Cost-Cutters, Except When the Spending Is Back Home
By RON NIXON
NYT
WASHINGTON — Freshman House Republicans who rode a wave of voter discontent into office last year vowed to stop out-of-control spending, but that has not stopped several of them from quietly trying to funnel millions of federal dollars into projects back home.
They have pushed for dozens of projects in their districts, including military programs opposed by the president, replenishing beach sand lost to erosion, a $700 million bridge in Minnesota and a harbor dredging project in Charleston, S.C. Some of their projects were once earmarks, political shorthand for pet projects penciled into spending bills, which Republicans banned when they took over the House.
An examination of spending bills, news releases and communications with federal agencies obtained under the Freedom of Information Act shows that nearly two dozen freshmen have sought money for projects that could ultimately cost billions of dollars, while calling for less spending and banning pork projects.
Politicians have long advocated for projects on behalf of individuals and businesses back home, even without earmarks. Several lawmakers said they were merely providing a constituent service. But since many of the freshman Republicans campaigned on a pledge to cut spending and to change Washington’s time-honored ways, their support of spending projects suggests that in many cases ideology can go only so far in serving the needs of people back home.
(More here.)
Powered by Blogger
1 Comments:
A new bridge over the St Croix River between Minnesota and Wisconsin is hardly a 'bridge to nowhere'. It is money well spent for needed infrasturcture...unlike the countless number of boondoggles and poorly allocated resources you can find littered in the Stimulus Bill at recovery.org.
Government should fund those necessary projects like a new bridge over the St Croix. They could have used all the stimulus spent in Minnesota ($2.9B) (none of which has done one fucking thing to help the economy) and built a new bridge with it and would have done more than all the shit projects and wasted billions of stimulus.
Instead we have indigenous plant mitigation in the Louisville Swamp south of Shakopee. We have a refurbished ex-169 bridge over the Minnesota River at Shakopee that goes NOWHERE - the DNR moved the archery range to the other side of Hwy 101 meaning that refurbished bridge - which took TWO fucking years to refurbish - connects two sides of a river NO HUMAN BEING WILL EVER USE!!! Let's not forget the new pedestrian bridge over 169 at Marystown Road in Shakopee THAT NO ONE USES!!! Oh, and there is also the new pedestrian bridges in the Louisville Swamp and who can forget the hole digging project at US169/MN13 in Savage - think of all the saved and/or created jobs!!!
It takes Republicans with a set of balls to stand up to the radical environmental lobby to get this much needed bridge built. It's hardly a pet project.
Post a Comment
<< Home