Bridging the gap

Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin invited attacks from Democrats when, during her national convention speech two weeks ago, she said, "I told the Congress, 'Thanks, but no thanks,' on that Bridge to Nowhere."

The Bridge to Nowhere is perhaps the country's best-recognized recent example of wasteful pork spending at the federal level. In 2005, then-House Transportation Committee Chairman Don Young, an Alaska Republican, inserted a $223 million earmark into an appropriations bill to help fund a $400 million bridge between the tiny, rural Alaska communities of Ketchikan and Gravina Island. When compared to other national infrastructure needs -- and even those in the state of Alaska -- it was totally unjustifiable.

Now the chief executive of the country's 49th state, Gov. Palin takes credit for halting the bridge once and for all. There is some truth to her claim, though it's worth noting that the project was on its death bed by the time she was elected.

However, that's not Gov. Palin's problem here. To borrow a familiar campaign phrase, she was for the Bridge to Nowhere before she was against it. She supported the state's Republican congressional delegation in securing federal funding. Only when the project gained national media attention and became an embarrassment to the state did she condemn it.

Instead, she accepted the federal dollars originally earmarked for the boondoggle bridge, vowing to spend the loot on more worthy Alaska transportation projects. Now she and the man at the top of the GOP ticket, presidential nominee John McCain, vow to oppose all earmark spending.

"You can't just make stuff up. You can't just re-create yourself. You can't just reinvent yourself. The American people aren't stupid," Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic nominee for president, said last week, ripping Gov. Palin for keeping the earmark money.

Yes, returning the funding would have been the right thing to do. Lee County, Fla., officials did just that last year when they rejected a $10 million earmark for a highway interchange that wouldn't even qualify as a low regional priority.

But the problem with Sen. Obama's criticism is that he and his running mate, Sen. Joseph Biden, actually voted to let Gov. Palin spend the earmark. When Congress tried to redirect $75 million of the Bridge to Nowhere pork to Hurricane Katrina repairs, Sens. Obama and Biden sided with the majority, 82-15, and let Alaska have its pork. In fact, the amendment supported by Sens. Obama and Biden gave Alaska the option to complete the Bridge to Nowhere.

And Gov. Palin did indeed say, "Thanks, but no thanks," and decided against funding the project.

Ultimately, Gov. Palin made the correct call. Meanwhile, the voting records of Sens. Obama and Biden show they've rarely -- if ever -- fought wasteful pork spending.