of Sen. John McCain’s election campaign. He has been particularly critical of the Northern Divide Grizzly Bear Project, a study examining bear DNA.
"I don't know if it was a paternity issue or criminal," McCain said, "but it was a waste of money."
But Katherine Kendall, the lead scientist on the project, says that her study was a “scientific and logistical triumph." She told The Washington Post that the DNA was mostly used to enable a head count of the animals.
“There’s never been any information about the status of this population. We didn’t know what was going on—until this study,” Kendall said.
While nobody wants to defend unfettered government spending, some politicians, including a few Republicans, have taken issue with McCain’s opposition to earmarks.
Earmarks, also known as pork, are attached by congressmen to appropriations bills to direct money to specific projects, thereby circumventing established budgetary procedures.
Some say that earmarks have gotten an undeserved bad rap thanks to a few unscrupulous politicians.
“The abuses get the headlines, but the ‘bad apples’ don’t tell the whole story. In fact, earmarking is a way to fund projects that have special applications or meet critical needs,” said David Ushio for the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.
A commentator for The Huffington Post predicts that earmarks will be a major issue in the fall elections if Sen. Hillary Clinton runs against McCain.
"I don't know if it was a paternity issue or criminal," McCain said, "but it was a waste of money."
But Katherine Kendall, the lead scientist on the project, says that her study was a “scientific and logistical triumph." She told The Washington Post that the DNA was mostly used to enable a head count of the animals.
“There’s never been any information about the status of this population. We didn’t know what was going on—until this study,” Kendall said.
While nobody wants to defend unfettered government spending, some politicians, including a few Republicans, have taken issue with McCain’s opposition to earmarks.
Earmarks, also known as pork, are attached by congressmen to appropriations bills to direct money to specific projects, thereby circumventing established budgetary procedures.
Some say that earmarks have gotten an undeserved bad rap thanks to a few unscrupulous politicians.
“The abuses get the headlines, but the ‘bad apples’ don’t tell the whole story. In fact, earmarking is a way to fund projects that have special applications or meet critical needs,” said David Ushio for the Honolulu Star-Bulletin.
A commentator for The Huffington Post predicts that earmarks will be a major issue in the fall elections if Sen. Hillary Clinton runs against McCain.
Headline Links: McCain, the bear study, and 2007’s pork record
Katherine Kendall, head of the bear study McCain has ridiculed, said that her research showed that there were more bears in the area than anyone had realized and suggested that conservation efforts have been paying off. The Washington Post covers the story in detail.
Source: The Washington Post (free subscription may be required)
Only a dozen House members and six senators refused to fund home state pork barrel projects last year, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a Washington-based budget watchdog group. More than 500 members of Congress obtained more than $18 billion worth of earmarks in 2007, said the group. According to their study, Republican Ted Stevens, a senator for Alaska, helped to obtain $345 million in earmarks for Alaska this year.
Source: CNN
Reference: The definition of ‘earmark’
Slate provides a short, cogent essay defining the earmark: “In general, the word ‘earmark’ refers to any element of a spending bill that allocates money for a very specific thing—a given project, say, or location, or institution.” Slate also notes that earmarks can be slipped into legislation by the appropriations and conference committees that write the reports that accompany the final bill.
Source: Slate
The Sunshine Foundation created an earmark map for the FY2007 Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations Bill. It plots 477 of the 553 earmarks in that bill on a map of America, showing how the money was distributed.
Source: The Sunshine Foundation
With McCain having abstained from earmark spending, pork is one issue likely to put the Democratic presidential nominee on the defensive.
Source: findingDulcinea
President Bush, calling the Democrat-dominated Congress “a teenager with a new credit card,” has also railed against pork barrel politics. Last year, he used his veto to block an appropriations bill he said was laden with pork. Democrats said he was politicizing an issue to which they have brought greater transparency.
Source: findingDulcinea
Opinion & Analysis: Profligate spending or benefit to communities?
Ezra Klein at The American Prospect says that while researching earmarks using the Sunshine Foundation’s earmark map (see reference section above), he was pleasantly surprised to discover many worthwhile programs being funded.
Source: The American Prospect
David Ushio of the Honolulu Star-Bulletin says that earmarks have gotten an undeserved bad rap because of a few members of Congress who have abused the system. “The abuses get the headlines, but the ‘bad apples’ don’t tell the whole story. In fact, earmarking is a way to fund projects that have special applications or meet critical needs. And often, these projects provide long-term benefits to local communities that go beyond ‘pork-barrel politics.’”
Source: Honolulu Star-Bulletin
Rebecca Hagelin at The Heritage Foundation notes that earmarks in past spending bills have included $50,000 for a tattoo-removal program in San Luis Obispo County, Calif., $500,000 for the Fort Union Trading Post Bike Trail in North Dakota, $2 million for the Center on Obesity at West Virginia University and $270,000 for an effort to combat “goth culture” in Blue Springs, Mo.
Source: The Heritage Foundation
An article published in May 2007 by The National Review argued that conservatives have developed an unhealthy obsession with combating pork. The consequences of this are “potentially dangerous.” On the subject of the defense spending bill that President Bush had just vetoed, Ramesh Ponnuru writes, “Very little of the disputed spending in the bill qualifies as pork: It’s not money ‘earmarked’ for a specific project, such as a highway ramp in a particular place, at the behest of a congressman. Most of the $20 billion in non-defense spending concerns matters of policy.”
Source: The National Review
Republican Sen. Tom Coburn from Oklahoma responds to a piece in The National Review criticizing “porkbuster” politicians. Coburn writes that the author of the piece is an apologist for the establishment who is making rationalizations in defense of pork.
Source: The National Review
Related Topics: The political battle over earmarks
John K. Wilson at The Huffington Post comments on the report on earmark abuse put out by Taxpayers for Common Sense in February. He predicts that earmarks will be a major issue in the fall elections if Clinton runs against McCain, and says that the press has largely ignored the issue, despite major policy differences between Obama and Clinton in this area. Wilson criticizes McCain for allowing his colleagues to request earmarks while standing by and never challenging them. “McCain deserves credit for opposing all earmarks and refusing to request any of them. But Obama’s position (trying to fix a flawed system while still requesting money for his state) is more honest,” he says.
Source: The Huffington Post
Clinton, with $340 million worth of special projects in her state last year, leads the candidates in earmarks, according to a new report by government watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense. Obama racked up fewer with $91 billion, while McCain rejected earmarks entirely. Clinton’s sum placed her among the top-10 Senate recipients of earmarks.
Source: Houston Chronicle
Katherine Strassel, a member of The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board, says that some Republicans are ambivalent about McCain owing to his crusade against earmarks and that that might affect his ability to unite his party.
Source: Real Clear Politics
McCain cites the Clinton-sponsored Museum of Bethel Woods, which has been dubbed by critics “The Hippie Museum,” as an example of pork barrel spending. But in the rural area of Bethel, New York, it is seen as crucial to the region’s economic development.
Source: The Washington Post
Experts say that McCain’s budget figures, including his plan to get rid of earmarks, don’t add up. McCain promises that if he becomes president he will reduce wasteful spending but does not explain how he would rein in health care and retirement costs and some experts say that his plan does not cover the cost of his proposed tax cuts. “This is one of the most fiscally irresponsible plans we’ve seen by a presidential candidate in a long time,” said Robert Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Source: Reuters
In February, McCain called on Obama to name publicly the pork barrel projects he has sponsored, following a Washington Post article on pork barrel recipients. The story found that Clinton distributed more than $340 million in earmarks for the state of New York last year, placing her in the top tier of Senate recipients, while Obama racked up $91 million in pork barrel projects.
Source: Fox News
Most Recent Beyond The Headlines
© 2019 Dulcinea Media, Inc.
