Washington's U.S. Senate race is turning testy over the issue of federal earmarks. This is money for special projects that members of Congress get for their home states. Democrat Patty Murray ranks 9th in Congress for bringing federal money back home. Republican Dino Rossi mentions it in nearly every campaign stop. But now the Murray camp is dredging up Rossi's own spending record from the Washington state Senate. KPLU's Austin Jenkins found out firsthand just how sensitive the issue has become to the two campaigns.
Full Story
Patty Murray is seeking her fourth six-year term in the U.S. Senate. Joel Connelly has been watching her from the beginning. The Seattle PI dot com political columnist says some Senators are known as legislators. Others, like Murray, control the purse strings.
Joel Connelly: "Murray is an appropriator which is a kind of a special species in Washington, DC in terms of getting money for projects and so on. They nowadays feel that they aren't adequately appreciated for what they do for their states."
Murray sits on the Senate Appropriations committee and chairs a transportation and housing appropriations subcommittee. Over the past three years, Murray has sponsored nearly a billion dollars in federal earmarks - for Washington state military bases, defense contractors, transportation projects, counties, cities and the list goes on. That's according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a non-partisan group that tracks pork barrel spending. Vice President Steve Ellis says that puts Murray in an elite category.
Steve Ellis: "She certainly has been unabashed in her pursuit and defense of earmarks. Essentially if you scratch my back. I'll yours. And if you don't scratch my back I'll make sure yours never ever gets scratched.
Ellis points me to a speech Murray gave on the floor of the U-S Senate in October of 2005. Republican Senator Tom Coburn of Oklahoma - an earmark foe - had introduced several amendments including one to strip funding for a new sculpture park in downtown Seattle. Murray struck back.
Patty Murray: "As the old saying goes: what is good for the goose is good for the gander."
A warning to any Senator who voted with Coburn.
Patty Murray: "So Mr. President when members come down to the floor to vote on this amendment they need to know if they start stripping out this project, Senator Bond and I are likely to be taking a long, serious look at their projects to determine whether they should be preserved during our upcoming conference negotiations."
Steve Ellis with Taxpayers for Common Sense calls that a case of bare-knuckled politics. I wanted to give Murray a chance to respond. I was given five minutes on the phone with her. Murray argued the Senate floor isn't the place to torpedo specific earmarks.
Patty Murray: "I was fearful that at the time - and always - that we were going down a road of cherry-picking individual states or individual senator's projects as a vendetta or as some other reason and that we don't want to start down that road."
After two questions about earmarks, Murray's communications director Julie Edwards broke into the phone interview.
Julie Edwards: "We only have about a minute left, so last question."
Murray defends earmarks as "targeted local investments" that create jobs. She says members of Congress know the needs of their states better than bureaucrats in federal agencies. She also notes the Senate has taken steps in recent years to make the earmark process more transparent. Following my conversation with Murray, I got a phone call. It was Washington's Secretary of Transportation Paula Hammond. She wanted to talk about the benefit of federal earmarks for Washington's road and ferry system. It's not a surprise that the Murray campaign is sensitive about earmarks. Republican challenger Dino Rossi has made federal spending a key issue in his campaign. Here he is on primary night.
Dino Rossi: "Cause we need to turn our economy around and put people back to work and that all starts with putting Washington, DC on a pork-free diet."
Rossi has vowed, if elected, he won't play the earmark game - at least until the federal budget is balanced. But Rossi has his own record on spending. In fact, the Murray campaign hopes to paint Rossi as a hypocrite on this issue. The campaign's Julie Edwards sent me a link to a speech Rossi gave on the floor of the Washington state senate in 1998. He's defending $200,000 for traffic control at a PGA tournament.
Dino Rossi: "There are four major golf events in the world. This is one of the four. It generates for the local economy between $40 and $80M, that's hotels all these different things."
In the end, Rossi actually voted to strip the money out of the budget, but said he was doing so only because it had become a political issue. Rossi later chaired the Senate Ways and Means committee and was responsible for budgets that included millions of dollars in member requested projects. In an equally short phone interview to the one with Murray, Rossi argued that's different.
Dino Rossi: "Well we don't have an earmark process in the Senate.
In Olympia, the technical term is budget provisos.
Dino Rossi: "You know and it comes through the committee, it comes through the committee with Democrats and Republicans alike."
But federal earmarks also go through Congressional committees. So still confused, I asked Rossi to clarify the difference between an earmark and a budget proviso.
Dino Rossi: "I think I've been very clear and I've got to run now."
And that was the end of the interview. Bottom line for voters: Murray touts the good that federal spending does in communities across Washington. While Rossi argues earmarks are part of what's broken in the "other" Washington. I'm Austin Jenkins in Olympia.
Senate Race Turns Testy Over Earmarks (KPLU)
Discussion
Weekly Email
