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 demanded 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 in the GOP presidential campaign of anti-earmark crusader John McCain, balked at McCollum's demand.
"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 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 multi-million-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 around the nation.
The anti-earmark bandwagon received a push this week from Democratic presidential contenders Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who joined McCain in a Senate effort to ban home state projects next year.