- Daily Photo: Obama Jokes Around at G-20
- Blackwater gets replaced in Iraq
- Daily Photo: U.S. Marines Look Out for Taliban in Afghanistan
- Hillary Clinton the Tomboy and Her "Ah-Ha" Moment
- Obama Administration Sudan Envoy Headed to Region
- Daily Photo: Potential Flashpoint in Iraq
- Clinton Says New Afghanistan-Pakistan Plan Depends on Diplomacy
- Exclusive: Three Israeli Airstrikes Against Sudan
- Additional 4,000 Troops to Be Ordered to Afghanistan
- Daily Photo: Navy Submarine Trains in the Arctic
- Alarm Over North Korea Missile Prep
- Anti-Terror Stimulus? US Offers Rewards for Top Terrorists
- Daily Photo: Pakistani Women in Refugee Camp
- Condoleezza Rice Appears on "The Tonight Show"
- Diplomat and Aid Group Sound the Alarm on Darfur Camp Situation
- auto industry rescue
- Ballotwatch
- Biden, Joe
- Bush, George W.
- Clinton, Bill
- Clinton, Hillary
- Dodd, Chris
- Edwards, John
- Giuliani, Rudy
- Gravel, Mike
- Huckabee, Mike
- Hunter, Duncan
- Inauguration
- Iraq
- Kucinich, Dennis
- McCain, John
- Obama, Barack
- Palin, Sarah
- Paul, Ron
- Romney, Mitt
- Tancredo, Tom
- Thompson, Fred
- Veepstakes
- Vote 2008: Democrats
- Vote 2008: Republicans
- Washington
- White House
« Previous | Main | Next »
Giuliani Claims 'Baby Bond' Victory
Email
ShareOctober 09, 2007 5:22 PM
ABC News' Teddy Davis and Mike Chesney Report: Former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani claimed credit Tuesday for Sen. Hillary Clinton's, D-N.Y., decision not to propose a $5,000 "baby bond."
"I challenged her on it. She backed off on it," said Giuliani during a Republican presidential debate taking place in Dearborn, Mich.
Clinton confirmed in an interview with Tuesday's Wall Street Journal that she will not propose a $5,000 "baby bond" after having floated the idea on Sept. 28 while speaking to the Congressional Black Caucus.
Clinton's idea, which was never a formal policy proposal, was ten times larger than a $500 "baby bond" that she touted a year earlier while speaking to the moderate Democratic Leadership Council.
"I like the idea of giving every baby born in America a $5,000 account that will grow over time," said Clinton, "so when that young person turns 18 if they have finished high school they will be able to access it to go to college or maybe they will be able to put that down payment on their first home, or go into business."
After floating the idea of a $5,000 "baby bond," Clinton was hammered by Giuliani, who portrayed the idea as a government give-away. On Friday, Giuliani's campaign mocked the idea by e-mailing members of the press a graphic of a faux "Hillary Baby Bond" which included the former first lady's likeness.
In explaining her decision not to push for a $5,000 "baby bond," Clinton told the Wall Street Journal that her priorities for health care, deficit reduction and energy alternatives "are really more pressing."
From the lectern in Michigan, the former mayor opened a new line of attack on the Clinton platform. This time the target was the formal retirement account proposal she made earlier in the day.
During a speech in Webster, Iowa, the senator explained that under her "American Retirement Account" program the federal government would allow people to put up to $5,000 into their accounts each year. Then, for families earning less that $60,000 per year, the government would match 100% of the first $1,000 invested. For families with annual incomes between $60,000 and $100,000, it would match 50% of that first $1,000.
The Clinton campaign estimates the retirement plan would require $20-$25 billion each year.
Saying that the senator was "filled with endless ways to spend," Giuliani claimed Clinton’s newest proposal would cost $5 billion more than the "baby bond" one.
Clinton never formally said how much she thought the entire "baby bonds" program would cost. But, assuming four million births annually, the $5,000 bonds would be a $20 billion line in the annual budget.
The Clinton campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
October 9, 2007 in Tancredo, Tom | Permalink | User Comments (10)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
hillary is taxing and spending again.
Posted by: darknessesedge@yahoo.com | Oct 9, 2007 6:51:00 PM
There we go, giving away money that can be handed over to Iraq. When will people get their priorities in order and give money to liberate our enemies in Iraq, rebuild their infrastructure, and suppy them with new Ford Trucks? Quit giving away War money to children, when they are old enough to join the Armed Forces, then they can get money.
Posted by: able | Oct 9, 2007 9:45:01 PM
no real challenge to be a liberal is there.
just reach into other peoples wallets and steal their hard earned money and give it to others and take credit for it.
Posted by: darknessesedge@yahoo.com | Oct 9, 2007 11:33:51 PM
He really made points with that line. Billary needs to stop thinking of new ways to spend out money $5k for this idea, $1k for this one, $500 for good haircuts, what's next? Rudy should have called her a real phony. She is so hated by the right and disliked by moderates, she has no chance in the general election.
Posted by: George H | Oct 10, 2007 8:01:07 AM
This incident underscores the problem with the enevitable so-called campaign of Hillary. Obama correctly asserted that experience is wonderful, but judgment is the key in making decisions. Hillary's strength is pandering and making decisions based on her political instincts, however, as this incident reveals, often this type of calculation can be ruinous.
The DLC is clearly backing Hillary straight to the primary and I'm doubtful that she won't win the nomination; yet, the republicans are lying in wait for her cautious pandering as well as Bill Clinton's record to pounce upon.
The DLC is betting the farm on Bill Clinton's instincts as they are willing to trade the Clinton's baggage for the opportunity to regain the Whitehouse. We the dems may come to rue the DLC's decision to ignore Richardson, Biden, Obama and Edwards as credible alternatives.
Meanwhile the MSM has basically ignored what is a major mis-step by Hillary, which would be widely described as inexperience if it occured in the Obama campaign.
Posted by: VSamuels | Oct 10, 2007 8:04:00 AM
Republicans have no problem with reaching into their pockets to fund a war on the wrong country to the tune of a trillion dollars. However, they seem to have a major problem "reaching in to their pockets" as they so put it to fund health care and education for american children.
Posted by: Bec67 | Oct 10, 2007 8:10:46 AM
I wonder if Giuliani would like to take credit for the debacle in Iraq as well or perhaps our nonexistent immigration policy. The list of GOP failure is endless and inexcusable. He is another cookie-cutter GOP Corporate Lap Dog whose time in government is OVER! These self righteous, self serving, self enriching constitutional traitors are so over. Inauguration Day will be Independence Day for WE THE PEOPLE.
Posted by: Citizen1960 | Oct 10, 2007 8:49:14 AM
I highly doubt Giuliani had much of an influence on Hiliary's decision to not carry her proposal further. Giuliani needs to start focusing on his own proposals for once, which he hasn't done, instead of attacking his opponent's.
Posted by: GC | Oct 10, 2007 9:39:39 AM
I doubt that Rudy Giuliani caused Hillary to withdraw her baby-bond idea. I think that Hillary would have been more likely to tighten her grip on the proposal and push it just to spite Giuliani, if she really felt the sting of Giuliani's comments. However, Rudy was right on the money to call Hillary out for a hair-brained idea.
Posted by: Sean O'Brien | Oct 10, 2007 10:52:28 AM
Every person prefers to have a way to the web.
Posted by: sterling baby gifts | Mar 5, 2008 9:56:25 PM
Post a comment
