Susan Gaertner: All pork may be earmarked ... ... but not all earmarks are pork

Many appropriate projects would not come to fruition without federal matching funds.

By SUSAN GAERTNER

Last update: April 7, 2008 - 6:52 PM

With increased concern about spending at the state and federal levels, many elected officials have pointed to the abuse of earmarking tax dollars for local projects and have demanded reform of the sometimes abused budgeting process in Congress.

The preeminent example of earmarking gone wild (sometimes referred to as "pork") is the now infamous "bridge to nowhere" in Alaska. The $320 million bridge, nearly as long as the Golden Gate and higher than the Brooklyn Bridge, was the crowning earmark glory of Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, and would have connected Alaska's Gravina Island (population 50) to Ketchikan (population 7,410). For Young, who has represented Alaska for almost 36 years, the "bridge to nowhere" was just a portion of $941 million in earmarks he brought home to his state.

It is in this environment that many in Congress are calling for an end to the abuse, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is even considering a moratorium. Reform is needed, but I worry that in our haste to condemn the worst abusers, states will lose federal dollars for critical projects.

In just the last couple of months, at least two members of Minnesota's congressional delegation, Republican Reps. John Kline in the Second District and Michele Bachmann in the Sixth, have pledged to forgo earmarks (at least temporarily) for their districts. While Kline, Bachmann and others may gain political points by swearing off earmarked funds, one wonders why they would hold their constituents hostage to a problem these citizens had no part in creating.

In Minnesota, many local projects seeded with state and local funds would not have come to fruition without a federal match. Numerous veterans, community development, transportation and environmental projects, for example, have received federal earmarked funds and have provided enormous benefit to our state.

The most recent appropriations bill, of course, also provided $195 million for reconstruction of the Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis.

While we all should be in favor of a fair and transparent budget process, projects such as these shouldn't be measured against a "bridge to nowhere."

The problem isn't earmarking. The problem is representatives like Don Young abusing their power and the Congress lacking discipline to curb the practice.

Indeed, we should welcome thoughtful and bipartisan reforms that would prevent irresponsible spending practices like "bridges to nowhere," but given our recent experience with the collapse of the 35W bridge, let's not make it more difficult to build legitimate bridges to somewhere.

Susan Gaertner is the Ramsey County attorney.

Recent Commentary stories

Google roundup: Hear, hear, for standing up against evil - April 7, 2008

Google roundup: Hear, hear, for standing up against evil - Google may not win its fight against the Chinese government, but bless it for trying. More

Comment on this story | Be the first to comment | Hide reader comments

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS