Edwards: Message not money

Posted: Monday, December 31, 2007 6:17 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, Edwards

From NBC/NJ's Tricia Miller
EMMETSBURG, Iowa -- In Edwards' third event of the day, a caucus-goer at the Pizza Ranch here asked a question that has been on everyone's mind: How can Edwards win the presidency within the limits of public financing?

The man said he had heard from other campaigns, specifically naming Michelle Obama, that Edwards would not have the finances to sustain his candidacy. David Plouffe, Obama's campaign manager, hosted a conference call and sent out a related spreadsheet this morning. Part of the spreadsheet crunched Edwards' campaign funding numbers, explaining that because the former North Carolina senator accepted public financing and its limitations, he would not have the funding to sustain his candidacy through the Democratic National Convention on Aug. 25.

Edwards jumped at the chance to counter.

"We have plenty of money to run a serious campaign,” he said, “but I just want to say how unbelievably weak it is to be arguing that you should be the candidate because you have more money than the other candidate. I mean, really -- does that convince anybody that that's who you should caucus for? You shouldn't even be here if that's what you're looking for!

“I mean, we could all just have our campaign fundraising events, send the totals in, the elections are over before you ever cast a vote! I don't think that's the way this works. I think you get to actually decide who you think is strongest, who has the fight, who has the ideas, and who's ready to be President of the United States. And I think that's exactly what's going to happen on Thursday night when you go to caucus."

Pressed further by reporters after the event, Edwards elaborated.

"If we are able to win the nomination,” he said, “and we're obviously moving in very strong right now, then what that means is, I will have beaten two celebrity candidates who between them have spent $200-250 million because of the strength of this message of stopping corporate greed, restoring the middle class, making the promise of America available to every American in a very personal way.

“It's because that message will have driven right through all of that money. And once you -- once I'm the nominee, if I've beaten them, having been outspent in ways that I just spoke about, taking on the Republican who's carrying George Bush's baggage will be a piece of cake. And I will have plenty of money, and I will have the bully pulpit, and I will have principled, convicted stands, which is what you need to be able to win the presidency."

But note this from a Sept. 28 Washington Post article: "While leading Howard Dean's campaign for the Democratic nomination in 2003, [Edwards adviser Joe] Trippi told The Washington Post that this 'campaign believes that any Democratic campaign that opted into the matching-funds system has given up on the general election,' Trippi said. 'There is absolutely no way you can sustain the hits that are going to come from now until August with a $45 million limit.'"

EMAIL THIS

Comments

Way to tailor and edit; I think that the article from here is a little better, and more honest to the moment. Nowhere is the fact that Mrs. E, "Shocked", the crowd into silence. Not the different tone of the headline too...

December 31, 2007, 5:27 pm
Edwardes Take On Michelle Obama

By Julie Bosman

EMMETSBURG, Iowa – It was the Edwardses versus Michelle Obama on the campaign trail today.

An audience member asked Mr. Edwards a question that wasn’t audible to the rest of the room, so Mr. Edwards repeated it.

“What he’s saying, is he’s hearing directly from the other campaigns, including Senator Obama’s wife, that well, Edwards, he may be a great candidate, but is he going to have enough money to go on and be able to win,” Mr. Edwards said.

“Can I say something first of all? We’re not going to have an auction in Iowa, we’re going to have an election,” he said, to enthusiastic applause.

But Mr. Edwards was just getting started. “Do you understand how frightening it is to a campaign and a bunch of campaign workers and a candidate that have raised $100 million, to have somebody even with them, who’s spending, whatever it is, a third, or a tenth, I don’t even know how much it is, of what they’re spending?” he said. “I mean, really! It scares them to death because what they know is, what this candidate and campaign stands for is working! They get it, they completely get it. So when you’re resorting to arguments about how much money somebody has, you’re in a bad place.”

“If they have more money and the money’s what matters, why are they worried about me?” he said, adding that the argument was “unbelievably weak.”

Then Elizabeth Edwards, who was also on stage, jumped in. “I just want to say, cause I’ll say it later and I don’t want to forget,” she said. “You may not be surprised. But I am surprised, and disappointed, in Michelle.”

The audience was shocked into silence for a full four seconds, until Mr. Edwards moved things along by asking, “Who’s next?”

But he addressed the money issue at a news conference after the event, saying that he would have “plenty of money” to take on a Republican in the general election.

“Once I’m the nominee, if I’ve beaten them, having been outspent in the ways I just spoke about, taking on a Republican who carries George Bush’s baggage will be a piece of cake.”

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/31/edwardes-take-on-michelle-obama/

Always happy to help you, "journalists".

Van

vanreuter, NY NY (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 6:35 PM)

We Love Mitt Romney,

Romney allowed his office as governor to fund Gay/Lesbian SEX-ED to GRADE-SCHOOL CHILDREN as young as KINDERGARTENERS--with NO PARENTAL NOTIFICATION OR CONSENT! NO U.S. POLITICIAN SHOULD ASSUME SUCH CONTROL OVER CHILDREN/THEIR PARENTS!!

The Man Boy Love Association

Man Boy Love Association (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 6:35 PM)

And coming from such an obviously impartial source, it must be true!
One can only hope you were going for the laugh line here, VanReuter.

Nicholas

--NSMsnbc (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 6:44 PM)

Look who's the first to comment about this Van (Hillary's mouthpiece). The fact is Hillary is counting on the fact that Edwards can not compete over the long haul. Her campaign with the complicit media is trying to push his campaign in Iowa, because they know he is not a threat in any other state except Iowa where he has practically lived for the past 4 years.

This is all a ploy to keep the change that Obama will bring to American politics. The very change that John Edwards also supports, and his campaign is being used as pans to that end.

Kelly (from Pittsburgh) (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 7:14 PM)

While Senator Edwards response is very pleasing in theory, he still did not address the issue of whether he has raised/will raise enough money to get his message to the masses. I don't think there is anything wrong with asking this question - I've heard it asked about McCain and Huckabee as well. I don't think it is a personal attack, I think it is a question. So the whole "disappointed in Michelle" line seems a bit dramatic to me.

Nashville_fan (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 7:17 PM)

As much as I like Edwards, people need to realize that Obama has BOTH the message AND the money.

Don't believe me about the message?

Follow this link:
http://video.msn.com/?mkt=en-us&brand=msnbc&fg=copy&vid=ce
746ee9-c883-4152-97ed-78390f1c3a0e&from=00

Also watch last week's Meet the Press.

Obama '08!

Aaron, Saint Paul MN (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 7:25 PM)

Edwards spent four years in Iowa so he really should be doing a lot better. His polling numbers in North Carolina are barely ahead of Hillary.

HonestErnest, Altadena,m CA (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 7:33 PM)

It's the 527s. I am suspicious about Edwards involvement in them. He is not neutral. They have planned together. And this worries me.
Joe Trippi today totally sidetracked the issue when asked about it.
Edwards was my second favorite in the race but, now I am questioning this man and what is true and what is not.
Who is Edwards in regards to his true beliefs and what is the story with the 527s.
Are they going to fund his race if he wins?
I just do not feel easy about him right now.

diane (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 7:44 PM)

Michelle Obama? scary thought having her as a first lady. She has no credibility in Chicago!

Nancy, Chicago (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 7:55 PM)

Edwards has apologized for every major legislation he signed in the Senate. -- BAD JUDGMENT

Edwards was a 1 term Senator. -- NO EXPERIENCE

Edwards could get re-elected or carry his home state. -- UNELECTABLE

Adam , Pittsburgh, PA (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:03 PM)

John Edwards is not dealing in realityville,usa. Money opens offices in later states. Money pays staffers. Money buys signs/buttons/travel expenses, etc.
The media talking heads will move on to H Clinton after Iowa. Public financing limits spending against Hillary Clinton and then the Repub candidate. He will be a sitting duck during the summer. If J Edwards wins Iowa, H Clinton will be the Democratic nominee(do the math).

Marbw (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:04 PM)

Go Edwards!! The only people who win if this becomes a money game is the corporations and the Republicans. This is about whether or not we are going to have a middle class in America and a President who will stand up with us.

Debra, Oakland, CA (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:24 PM)

Happy New Year ! ... hillaryclinton.com

C.B. (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:29 PM)

The fox news is a big disgrace to america by excluding Ron Paul. I don't think the Lame Stream Media understands exactly how much popularity Ron Paul really has, and how much his ideas are resonating with Americans. The American people aren't stupid, and we understand the dire situation our country is headed in. Especially the economic crisis we are going to suffer. The Dollar is declining in value week after week, U.S. imperialism goes unchecked at the expense of our Republic, and we middle class Americans are overtaxed, and over-regulated.

We The People are not going to let a Lame media stand in the way of progress and restoring The Constitution. Ron Paul is the only candidate offering REAL solutions to REAL problems. Ron Paul has my vote.

kevin,DC,DC (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:30 PM)

Happy New Year ! ...hillaryclinton.com

C.B. (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:30 PM)

I wish John Edwards could get more traction with the reporters. They seem to have anointed him as the also-ran already by talking constantly about the Clinton-Obama race. It ain't over til it's over folks.

Jack of Marysville WA (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:30 PM)

Based on this article, this Edwards argument is the "unbelievably weak" one. His decision to accept public funds did two things: 1) helped his campaign reach de facto financlal parity with Clinton and Obama after you add in the public funds and the 527 money he has pouring into the state; and 2) created a disadvantage for him in the general election, which his two other primary competitors would not face if they were to win the nomination. The answer seems to be part of a larger pattern with the Edwards campaign where time and time again we see it choose pious outrage over common sense.

Del, New York, NY (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:37 PM)

Based on this article, this Edwards argument is the "unbelievably weak" one. His decision to accept public funds did two things: 1) helped his campaign reach de facto financial parity with Clinton and Obama after you add in the public funds and the 527 money he has pouring into the state; and 2) created a disadvantage for him in the general election, which his two other primary competitors would not face if they were to win the nomination. The answer seems to be part of a larger pattern with the Edwards campaign where time and time again we see it choose pious outrage over common sense.

Del, New York, NY (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:41 PM)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Fb3eulMVoc (interesting)undecided

Pay-Attention to Everything (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:41 PM)

Do we need more examples to show how INEXPERINCED Obama is ? If he can't take or handle the lates polls, then he for sure not qualified for any government job. It is beyong my imagination. This country will not give up a candidate simply because he doesn't have enough money. So ridiculous. Well, Obama first aiming at Hillary, now aiming at Edward, he sees their numbers are shrinking and desperate now. Vote for Hillary or Edward, NO TO OBAMA !!!

SOME PEOPLE HAVE LOTS OF MONEY, BUT NO LOVE.

AB (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:43 PM)

Protecting the Edwards' I see. Why did you edit out the fact that Elizabeth attacked Michelle Obama. That was low.

KS, atlanta (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:43 PM)

Non Issue. There's more than enough media hype and sound bytes than can allow a campaign to balance public funds with coverage until the general election cycle kicks in. Kerry raised the most money and looked what happened to him. Go have another donut Van.

Kristian O (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 8:57 PM)

Nice. You just couldn't help yourself. You just HAD to end your piece with that $45 million quote. Well, I think Trippi was wrong then and I think Obama is wrong now, because MY vote isn't for sale. And I think the number of folks who think THEIR vote is for sale is so small as to be insignificant.

Now, about substance: Mr. Edwards has the correct message, the best policy proposals to back up that message, and the correct core values to sustain the lack of positive media coverage and Obama's and Clinton's millions of dollars. Besides what Obama has spent in media buys, you folks have given him a free ride with 60% positive coverage throughout the process, so far...much more positive than any other candidate. It is funny, Edwards is gaining momentum despite the lack of media coverage AND being outspent by an obscene amount of money. I wonder why you don't cover THAT aspect of the race?

SandyD, Danville, IA (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 9:21 PM)

Obama's camp committed a serious strategic error. You don't tell Iowans that someone doesn't have enough money to be credible. Middle America doesn't want to hear that Obama doesn't believe in the American dream. They don't want to hear that their voices don't count as much as corporate contributors or the well-to-do because their wallets are lighter.

Shame on them. I think there may be a backlash thanks to that plan. Middle America may say, "Oh Yeah?" and flip him the bird.

Edwards has scored some big points with me lately. He may have my vote. He may be the most electable of all the Dems.

Eileen Berne (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 9:36 PM)

The one thing about the Obama's, your going to get the truth. It may not be good for them to tell you the truth, but you get it anyway. IF Michelle Obama did make that statement, it's the truth. It's not a personal attack, it's the truth about that campaign. IT IS A VOTE FOR HILLARY. Edwards is the easiest candidate for the Republicans to defeat. I'll take him over Hillary, but he could'nt even carry his home state. That killed us!
CHANGE WE CAN BELIEVE IN!

Fasteddie (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 9:37 PM)

Trippi isn't the one calling the shots for Edwards, obviously, and after all, how did all of that money help Dean? Or Kerry, for that matter, in the general election? There's also a good chance the Republican nominee will have the same money limits as Edwards -- for example, McCain and Huckabee accepted matching funds.

As Edwards pointed out, if he can beat Clinton and Obama despite all of their money, then Edwards is clearly the superior candidate, and beating the fractured and demoralized Republicans' nominee will be the easy part.

Mike, Iowa (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 9:54 PM)

Elizabeth Edwards is a pain in the neck. She thinks having cancer means never having to say you're sorry so she just slams away.

John Edwards will have used up over 60% of the limit he's under with public financing with the Iowa caucuses and his plan to use 527s is not holding. He even gets questioned about it on the morning shows. Iowa will weed him out even if he comes in first.

Carolyn Banks (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 9:55 PM)

This last post is obviously b.s and
a planted comment by another campaign
that feels threatened by Mitt Romney
and his chances to get the Republican nomination.

It slandering, slash and burn politics as usual
and it should be removed ASAP

(I have not made up my on a candidate yet,
but we can do without the sleezy, planted comments)

Mark P San Diego, CA (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 9:59 PM)

Forget the Edwards spin. For an honest assessment this is the quote that counts:
Trippi said. 'There is absolutely no way you can sustain the hits that are going to come from now until August with a $45 million limit.'"

laurie, st.paul (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 10:07 PM)

The Des Moines Register has just released its final pre-caucus poll in Iowa and Barack Obama has extended his lead over Hillary Clinton. He leads her 32% to 25%, with Edwards a close 3rd at 24%. Yippee!

The DMR poll has earned the reputation as the most important pre-caucus poll in Iowa because they were the only pre-caucus poll in 2004 to correctly predict the rank of the democratic contenders coming out of the caucuses that year. They were the only ones that predicted that Kerry was going to win and Edwards would come 2nd. All the other polls were all over the place but they got it right. Looks like Obama is going to win Iowa.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071231/NEWS09/71231044/1001/NEWS

Ava (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 10:17 PM)

What we all know is that change will not come in the courts were Edwards would have done better with his anger. We need a president who will bring both sides of the house together to bring change. This is where Obama does well. We need him 08.

Chris, Adaville, Iowa (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 10:35 PM)

To my knowlege, John Edwards has always told the truth...he is the middle class...I believe in him with all my heart! He is one of the few Senators that personaly responded to me when I wrote over 500 letters pleaded for stem cell research which would benefit my son.

Cindy Kimrey Atlantic, NC (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 10:38 PM)

Well, yes, but.... How *does* Edwards plan to finance a full 50-state campaign within the confines of public financing, against a Republican nominee with bucks up to here?

Denny, Alaska (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 10:52 PM)

For the simple reason that Edward, as a trial medical malpractice insurance lawyer, was able to force insurance companies to settle most of his cases out of court, because often these companies do not want un-necessary publicity, does not mean that he can do same on enlightened voters. People are not less informed as he convinces himself to think.

Raising money for campaign is one of the integral parts of running for president. To raise money, the donors must be sold on the viability of a candidate or want to use the candidate to make political statements. Among the candidates, Senator Obama was disadvantaged because he is new in the scene and has to build national infrastructure from the scratch. Edward wanted to raise money but was not successful like Hilary and Obama. Hence he chose to use public financing for his campaign. In retrospect, we now know that he made the calculation that by using public financing his campaign would be complemented by backdoor deals from labor unions and 527’s. Unfortunately for him, there are caucus-goers that will insist on backing candidates with viable electability. Being clever and half will catch up with him.

Edmonsky, Sacramento, CA (Sent Monday, December 31, 2007 11:57 PM)

Did Mitt really do that? And he was criticing Obama fe months ago about sex-ed for children.

Mitt Romney will go down as the most dishonest American politican ever. What a disgrace to Mormons.

Oh, by the way, apparently, Iowans are not being into Edwards fake message. you can hit a poverty charity scam, get a $400 hair cut while people in America go without food, made millions as a trial lawyer, etc, and still pretend to be the man for the poor. If he's so passionate about his candidacy, why didn't he "Romney" his campaign with his own money, instead of coercing small donors everyday.

Diamond (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 12:47 AM)

Man Boy Love Association:

Just one more reason--CAN'T VOTE ROMNEY

can't vote romney in the USA (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 1:07 AM)

jUST LOOKIE hERE MarTha.. hillaryclinton.com

Buddy (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 2:03 AM)

The new DMR poll smashes the Edwards surge storyline by showing Obama way up -- but the survey has a VERY strange turnout projection (40% independents and 60% first-time caucus goers!) Full analysis here: http://www.campaigndiaries.com/2008/01/final-dmr-poll-smashes-all-conventional.html

Daniel, NY (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 2:21 AM)

I've read this in many blogs; Edwards is doomed because he won't have enough money. Don't believe it. He's right. If he can pull even with much better funded candidates in Iowa, that shows it can be done. The money is for advertising and organizing to get a candidate's name and message out. We the people don't have to support the candidate running the most ads.

And hearing about how Edwards is "angry" and into "class warfare" is getting very tiresome. The corporate elite are the ones waging class warfare and the middle class is losing. Is it "angry" to refuse to just roll over and leave our children and grandchildren an America no different than third world countries with tiny elites, a small middle class of professionals to serve them and huge majorities of working poor? Because that's where we're headed.

There is nothing wrong with people getting wealthy but the American way of life and government will not survive ever more extreme concentration of wealth in the hands of a tiny minority and an ever widening gulf between that handful of super rich and everyone else.

CEOs in the 50s,60s,70s,and even in the greed-is-good 80s and 90s never made as many times more than their average employee as they do now and that is not going to change American society for the better. It's time to stop behaving like sheep.

We can't complain about politicians with no backbone if we're going to reject those who will stand and fight.

We can't complain about money corrupting politics and then dismiss, out of hand, all but the most heavily funded candidates.

Of course if we all just throw up our hands and leave it to the moneyed elite to pick our candidates and make our decisions, that's just what they want. Nice docile sheep who are too cowed to know their own strength.

They already have half of us convinced there's no point in even voting. Maybe, in the New Year, we should stop being so polite and stand with the fighters instead of just slapping on another patriotic bumper sticker and turning on the latest reality show. Maybe, in 2008, Iowa will help is all start something with John Edwards.

Felix, littleton CO (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 2:22 AM)

Telling it like it is:

click--
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Fb3eulMVoc&eurl=http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/1/1248/80544/776/428408

Marbw (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 2:55 AM)

What a phony this varnish-haired hypocrite is! A damn lawyer claiming to represent common people. This leech will tell you whatever you want to hear and actually makes Hillary palatable.

Mike (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 3:13 AM)

Edwards does have a point. It is pretty weak to say that people should not support a candidate because they don't have enough money. That's hardly the message that any campaign should be putting out there.

Carrie, Eastern Iowa (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 4:09 AM)

Boy, a price will be paid for that comment. A silly woman making silly comments with no proof that michelle ever made the comment. One should not mess with a power house like michelle. I just watched michelle 2 times on c-span and she didn't say anything about edwards. This kind of stuff is why edwards will lose and lose BIG.

Greensboro (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 4:40 AM)

Happy New Year!! There is nothing worth remembering about last year. For it was a year of the "Washington self serving paper hangers failures!

A failed Congress,

A President who makes his own laws as he sees fit!

A meaningless waste of power and loss of life!

Not enough cardboard boxes for the homeless!

Infrastructure on verge of collapse!

America Properties on the world auction block!

Poverty unchecked!

Sell out of the trucking industry!

N.O forgotten!

20 million Illegals roaming our streets!

Fed puts mask on national security!

National defense ""Air force crippled"" f-15'S junkers!

Local police over whelmed by Illegals, murder, robbery, sex crimes, gangs, drug runners, illegal smuggling of illegals in group numbers.

Local community services destroyed by having to spend intended monies on tax payer needs given to the Illegal!

Needless acts by Congress to shake the hand of those who support killing our troops!

The head of the VA chopped off, But the red tape and the anguish which Veterans suffer remains!! Our Va hospitals no more than a meat mill, Red tape masked over by new and more useless red tape.

And these who seek to become the NEXT President are nothing more than Washington self serving paper Hangers!

Unqualified and conjecture, misrepresentation of the people's voice!

Yes, America has to reinvent Congress. Because the next President will be hamstrung

The gavel slams another year:

Happy New Year

We can change the paper hanger existence

Happy New Year, Paper Hangers : FACTS (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 6:11 AM)

Here's the Washington Post article about electronic voting machines being unreliable. Gee, who would have thought:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/31/AR2007123101118.html?hpid=sec-nation

Ann Doe (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 8:18 AM)

now it's michelle obama going negative...but then whatdo you expect for someone that takes bigmoney from wal-mart?

tuck,realityville, kansas (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 8:52 AM)

An American living and working for an American company in Canada. "IF ANYONE DOES'NT GET WHAT's GOING ON HERE WITH REGARDS TO THE COMMENTS COMING OUT OF OSAMA OBAMA'S CAMP THEY REALLY NEED TO STOP AND SMELL THE COFFE. IT IS THE PROOF IN THE PUDDING AS THEY SAY! IF ELECTING ANYBODY IS BASED ON HOW MUCH MONEY HE HAS OR CAN RAISE, WHAT WERE GOING TO GET IS ANOTHER "BUSHWACKER" FOLKS" THINK ABOUT IT "IS THAT WHAT YOU WANT???????

Jerold Jolup Boston Ma. (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 9:03 AM)

John Edwards is a phony.

The Many Apologies of John Edwards

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pOZML6P0Vg

John Edwards cannot lead the democratic ticket.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ADwjvAs9J-0

John Edwards and Hillary Clinton did not read the NIE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLJFujflVmY

Obama SmackDown Series: Smacks down Edwards on Iraq.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4x_KnWEDjs

John Edwards 2002 Vote for the Iraq War
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HY6BZgkI0kI

John Edwards Feeling Pretty.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=2AE847UXu3Q

Banko (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 9:43 AM)

Happy New Year everyone!
Two days to go and two different polls give two different leaders. Do polls change things at this stage?
Maybe, but I think many people have decided already and are keeping their decision under wraps. Good, I like surprises. Can't wait to see what present Iowans give us this year.

John Alexander,Edinboro,PA (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 9:48 AM)

------------------
Prez can't snatch Congress' health care

A television ad shows John Edwards giving a campaign speech and vowing to fight for universal health care coverage.

"When I'm president I'm going to say to members of Congress and members of my administration, including my cabinet: I'm glad that you have health care coverage and your family has health care coverage," Edwards says. "But if you don't pass universal health care by July of 2009 in six months I'm going to use my power as president to take your health care away from you."

Cue the wild applause.

The problem with this statement is that the president can't just "take away" health care from Congress.

Health care for Congress and the administration is passed by statute. The president cant repeal a law on his own, said Don Ritchie, associate historian of the Senate Historical Office.

Congress has the power of the purse and passes legislation. Its the president whos dependent on Congress to get legislation passed," he said.

If we broaden our view from the 30-second ad, Edwards fleshed out his idea in a September 2007 speech he gave in Chicago. During that speech, he explained that his plan was to "submit legislation that ends health care coverage for the president, all members of Congress, and all senior political appointees in both branches of government on July 20th, 2009 -- unless we have passed universal health care reform."

That's a more realistic scenario, and there's nothing to stop a president from submitting legislation if he can find a member to introduce it. But count us dubious on Congress voting away its own health care coverage.

In the meantime, we find Edwards' lordly pronouncement in his TV ad to border on the absurd. As a former member of the U.S. senate, he should know better. For that reason, we give him the rare Pants on Fire ruling.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/190/

Marbw (Sent Tuesday, January 01, 2008 11:16 AM)

Next >>

SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

Your name, city and state (John Doe, Seattle, Wash.):

Your e-mail address (jdoe@msnbc.com):

Your website (it's okay if you don't have one):

Remember me? (We'll keep it private) Remember me?

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=541188