Is Bachmann representing the 6th District?
What is going on with Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann?
She voted against her own earmarks in the Transportation Housing and Urban Development bill and in the Labor, Health and Human Services Appropriations bill.
She is the one who inserted an earmark for $500,000 to improve a stretch of Minnesota Highway 241 in the Transportation bill. She also inserted a request for $350,000 for the Northland Medical Center Princeton in the Health and Human Services bill.
That same Transportion bill includes $195 million for construction of the I-35-W bridge, $55 million to complete the North Star Commuter line, $1.25 million for the St. Cloud Regional Airport and $820,000 for the St. Cloud Metro Bus.
All but the bridge money are in HER DISTRICT.
She opposes the bill because she says it is full of pork and exceeds spending President George Bush is willing to live with.
Rich Dunn, Bachmann’s chief of staff, says the bill increases funding 7 percent over last year’s levels and 5 percent over the president’s request.
Larry Schumacher, political writer for the St. Cloud Times, quotes DFL Communications Director John Stiles. Stiles says one reason for Bachmann’s vote may be in a letter she signed along with 146 other Republicans saying they would vote to uphold any veto of an appropriations bill that exceeded the president’s request.
Dunn, however wants everyone to know that the Transportation bill has 2,124 earmarks totaling $3 billion.
Some of those earmarked projects including $301,000 for an International Peace Garden, $335,000 to preserve a baseball field in Montana and $100,000 for a Los Angeles Fashion District.
Dunn warns about jumping to conclusions that Bachmann doesn’t favor local projects. She prefers a more responsible bill, which no doubt would retain her projects, particularly the $500,000 for Highway 241.
Stiles also says Bachman voted against one of her earmarks in a Labor Health and Human Services appropriations bill. It was for a $350,000 for Northland Medical Center in Princeton.
So what is Bachmann trying to prove?. Does she think for a minute that her vote in protest is going to change those earmarks, which are part of the system? If she took the pulse of her district she’d realize she’s out of step by voting against a bill that may have some pork but happens to have projects important in the Sixth District.
Isn’t that the one she represents?
Some pork? $3 billion sounds like quite a lot of bacon actually.
As you say, pork is “part of the system.” And, until we find a way to responsibly separate the wheat from the chaff, the only way to protest pork is to vote against entire bills.
I’m sure Bachmann finds her projects worthwhile, but like many, many, of us, finds the price of getting funds for legitimate projects too high.
Your post highlights exactly what is wrong with the system. Instead of individual projects having to be sold on merit, they are simply attached to much larger bills in hopes that no one will notice, or the political price of opposition will be too high.
And, sure as we’re talking about it, Bachmann’s opponents are now using her vote against her.
No wonder pork barrel spending is out of control. The price for allowing it is far smaller than the price for trying to exercise restraint.
Patrick,
You state your case very well.
You probably know that one of the earmarks in the transporttion bill is for $1.5 million to reconstruct the intersection at the freeway in North Branch. Having driven in that unsafe area, I’d say that’s not pork.
Don
Thanks Don, as do you. And no, I wouldn’t call funding for the North Branch bridge pork either. The bridge needs to be rebuilt and more vehicles accommodated.
But I wouldn’t go so far as to call it unsafe. There are remarkably few accidents in that area. The issue is more one of traffic than safety.
BTW (by the way), it’s great to see you here. I think blogging is something you will really come to enjoy.
Cheers.