Bachmann: It’s Not an Earmark If It’s for Highways and Bridges

The first phase of the lame duck ends today. Has Congress done the heavy lifting of finding consensus on extending tax cuts, or unemployment benefits, or Medicare physician payments, or the surface transportation authorization, or the federal budget?

It's nice that Michele Bachmann thinks transportation funding is important, but does it need to go through earmarks? Photo: ##http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/16/bachmann-wants-earmarks-r_n_784267.html##Huffington Post##
It's nice that Michele Bachmann thinks transportation funding is important, but does it need to go through earmarks? Photo: ##http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/16/bachmann-wants-earmarks-r_n_784267.html##Huffington Post##

No. But they named a few post offices. And they re-elected their same leaders to keep on leading them. And the emboldened Republicans have made it clear they’re steering toward a ban on earmarks, a sign to the electorate that they’re going to tackle the “wasteful spending” they lambasted during the campaign. (Their effort to start by eliminating funding for NPR was quickly disposed of today.)

Tea Party darling Michele Bachmann (R-MN) has taken a hard line against earmarks in her second term, after getting nearly $4 million in earmarks her first term. “It’s all bad, as far as I’m concerned,” she told Fox News this spring. “All this pork is bad.”

This week, she told the Minnesota Star Tribune that she wants to redefine earmarks so that they don’t include transportation earmarks. Meaning, she wants an absolute ban on earmarks, except the ones she really, really likes. “Advocating for transportation projects for one’s district, in my mind, does not equate to an earmark,” she said.

Actually, that’s exactly what an earmark is, and that’s why they’ve been so controversial. They’re one of the primary ways that the legislative branch exercises control over spending. Many lawmakers see them as indispensable, since, they assert, they know better what the needs are in their districts than federal bureaucrats in Washington.

But Bachmann says, “”I don’t believe that building roads and bridges and interchanges should be considered an earmark… There’s a big difference between funding a tea pot museum and a bridge over a vital waterway.”

Interesting choice of targets for a Tea Partier. Incidentally, the museum she’s referring to is North Carolina’s Sparta Teapot Museum, which closed its doors early this year. A few years back there was some brouhaha surrounding a half-million dollar federal grant that was approved but, in the end, not spent.

In any case, Bachmann’s carve-out for transportation earmarks is somewhat endearing – after all, it shows the importance she gives to infrastructure investment, even if she does only mention roads and bridges. But it also shows she’s committed to an old and broken system for appropriating money.

“The transport program has always been characterized by a desire to have less federal involvement,” Robert Puentes of the Brookings Institution told Streetsblog today. “And that’s what we’ve done over the last couple years, is to whittle away the federal role, and what we’re left with is 6,300 earmarks.”

Meanwhile, he says, discretionary grant programs like TIGER have been able to target programs of national and regional significance and so are actually more consistent with fiscally conservative principles than earmarks. “They adhere to the mandate these guys are coming in with,” he said. “Better spending, more targeted spending, not wasting money – it hits all these things that they, abstractly, want to do.”

Michele Bachmann’s exemption for transportation earmarks may sound crazy, Puentes says, “But that’s how a lot of folks think about the transport system.” He says people treat transportation earmarks separately, “like if a member’s requesting it, it is therefore a matter of national significance, a high priority project.”

He’d rather switch to performance-based funding for projects that will actually help bring us into a 21st century transportation system and not just bring home the bacon for one member’s district.

  • Rob B.

    What’s so scary is that she might be Sarah Palin’s VP running mate.

  • MB also said one tenth of the U.S. Navy was escorting Obama on his international trip last week, and he was going to spend more than the war effort on 5-star hotel rooms. The reality-based world is not her forte.

  • Octavian

    Problem is, people got so crazy these days that one of these lunatics might become president in 2012…

  • Alex B.

    Incidentally, Minnesota’s TIGER applications were mostly all plucked out of the postwar hat of highway widening plans – with the exception of some rehabs old train stations. So in due time Minnesota got a disproportionately small share of TIGER funding – a sign that the state would do poorly in the conservative world where transportation funding was at the discretion of the executive branch.

  • “There’s a big difference between funding a tea pot museum and a bridge over a vital waterway.”

    There is a big difference. The tea pot museum wastes money but probably does no damage. The bridge wastes money and probably damages the environment by generating more sprawl, more greenhouse gas emission, and so on.

  • john

    The supporters for Palin-Bachmann ’12 should come out of the closet, I really like to see what they look like.

  • Richard

    Wasn’t the poster child for wasteful earmarks a bridge over a waterway?

    Perhaps the upside here is that it may indicate some conservative support to get a transportation bill done.

  • Bachmann on transportation, ca. 2008: “liberals want everyone to live in tenements and take light rail to their government jobs.”

    The only transportation bill she’d approve is one that allocated 100% of ground transportation funds to roads.

  • MAT

    Bridges over waterways in Minnesota are never wasteful. Lots of lakes up there. Hopefully Bachmann will be DOT Secretary under the Palin Administration. God Bless America!

  • washcycle

    Wasn’t the Bridge to Nowhere THE poster child for earmarks and their evil? That was a bridge right?

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Congress Reluctant to Shine Light on Transportation Earmarks

|
The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is about to unveil a massive bill that will re-authorize federal transportation programs for the next six years. The bill will also include funding for a large number of "earmarks," the congressional pet projects that can include everything from bike trails to Bridges to Nowhere. Earmarks grew largely in […]

You Can Open Your Eyes Now: Budget Deal Spares Transpo the Worst

|
It’s Monday morning, and the government is open for business. In a last-minute agreement just an hour before the current budget extension was to expire Friday night, Democrats and Republicans avoided the nuclear option of a government shutdown. They cut $38.5 billion from the 2010 budget; $78.5 billion from President Obama’s 2011 budget proposal. Some […]

Earmark Ban Goes Down to Defeat in the Senate

|
The Senate just voted down the Republican proposal to ban earmarks. The proposed ban was met with profound ambivalence in the transportation community. Some, like Rob Sadowsky, Executive Director of the Bicycle Transportation Alliance, worried that a ban would remove a primary funding mechanism for bike-ped projects. The day after the election, Sadowsky told BikePortland, […]