October 5th, 2007
08:18 PM ET
11 years ago

Giuliani attacks Clinton over $5,000 baby bond

Giuliani had some harsh words for Hillary Clinton Friday.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani attacked New York Sen. Hillary Clinton Friday for entertaining the idea of giving every newborn child a $5,000 bond.

Speaking at the American's for Prosperity Foundation Summit, the Republican White House hopeful criticized Clinton’s proposal for its high cost and said such a suggestion shows the Democratic presidential candidate’s lack of executive experience.

"Do you know the first question I asked? ‘How many children are born in the United States?’ Because, I was going to multiply that by the $5,000,” Giuliani said. “Because I ran a city. I've run a business. I know how to make a payroll and I know how to reduce expenses. ‘Do you know how much money it is per year?’ Twenty billion."

“Hillary, that's real money," he added. "You and Bill can't afford that. It's got to come out of somebody's pockets. You know who it comes out of?”

Giuliani went on to criticize Clinton, as well as fellow Democratic White House hopefuls Barack Obama and John Edwards charging that they are seeking "on-the- job executive training."

"In the case of the three leading Democrats, [they] have never run a city, they've never run a state, I don't think they've ever run a business," Giuliani said. "This is why they make proposals like this."

At a forum hosted by the Congressional Black Caucus last week, Clinton said, "I like the idea of giving every baby born in America a $5,000 account that will grow over time, so that 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 make that down-payment on their first home."

Speaking to supporters in Chicago Thursday night, Clinton said that the proposal was only an "idea" not a policy of her presidential campaign.

"I was just trying to start a conversation, which I think is an important conversion, about how we make sure children from middle class, working families, poor families, have access to all the opportunities in life that many of us try to provide for our own children," she said. "So I am looking for a conversation and that was just an idea I threw out to see what kind of reaction I'd get."

- CNN Ticker Producer Alexander Mooney

Filed under: Hillary Clinton • Rudy Giuliani
soundoff (94 Responses)
  1. LCD, Chicago IL

    I agree, $5000.00 is a drop in the bucket. What is wrong with investing in our future, in children? It could be ear marked for education or a 1st home. We all know they won't have social security....
    I cannot wait for all the debates!

    October 5, 2007 08:59 pm at 8:59 pm |
  2. Jack Phillips, Crosby TX

    Is Senator Hillary Clinton somebody we want to be our president when caters to one group, then she turns around and denies catering to them? Personally, I've had enough of the Clintons. I think their political legacy should end when her term as senator ends. When she loses the election, look for her to leave political office at the first opportunity. She only wanted to hold the position of senator as a stepping stone to the presidency.

    October 5, 2007 09:01 pm at 9:01 pm |
  3. Chris, Middletown, CT

    I spoke with a left leaning liberal today – (they even had the "Court Marshal the CIC" bumper sticker on) – we started talking about their dislike for the Republican party....and the fact they wouldn't vote for Hillary....ever – then they said "but I really like Giuliani" – not making this up – he is a moderate...who will be our next president...not sure what type of people will vote for her....but the word "literate" won't be throw around...finally we are not thinking "Republican/Democrat" anymore....and just thinking the right "person" for this job – (I know...divorced...kids don't speak with him....again...don't take marriage advice or child rearing advice from him...President Giuliani

    October 5, 2007 09:13 pm at 9:13 pm |
  4. jean noel, sherman tx

    i think that clinton's idea is good. it was just an idea that she wants to test.people should care about middle class citizen. The check and balance system provides a frame that controls desition taking.

    October 5, 2007 09:15 pm at 9:15 pm |
  5. laurinda,ny

    NOAH, What are you talking about? I don't see anyone posted in front of you so who is Hill? Have you been drinking?

    October 5, 2007 09:16 pm at 9:16 pm |
  6. erika morgan black dimond wa

    As a $5000 bond at birth would be very helpful to pay for an education with it's expected interest additions; as the Iraq debacle will financially impoverish this next generation with debt in such a way that their future is unsecured by the financial irresponsibility of Guiliani"s great "friend" Bush, I think Hillary Clinton's idea is the only thing that will move our civilization toward an even field of opportunity in these children's lives. It is clear that the next generation will have a diminished lifestyle compared to their parents caused by wanton useless waste of future resources by the current administration in order to enrich their already rich oil friends more. The Clinton proposal attempts to at least recognize the incalculable debt even though it by no means solves the problem of borrowing from the next generations earning power; remember the US was in the black when Bush took the reins of government and now we are more in debt then ever before, this has injurious results for our children lives.

    October 5, 2007 09:19 pm at 9:19 pm |
  7. Max, Hilton Head, SC

    Is anoyone else sick of the potshots? The sanctimonious Republican candidates want to mirror themselves after W with their cheap, sarcastic remarks. How about some real discussion about the issues and let's leave the personal jabs out of it? Rudy, are you capable of this? What else do you have to offer? Oh, I forgot, you were the mayor of New York for a while.....

    October 5, 2007 09:25 pm at 9:25 pm |
  8. Outraged Grammarian, Carson City, NV

    Speaking at the American's for Prosperity Foundation Summit

    WRONG! So WRONG! Don't you have editors? Plural =/= apostrophe! How can we take your reporting seriously when you can't even master elementary English grammar?

    October 5, 2007 09:27 pm at 9:27 pm |
  9. Chris, Middletown, CT

    As far as Hillarys debating abilities – I ask you (beg you) – to do a search on Hillary debate transcripts – read them – she answers questions a 100 different ways – really....just read them – here is one of the quotes from Hillary before the war....funny how she changes her opinion based on the far left and MoveOn 78 million dollars... – SEN. CLINTON: Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaeda members. Any vote that might lead to war should be hard, but I cast it with conviction. So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interests of our nation.
    and...her answer??
    SEN. CLINTON: Well, I cast a sincere vote based on my assessment at the time, and I take responsibility for that vote. I also said on the floor that day that this was not a vote for pre-emptive war. I thought it made sense to put inspectors back in. As you recall, Saddam had driven out the UN inspectors in 1998 and the situation in Iraq was opaque, hard to determine, and I thought that it made sense to put inspectors back in. Now, obviously, if I had known then what I know now about what the president would do with the authority that was given him, I would not have voted the way that I did.

    Maybe I'm reading this differently – but is it just like saying "had I known the Powerball numbers I would of played them yesterday" – this is not a time for Clinton rhetoric...and the marble mouthed flip-flops...good thing it appears as though we will have Giuliani to vote for...finally....a true moderate (not like Bill who was forced from the left due to the Republican makeup of the Senate and House)

    October 5, 2007 09:32 pm at 9:32 pm |
  10. Kevin Barker, Laguna Hills, CA

    Hey Hillary, how about if the parents had to put up a bond of $5000 before they could have a child. What ever happened to personal responsibility???

    October 5, 2007 09:35 pm at 9:35 pm |
  11. H. McGrew MSBG OH

    Spend 5K now at birth, think about what that will be when the kids retire at 65+ years. Great idea. At least it keeps the money in the USA, not in Iraq! Oh, but then again we may need that extra money to look for WMD, or pay for the bombs and ammo to kill more people overseas. Hmmm... what is the best way to spend that money????

    October 5, 2007 09:38 pm at 9:38 pm |
  12. Jules, Chicago, IL

    Before you shoot your mouth off about a paltry $20 billion to give every newborn a $5000 savings bond, take a look at the recent request by YOUR president for the $150 billion he's expected to request to contunie to fund the slaughter in Iraq, to add to the $450 billion it's cost so far and expected to reach $800 billion by time the Shrub leaves office.

    Shut up, Rudy.

    October 5, 2007 09:39 pm at 9:39 pm |
  13. Bill , Covington,LA

    Ms.Clinton,is it your intention to award $5000.00 to each illigimate child born of illegal imigrants? As you know those people give multiple births just to get welfare,food stamps, government assisted rent payments, free medical, ferr education, and finally motor voter registeration. Dream On!

    October 5, 2007 09:41 pm at 9:41 pm |
  14. Anne, Monterey, CA

    I wonder if Hilary meant a Zero Coupon bond that can be purchased at about 41 cents on the dollar, does not pay out interest and matures in 18 years at full face value?
    Just a thought. Rudy and Hilary both probably need a little financial advice.

    October 5, 2007 10:04 pm at 10:04 pm |
  15. robert san fran

    5000 bucks per new baby
    Universal Health Care

    It all sounds so wonderful. Why in the hell would anyone think for 1 second that our government can manage such things? They couldnt manage their way out of a paper bag.

    welfare system – flawed
    FEMA – flawed
    National Security – Suspect

    Sure Hill give em the 5000, I vote you and all your associates on the taxpayers payroll pay for it.

    And for all you Hillary lovers, what has she exactly done that suggests she can run a country? Oh she was First Lady, then finagled her way into the Senate by moving to NY State, a place she had never lived prior to her senate run.

    And where is NOW? Here is a woman that would be no place without her husband. Is that not an issue for all you feminists out there?

    October 5, 2007 10:10 pm at 10:10 pm |
  16. DSF, Canada

    Right on Eric...I agree 100%.

    October 5, 2007 10:42 pm at 10:42 pm |
  17. Pragmatic Thought, Phoenix, AZ

    Oh, good Lord, will Rudy EVER get a clue and will the rest of America ever wake up to the fact that this man is a poseur?

    October 5, 2007 11:12 pm at 11:12 pm |
  18. J Houston, TX

    That's not a lot of money. That's like 20 stealth bombers. A drop in the bucket.

    Hey that's almost exactly the number we built (21)! Too bad the B-2 was manufactured over 1985-1997. So that makes something like 2 billion a year spent on the aircraft? So this is something like ten times the expense, and more children are born every year.

    You can't just GIVE people money. Colleges and housing costs will just rise to compensate. Economics doesn't work like this.

    October 6, 2007 12:14 am at 12:14 am |
  19. Stephen, Naples, Florida

    So this commitment will not be redeemable for another eighteen years? Hell, why not make it a hundred grand Hillary?

    October 6, 2007 12:19 am at 12:19 am |
  20. Joyce E. Neal, Nashville, TN

    Rudy is just grabing at straws, trying to start something so he won't have to address real issues, such as, health care for all Americans, a quality public education for all Americans, and ways to get back to the "made in America" tag.

    October 6, 2007 12:29 am at 12:29 am |
  21. nashville, tn

    I'm sorry but this notion of liberal's overspending is complete and utter nonsense. Lets talk about the HUNDRED billion dollars spent on a meaningless war and the only 20 billion that would be needed to give families an extra boost to invest in their childrens future. Do you people just think the 5,000 baby deal would just be handed out with no restrictions, no requirements, and no justifiable reasoning?? I realize its hard to think your government is competent in its policy making under this current adminstration but remember we are talking about democrats here, not republicans.

    October 6, 2007 12:46 am at 12:46 am |
  22. Eyckie, Toronto, Canada

    So many people here are complaining about giving money to children whether it's for healthcare or education. I guess it's each man for himself. Well if you really believe that, then spend a few paltry dollars to keep them healthy so they are not a burden on the system when they get older. Educate them so they can get good jobs and afford their own healthcare. The money you put in now will give you a huge ROI many times over. The whole system would benefit from more educated people, entrepreneurs, that have higher taxable incomes owning or running business' that pay taxes. Raise a generation or two that have higher expectations for themselves and you won't need welfare or free healthcare. Invest in the children now and the need for social programs and assistance will slow dramatically. Don't be nieve enough to believe that proverty will ever be eliminated, but invest in the people and the rest will look after itself.

    October 6, 2007 12:52 am at 12:52 am |
  23. Axel, RKDA, California

    First of all, I want to say I absolutely disagree with Hillary Clinton's idea of giving out $5,000.00 bonds to newborns. In my opinion putting 20 biilion a year into proper educations for every child, not just newborns, would be a much better idea. But I would like to take this opportunity to discuss Government Waste for a moment. Have you ever noticed that almost every US Government employee drives a brand new car? And I am not talking about a cheap compact either. They have big expensive gas guzzling cars that cost us a small (no make that a large) fortune every year. Now ask yourself, "Do I get a brand new car every year?" Most likely you don't.

    Why? Because you can't afford it. And part of the reason you can't afford it is because you are paying your taxes. I don't mind doing that. I have always supported my country. But I do mind when they waste my tax dollars. What am I supposed to say when someone says they are wasting my tax dollars? "Yeah, I know they are." and just leave it at that? I'm sorry, I can't do that. They are not just wasting my tax dollars on a war that I don't support (specially when they aren't even spending the money to equip the troops properly, whom I do support. They are wasting it on things like new cars that are not really necessary. I have been driving the same car, that wasn't new when I bought it, for several years now, and I bet a lot of you are doing the same thing.

    Again I ask, Why? Because between the cost of car payments, insurance, gas, tires, oil, etc., I can't afford to buy a new (or even a used) car every year. I do well to keep the car I have in good shape and moving. And I guarantee you that I drive far less than most people do. I drive less than 4,000 to 5,000 miles a year on the average. In addition to the fact that most of these Government vehicles are brand new every year (and I am not talking about specialty vehicles either, just your run of the mill type of passenger vehicle), they are not always used in what I would consider to be in an "Official" manner.

    According to the US Census Bureau, the US Government had 2,720,688 employees for fiscal year 2006. This only includes civilian employees only, and does not include the US Postal Service, or any of the branches of the military. It also does not include State, County, or Local Government vehicles that are purchased using federal funds. You may know some of these people. You may see them at a grocery store some evening, going to a baseball game, or maybe even going the movies, in their "Official US Government Vehicles", some of which have stickers in the windows that clearly state these vehicles are for "Official Use Only". What would the official use of a government vehicle be at a movie theatre at 9:00 PM? Or on weekends? Surely this is not sanctioned usage of these vehicles.

    These people are typically paid pretty well as well. Can't they afford to drive their own cars after work hours? It may be an accepted practice to allow employees to keep and use their company cars all the time in the private sector, but I don't believe that falls into "Official Use" of a government vehicle. In my opinion, this is a classic example of Government Waste.

    What does this have to do with giving $5,000.00 bonds to newborns, you ask? Nothing directly. I just wanted to make the point that if someone wanted to do something that would cost 20 billion dollars a year, they need to first consider how they will pay for it, and also whether it is Government Waste or not. And if it is, they should be thinking of ways to eliminate that waste. And heaven forbid should they actually think of a constructive use for our tax dollars once in awhile...

    October 6, 2007 04:25 am at 4:25 am |
  24. Mrs. America

    George W runs the country like it's his personal portfolio, and look where that's got us. So much for Rudy's assessment. As for Hillary's $5,000, she didn't think that one over very well.

    October 6, 2007 06:54 am at 6:54 am |
  25. Sam, IA

    Libs take your money? Hmmm. Rudy is pledged to continue the Iraqi fiasco which will make 20 billion look like chump change.Democrats build bridges, Republicans build bombs.

    October 6, 2007 08:07 am at 8:07 am |
1 2 3 4