WASHINGTON - When Minnesota officials asked Congress to earmark $25 million for the Central Corridor light-rail project this month, U.S. Rep. Betty McCollum's office insisted that Gov. Tim Pawlenty personally sign a statement backing "Congress' authority to direct project specific funding."
Translation: If the governor wants the money, he'll have to endorse Congress spending money on home-district projects, a process known as earmarking -- and one that's generated a lot of smoke in congressional and presidential politics this year.
Pawlenty, a co-chairman of the Republican presidential campaign of anti-earmark crusader Sen. John McCain of Arizona, balked at McCollum's request.
"The earmarking process," Pawlenty said in a letter back to her, "is in need of reform."
While there is little doubt that McCollum will still vouch for the $900 million rail project in the heart of her St. Paul district, analysts say her attempt to extract an earmark sign-off from Pawlenty raises the rhetorical heat in the congressional battle over so-called pork-barrel spending.
"They're politicizing a process that's already political," said Keith Ashdown of Taxpayers for Common Sense, the group that coined the phrase "Bridge to Nowhere" to derail a multimillion-dollar bridge project in Alaska.
Under pressure from House Republicans, Democratic Speaker Nancy Pelosi is considering a freeze on earmarks, a move that would neutralize a GOP campaign issue but also jeopardize hundreds of millions of dollars in home-district projects across the nation.
The anti-earmark bandwagon got a push this week from Democratic presidential contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Rodham Clinton, who joined McCain in a Senate effort to ban home state projects next year.