As has been noted, Senator Clinton has used earmarks or pork barrel spending to get things for communities in New York and as anyone who has followed politics or who have watched West Wing knows, earmarks have been a way to sweeten a bill to get it through Congress.

Senator Obama has said that he's for transparency in the earmark process and his website says that he'll hold pork barrel spending to 2001 levels, but I'm not finding any mention of how he'll achieve this other than possibly his power of persuasion.

I'm currently watching John McCain give a speech and participate in a Q&A in Texas; He says that he'll veto any bill that crosses his desk that contains an earmark and he gives an example that he's used before; In the past two year's worth of budgets, President Bush has signed more than 35 billion dollars worth of earmarks into law and this would be enough to give every American child a $1000 tax credit.

Personally, I'm not opposed to the concept of earmarks and I've actually advocated pursuing them on behalf of various groups with which I'm involved, but it seems that either Democratic candidate will probably have to justify the concept for the American people and educate them about the benefits. Senator Clinton could possibly point toward all of the good that she's done with the money and that would be fairly easy to do, plus it'd be understanable by the electorate; Senator Obama is going to have to explain how he's going to hold earmarks to a certain level and why the needs in 2008 are not greater than 2001; While it looks like on this one particular issue, though a veto pen may seem draconian in practice, the specificity of Senators McCain's position could be the easiest to sell.