About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Asserting that Dems "like their earmarks," CNN's King, Bash ignored own reporting on GOP-sponsored earmarks

March 01, 2009 7:05 pm ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: On State of the Union, Dana Bash remarked that the Obama administration has "got a big problem on their hands because if they -- if the president really thinks he's gonna stand up and say, 'No earmarks,' the Senate majority leader and other Democrats said, 'Uh-uh. That's the way we do business, and that's the way it's gonna stay.' " King replied, "They like their earmarks." But while Bash and King have both previously noted that Republicans requested many of the earmarks in the bill, neither gave any indication during the discussion that they did so.

38 Comments

On the March 1 edition of CNN's State of the Union, host John King asserted that "Republicans are saying hypocrisy" because President Obama "said he doesn't like earmarks," but intends to sign the omnibus appropriations bill "even though it has 8,000 or 9,000 of those earmarks." Moments later, senior congressional correspondent Dana Bash remarked that the Obama administration has "got a big problem on their hands because if they -- if the president really thinks he's gonna stand up and say, 'No earmarks,' the Senate majority leader and other Democrats said, 'Uh-uh. That's the way we do business, and that's the way it's gonna stay.' " King replied, "They like their earmarks." However, although Bash and King have both previously noted that Republicans requested many of the earmarks in the bill, neither gave any indication during the discussion that Republicans sponsored many of the earmarks, as Media Matters for America has noted. Indeed, King noted the Republican sponsorship of earmarks in the bill earlier in the program when he told Rep. Tom Price (R-GA), "[M]any of your leaders, the Republican side in Congress, have loaded their share of earmarks in this, too."

Bash has also previously noted that Republicans have sponsored earmarks in the bill. During the February 23 edition of The Situation Room, Bash reported that the legislation "has an increase in spending and also a hefty amount of earmarks, pet projects, from Democrats and Republicans." On February 24, Bash stated that "it's important to emphasize, it is Democrats and Republicans who are asking for these pet projects to be sent back home." From CNN Newsroom:

BASH: And there you heard Congressman Jeff Flake [R-AZ]. And he and other members of Congress are going through, and we are certainly also going through, finding some examples of things that, you know, particularly in this day and age of crisis, economic crisis, and members of both parties saying that everybody needs to be careful about what they're spending, things that some people may be questioning whether or not it's the right thing to do. But again, I think it's important to emphasize, it is Democrats and Republicans who are asking for these pet projects to be sent back home, and it is from last year's budget, but still in there.

Likewise, during a report aired on the February 25 editions of CNN Newsroom and Anderson Cooper 360, as well as the previous day's Situation Room, Bash remarked, "[B]ringing home that bacon is bipartisan. Even Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who campaigned alongside John McCain as he railed against earmarks, is getting $950,000 for a convention center in Myrtle Beach in his home state of South Carolina." Additionally, on the February 25 edition of The Situation Room, Bash reported, "I can tell you, Wolf, and it is important to note that Republicans are asking for about 40 percent of the 8,500 earmarks that are in this bill. So, it is certainly bipartisan." Later that night on Lou Dobbs Tonight, Bash again noted, "[I]t is important to note that nearly half of the -- about 8,500 earmarks in this bill are actually coming from Republicans."

A handout distributed on February 24 by House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-MD) titled "You can't spell 'earmark' without an 'R' " asserted that "40% of the earmarks in the omnibus appropriations bill are Republican earmarks." The handout also stated that "[t]he earmarks in the omnibus appropriations bill total less than 1% of the budget" and that they "were reduced by 43% last year, and the omnibus appropriations bill reduces earmarks by another 5%."

From the March 1 edition of CNN's State of the Union with John King:

KING: Let's talk -- we only have about a minute left, so you each get about 20 seconds on this point.

This omnibus spending bill, which everybody at home is saying, "What is that?" The big bill that essentially pays the bills for the year. That's all under way. It's going to come the president's way, Suzanne. He said he doesn't like earmarks. He wants to change the way Washington does business. But his team says, "We're gonna sign this one, even though it has 8,000 or 9,000 of those earmarks, because we need to move on and focus on our agenda, not the carryover from the Bush days." Republicans are saying hypocrisy.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX (White House correspondent): Yeah. I mean, obviously, that's a point that they're making here. The Obama administration -- aides say that they believe that they can kind of move forward here. You put up the budget. It talks about a new era of responsibility, so that they're turning the corner. They believe that if you look forward on the stimulus plan and what they've put forward in the budget, that they're going to be able to convince the American people to look beyond that.

KING: You get 10 seconds.

BASH: Well, on this issue of earmarks, the Obama administration, they've got a big problem on their hands because if they -- if the president really thinks he's gonna stand up and say, "No earmarks," the Senate majority leader and other Democrats said, "Uh-uh. That's the way we do business, and that's the way it's gonna stay."

KING: They like their earmarks.

Dana Bash, Suzanne Malveaux, thank you very much.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by fmbanker87 (March 01, 2009 7:18 pm ET)
         
      Obama promised no earmarks, now he's got 8000. Thanks Mr. O for keeping your word, you lousy hypocrite.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (March 01, 2009 7:21 pm ET)
           

        The only hypocrites are you and your conservative traitor buddies who screwed everything up in the first place. Now sit back and watch how competance leads this nation out of your hypocrite buddies mess.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by LuvLuLu (March 01, 2009 8:02 pm ET)
           

        The government's been surviving on a continuing resolution. This appropriations/budget bill is not Obama's bill. This is leftovers from last fall when the Republicans were blocking everything and Bush was still in office.

        This is yet another example of the Bush Administration specifically and the right in general trying to put Obama and Democrats behind the eight ball. They wanted to mess up the incoming Democratic administration, so they starved the beast, delayed ending the war in Iraq, failed to keep up with the needs of Afghanistan, etc, etc.

        40% of the earmarks in this budget are from Republicans. They are fully participating in this effort, and have not restrained themselves, and Dana Bash should not have called out the Democrats if she wasn't also going to call out the Republicans.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by thejbomb65 (March 01, 2009 11:20 pm ET)
           

        hey banker this is a real conservative about to school you so listen up.

        you have a great deal of nerve calling hypocracy when neo cons like you have lied us into a war for no reason. (dont you dare spew that saddam was a dangerous man crap)

        and your fellow con artists then proceeded to spy on every american possible under the guise of "monitoring terrorisim" when that was complete malarky.

        then broke nearly every criminal law that could possibly be done by indefinatly holding terrorist suspects and torturing them in violation of every international law and treaty that we adhere to and just so happens to have tried and executed people who did the very things we ourselves are doing (Nuremburg Trials and the War Crimes Trials for the Japanese) and in violation of every principle our country stands for. (suspension of haebeas corpus)

        and just for icing on the cake, you morons did the complete opposite of true conservative principles. spent like there wasno tommorow, increased the size of the government, and crashed the economy.

        so call hypocracy all you like. but before you dare call it here look in the mirror first and see the hypocracy staring you in the face. and if you are able to look yourself in the mirror and still cry foul here. well then you are truly without morals, character or backbone

        Report Abuse
      • Author by laissezfairesucks (March 02, 2009 12:58 am ET)
           

        I beleive the last count of Republican earmarks during the session of Congress controlled by the Republicans was 14,000 give or take, under Bush. So the current number has been reduced by almost half, but the media meme that Democrats are "tax and spend liberals" has got to be maintained.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 02, 2009 8:56 am ET)
           

        Nice try, little fella. At least 4000 of these alleged earmarks are for gops and Meshuggah Mitch McConnell insists on keeping the same level of funding for the minority even though ya lost nine seats. Ya want hypocrisy, check your mirror, chump. There's no hypocrisy like gop hypocrisy.  

        Dash does nothing but parrot the factually-challenged, gop-slop  talking points she's fed.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by LisaLV711 (March 02, 2009 8:58 am ET)
           

        awww...you should thank him. The earmarks were put in during the BUSH administration! Obama, basically signed off on the bill, but in essence said he'll do it this time, but don't let it happen again. Rahm Emmanual cleared this up on Face the Nation Sunday.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (March 02, 2009 10:04 am ET)
           

        Last time I checked, Obama doesn't write legislation any longer. He's not responsible for what is, or is not in the legislative bills. He can try to influence it, but last time I checked, Senators and Representatives write legislation. 

        Report Abuse
    • Author by rdirkse (March 01, 2009 8:30 pm ET)
         

      Keep 'em honest

      Report Abuse
    • Author by dggpa0207 (March 01, 2009 8:52 pm ET)
         

      Bash is likely a right leaning or "conservative Republican" reporter.   After all, she was assigned to follow and report on the Republican candidates duirng the Presidential campaigns.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by bruce1ace (March 01, 2009 8:53 pm ET)
         
      The fact is that President Obama did say "no earmarks". If he wanted to start that policy at a later date he could have said so, being that he is an extremely eloquent speaker as we all have heard.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by loonz (March 01, 2009 9:01 pm ET)
           

        He can say no earmarks but that's ultimately up to the branch that makes the law, Congress.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by bruce1ace (March 01, 2009 9:10 pm ET)
             

          I have not been able to find an Obama quote where he as President said there were to be no earmarks in the budget.  I found where he said he didn't want any earmarks in the stimulus bill and I found where he supported a bill last year as Senator for no earmarks that was defeated.

          If anyone has a quote from President Obama regarding no earmarks in the budget I would appreciate a link.  Thanks.

          Report Abuse
          • Author by snoopy (March 01, 2009 9:12 pm ET)
               

            Didn't you just say The fact is that President Obama did say "no earmarks". ? And now you want someone to post a link because you can't find one?

            PRICELESS!

            Report Abuse
            • Author by carlileb5935 (March 01, 2009 9:50 pm ET)
                 

              Can someone please find the link where Obama said that he was born in Indonesia? I've been looking for it and can't find it.

              Oh, and how about that one where he said he was a socialist? Can't find that one either.

              Report Abuse
            • Author by bruce1ace (March 01, 2009 10:00 pm ET)
                 

              That's true I did.  MMFA has posted that Bash asserted that and MMFA has not flagged that as misinformation.  I was looking for the actual quote.  If he never said it then MMFA should flag it as misinformation.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (March 01, 2009 10:36 pm ET)
                   

                MMFA has posted that Bash asserted that and MMFA has not flagged that as misinformation. 

                So you're complaining because the title of the thread covers more than Bash's false claim? Gee, too bad y'all weren't this nit-picky when Bush claimed Saddam had WMD's. Too bad y'all didn't challenge that claim about Iranian or Korean nukes capable of hitting the "fatherland". I must say, you are consistant in your partisan divide.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by bruce1ace (March 01, 2009 11:17 pm ET)
                     

                  MMFA is very thorough in their analysis.  It is not an unreasonable assumption to think Obama said it if MMFA hasn't flagged it as untrue.

                  I'm really not complaining.  You calling me the partisan is quite humorous in fact.

                  Report Abuse
          • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 02, 2009 9:26 am ET)
               

            In other words, once again, Brucie not only has no evidence in support of his latest blanket assertion, so he wants someone else to dig some up and make his case for him.

            I'm shocked.

            I hate to keep confusing you with the facts, Brucie, but the Legislative Branch writes legislation, not the executive. Hence, the name.

            The President can request whatever he wants, but Congress writes the legislation. Moreover, apart from further eroding your pitiful excuse for a case by providing evidence of his record in opposing earmarks, what Obama did previously as a member of the Senate has no bearing on current or future legislation. Feel free to check.

            Once again, Brucie, you have no case, no clue, no reason and no foundation for your latest load of gop-slop nonsense. In the unlikely event that you can cough one up in the first place, it's up to you to make your case. Nobody is obligated to disprove what you can't prove.

            Report Abuse
            • Author by bruce1ace (March 02, 2009 10:54 am ET)
                 

              If Obama never said "no earmarks" as Bash claimed in the above summary, then I'm hardly bashing Obama or Democrats for pointing out that Obama never said what she is claiming.  Its actually a defense in favor of Obama.

              Unbelievable.

              Report Abuse
              • Author by snoopy (March 02, 2009 12:02 pm ET)
                   

                You're pointing out that Obama never said it by claiming it's a fact and asking other people to help you find the quote so you can prove it? Man, I haven't had this much fun since I cancelled my cable bill!

                Here's what Obama really said, just so ya know: "I want to pass a budget next year that ensures that each dollar we spend reflects only our most important national priorities," Obama said on Tuesday night. Next year, bruce, as in 2010.

                Report Abuse
                • Author by bruce1ace (March 02, 2009 1:17 pm ET)
                     

                  My first post was in error. 

                  As I tried to explain, I was basing that post on MMFA's summary which didn't challengs Bash's comment.

                  When I looked for the actual quote, I couldn't find it.  If I was really the partisan that you label me, I wouldn't have bothered to try to figure out what Obama did or didn't really say about the subject.  And when I couldn't find a quote in support of Bash's statement I certainly wouldn't have pointed that out.  I would have simply accepted the original comment as it stood.  

                  I want to know what Obama said about earmarks.  That's it. 

                  Report Abuse
    • Author by truthseeker77 (March 01, 2009 10:04 pm ET)
         

      Obama did not promise there would be no earmarks. He promised to "reduce earmarks to 1994 levels," that is, 7.8 billion a year. 

      During the years when Republicans controlled Congress, earmarks grew from $7.8 billion in 1994 to $29 billion in 2006. In the past two years, the Democratic Congress has cut earmarks nearly in half, to $17.2 billion in 2008. However this amount is still too much and includes such projects like $188,000 for the Lobster Institute in Maine, and $7.4 million for Richard Nixon’s presidential library. Barack Obama is committed to returning earmarks to less than $7.8 billion a year, the level they were at before 1994, when theRepublicans took control of Congress and the level of earmarks began increasing dramatically.

      link.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by right-winger (March 02, 2009 12:14 am ET)
         

      NOT SURPRISE!!!!! I BET THAT COUPLE AND GOT THERE TICKET FOR THE NEXT REPUBLICAN CONVENTION. THEY SHOULD GET A JOB AT FOX AND TAKE WOLF WITH THEM. MARK MY WORD THEY WILL HAVE DEMS ON THERE SHOW NOW TOO PUT OBAMA DOWN . HEY DEMS NOW YOU WON'T HAVE TO CALL TO GET ON CNN NOW THAT THERE BOY BUSH IS GONE. WHEN BUSH WAS IN OFFICE DOING ALL HIS DIRT THAT PEOPLE LIKE BASH,KING AND WOLF SAID NOTHING THEY WOULD NOT PUT A DEM ON THERE SHOW TO TELL WHAT BUSH WAS REALLY DOING BUT NOW EVERYTIME A DEM COMES OUT AGAINST OBAMA HE IS ON FOX 2 BEFORE YOU CAN SAY FOX NEWS.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by laissezfairesucks (March 02, 2009 1:02 am ET)
         

      At last count the last GOP controlled Congress had something like 14,000 plus earmarks. The media are tarnishing the Dems again as "tax and spend" liberals despite the fact that the GOP has consistently spent more  and earmarked more than the Dems.

      Reagan TRIPLED the national debt, Bush 2 doubled it, if I'm not mistaken, so leave the Dems alone, they're being responsible by comparison to the GOP.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 02, 2009 9:32 am ET)
           

        Ya gotta love how these shrub-shilling gops not only blame the Dems for the mess caused by their incompetence and rubber-stamping of brain-dead, bushleague policies, they complain about the cost of the clean up.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by magnolialover (March 02, 2009 10:08 am ET)
             

          I love it when they complain about liberals being "tax and spend" and that we want to expand the federal government. Funny thing is, none of them seemed to have much trouble with it, when Bush was running the show, and oversaw the largest expansion of the federal government in our entire HISTORY. Also, Bush spent more than any other administration before him, but the problem with that, is that he gave tax cuts, and then kept spending like the drunken sailor he wished that he was. 

          Good lord republicans are dumb at times, when they harangue Obama, they are directly impugning themselves as well, because they never said word one when Bush was spending wildly and out of control. 

          Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (March 02, 2009 1:08 pm ET)
         

      I think many, if not most, people equate earmarks with pork... and maybe both parties deserve blame for that, given how earmarks became a political football during the campaign.

      Truth is that "earmarks" are simply a legislative device for making sure money is used for a specific purpose... no more, no less.  Certainly earmarks are often used to shoehorn pork into a given bill, but earmarks are not inherently evil.  

      Report Abuse
      • Author by shaggles (March 02, 2009 3:14 pm ET)
           
        Thank you for pointing that out. Earmarks don't necessarily = pork.
        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.