Massive highway bill can be made lighter with cuts

At the risk of being accused of having blinders on in our reading of the House and Senate versions of the six-year highway bill that will be worked on by a conference committee, we do see a major difference between spending $3 million to expand the National Packard Museum and renovate the Packard Music Hall in Warren and $200 million on a bridge to an Alaskan island with 50 residents.
Yet, the two projects were highlighted in a recent editorial in the Philadelphia Inquirer that urged President Bush to veto the highway bill Congress is going to send to the White House. While we agree that pork-barrel spending at a time of record budget deficits and national debt is irresponsible, we see no similarity between a facility dedicated to this nation's automotive history and a structure that is not needed. Indeed, hundreds of people visit Packard Museum and attend events at the music hall each year, but not many go to the Alaskan island.
Such perspective is necessary given that the House-Senate conference committee will be addressing the differences in the two versions of the highway bill. The Senate's measure carries a price tag of $295 billion, while the House approved a $284 billion package. President Bush has said he will veto any measure that costs more than $284 billion. The House bill sets aside $12 billion for some 4,000 specific projects that lawmakers contend are vital to their districts and critics label as "pork;" the Senate measure expands the inventory of roads, bridges and other transit-related items to be funded over the next six years.
Objective criteria
Aware of the president's veto threat, Republicans and Democrats have been forced to take a long, hard look at the "pork." That's a good thing -- but only if every project in that category is evaluated using objective criteria. We say that because we are well aware of the role power politics plays in Washington.
For instance, Rep. Don Young, R-Alaska, chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, grabbed more than $700 million worth of earmarks for Alaska, including $423 million for two "bridges to nowhere," in the words of Taxpayers for Common Sense, a taxpayer watchdog organization. According to Erich W. Zimmerman, a policy analyst, one of the bridges is so wasteful and unnecessary that Common Sense awarded Young a "Golden Fleece Award" for his support of the project.
We have no qualms about every one of the earmark projects being objectively evaluated because we believe the National Packard Museum and the Packard Music Hall would pass muster.
All the other projects for the Mahoning Valley -- the list carries a price tag of $21.8 million -- are transportation related. They are not pork.
Whether the members of the House-Senate conference committee have the courage to say no to the likes of Rep. Young remains to be seen. But the threat of a presidential veto should inspire legislators to temper their demands.