Money Money Money

I can’t remember where I stole this link from, but the Washington Post has an article discussing the value of earmarks obtained by the three major presidential candidates.

John McCain comes in first place with zero earmarks. However the scandal-in-the-making with that pretty blond lobbyist has a distinct probability of derailing the straight talk express.

“Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the likely GOP presidential nominee, was one of five senators to reject earmarks entirely, part of his long-standing view that such measures prompt needless spending.”

On the Democratic side of things, Barack Obama wins hands down:

“Working with her New York colleagues in nearly every case, Clinton supported almost four times as much spending on earmarked projects as her rival for the Democratic presidential nomination, Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), whose $91 million total placed him in the bottom quarter of senators who seek earmarks, the study showed.”

…

“As a campaign issue, earmarks highlight significant differences in the spending philosophies of the top three candidates. Clinton has repeatedly supported earmarks as a way to bring home money for projects, while Obama adheres to a policy of using them only to support public entities.”

A McCain v Obama race looks really good for a lot of reasons. Reigning in congressional money-wasting (See: Hillary’s Woodstock museum) is just one of them.