“Senator McCain said Governor Palin ‘learned that earmarks are bad’, but in 2008 alone Gov. Palin requested $256 million in earmarks for Alaska, and her state received more earmarks per person that any other state,” said spokesman Tommy Vietor. “The fact is that Governor Palin isn’t just good at getting pork projects, she’s one of the most successful pork barrel politicians in history.”
But if you look at the document you quickly get feel for the fact that many of the earmarks are requests for funding that are completely legitimate, and many relate to unfunded mandates imposed upon Alaska by federal legislation like the Clean Water Act and the Endangered Species Act. Several examples are set forth after the jump.
“Meets the increased needs under the Magnuson-Stevens Act for developing regional fishery coordinated databases.”
“This is an ongoing effort to collect data on the recreational hailbut fishery that is conducted by federal agencies though relying on the state for data.”
“Provides state funding for management of federal fisheries, including Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands king crab and tanner crab, weathervane scallops and groundfish.”
“To meet federal obligation to enhance Sockeye salmon production, the state operates an enhancement unit at an existing hatercy and conducts fish monitoring. The work is completed cooperatively with the Canadian government.”
“Provides ongoing funding for programs that mitigate that impacts of harvest reductions imposed by the Pacific Salmon Treaty on Alaskan fisheries and coastal communities.”
“Funds Alaska, Washington, Oregon, and Northwest Treaty Indian Tribes in meeting federal obligations under Pacific Salmon Treaty.”
“Funds monitoring of ice seal populations in Native Villages, research on species delineation and genetics of harbor seals to understand the declines in population and provide for population restoration, and continues research into Stellar Sea Lion population decline.”
“Allows State of Alaska to monitor Yukon River salmon and provide information necessary to support negotiations between US and Canada under Yukon River Salmon Agreement.”
“To continue necessary airport upgrading after transfer of the Naval Air Station (Adak) to the State.”
“Continued funding to address the challenges of NCLB (No Child Left Behind) as it relates to teacher quality and student achievement. It provides trained, full-release mentors for beginning teachers and principals.”
“Funds State of Alaska for implementation of federal obligations under Yukon River Treaty.”
“To complete a communication facility to support the 168th Air Refueling Wing’s 8 PAA KC 135 aircraft.”
Nowhere in this list do we see anything like an earmark for the employer of Palin’s spouse. Compare this sequence of events:
Nov. 2004 — Obama elected to Senate.
Michelle Obama’s salary for the Univ. of Chicago Hospital — $121,910.
Michelle Obama’s salary in Spring of 2005 — increased to $316,962.
B. Obama’s earmark request for Univ. of Chicago Hospital Pavilion for 2006 — $1 million.
That’s a 5-1 return on the raise they gave Michelle.
BUT TAKE A LOOK at the list of earmarks released by Obama under prodding during the Democratic primaries.
http://patterico.com/2008/09/10/politico-hit-piece-claims-palin-addicted-to-pork-earmarks-contrary-to-her-campaign-position/
Unfortunately your post is a bit irrelevant. The question is not who asked for the most earmarks. The question is, was John telling the truth when he said Palin never asked for earmarks as governor?
First, one should always question a statement with the words “never” or “always” and a good politicion should avoid them.
This interview is a good example of why, before he chose Palin, I was not going to vote in this election. His selection of Palin brought him up a couple of notches for me, but this is still an example of what annoyed me.
Don’t get me wrong, I think Obama and Biden are worse. Much worse. But McCain shot himself in the foot.