Last night I was starting to nod off a bit during the Presidential debate. It was all sort of a blur. But then it was brought to my attention that McCain was railing against earmarks and in particular a certain $3 million projector Obama requested.
Wait. What?
"$3 million for an overhead projector at a planetarium in Chicago, Ill. My friends, do we need to spend that kind of money?" asks John McCain.
My friends, there is one planetarium in Chicago, Ill., and that is the Adler planetarium, the oldest planetarium in the western hemisphere and among the premiere public outreach center for Astronomy and Science in America. (It also has
the best view of Chicago.) It houses the world's leading collections of ancient cosmological instruments and is a national historic landmark we can all treasure.
My friends, I know the people who work at the Adler, and they live on Main St. and do not needlessly and recklessly waste tax payer money. All the money they receive and the countless volunteer hours goes to educating and inspiring children, the future of American competitiveness in science. They certainly do not ask for $3 million boondoggles. What was John McCain really talking about?
from the AP factcheck article:
THE FACTS: McCain's phrase suggests Obama spent $3 million on an old-fashioned piece of office equipment that projects charts and text on a wall screen. In fact, the money was for an overhaul of the theater system that projects images of stars and planets for educational shows at Chicago's Adler Planetarium. When he announced the $3 million earmark last year, Obama said the planetarium's 40-year-old projection system "has begun to fail, leaving the theater dark and groups of school students and other interested museum-goers without this very valuable and exciting learning experience."
So, there you go. Obama asked for $3 million for a national historic landmark and John McCain wants children to sit in the dark.
Really this story has been on the net because it plays to two memes that McCain is trying to put forth against Obama. First, all earmarks are bad and shouldn't be given out. If you are against earmarks -- and there are many many examples of great things and terrible things that earmarks have funded that could legitimize either side of that argument -- well then you probably won't think much of his VP selection, Sarah Palin, who acquired $27 million in earmarks from 2000-2003. That would be for Wasilla the small town she was mayor of at the time, not the state of Alaska.
The other issue/meme isn't about Obama asking for $3 million in 2008 to support a major improvement to a national historic landmark. It's that the planetarium chairman is Frank Clark, CEO of ComEd who reportedly raised $200,000 for Obama's campaign. This is the kind of thing that buys favor with politicians; and the meme they are trying to start is that Obama takes money (and by implication favors) from special interests. But let's put this in proper perspective. The Obama campaign has raised $456 million through August with more than $18 million from Chicago alone... and they're still counting. Personally, that much money wouldn't buy much favor with me if I was on pace to raise more than $500 million.
This earmark seems to me to be all about enriching Illinois and Chicago by supporting a national landmark. You can argue that the earmark system isn't the way to do it, but face reality, it's the way things like this are currently done. I think John McCain owes the dedicated people at Adler Planetarium an apology. Even better, Adler still hasn't received funding to repair/replace their projection system. How about a
donation?