4 thoughts on “some advice for the mccain campaign”

1. 

   I know the Fox News talking point currently is that Obama and Biden supported the Bridge to Nowhere project by voting no to an amendment that would have sent the funds elsewhere. Or something like that. Voting no or defaulting a vote as NRO is calling it is a complete stretch of senate rules and parliamentary practices. Voting for an amendment is all together different than voting for a bill. There’s nothing to suggest that the amendment would have killed Sarah Palin’s Bridge to Nowhere.

   More along that line, there is no doubt when she started to oppose the Bridge. It began after she lobbied the federal government for the funds and well after she learned that the project was dead mainly due to national humiliation. Neither did she tell the government ‘thanks but no thanks.’ That’s a complete lie the McCain Camp is passing along. She supported the Bridge, lobbied for it, took the funds for it and then once she learned the government no longer wanted it she then spent the funds on other pork projects. There’s no confusion with that.

2. 

   Here’s the full text of the Coburn amendment (linked, not by Fox News, but by the Chicago Daily Observer, which agrees with Fox News that Biden and Obama’s vote against reallocating the bridge funds to New Orleans could reasonably be considered supporting funding that bridge:

   Text of Amendment SA 2165. Mr. COBURN submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by him to the bill H.R. 3058, making appropriations for the Departments of Transportation, Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development, the Judiciary, District of Columbia, and independent agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2006, and for other purposes; as follows:

   At the appropriate place, add the following: Section 144(g)(1) of title 23, United States Code, is amended—

   (1) in subparagraph (A)(ii), by striking “for the construction of a bridge joining the Island of Gravina to the community of Ketchikan in Alaska’’ and inserting “for the reconstruction of the Twin Spans Bridge connecting New Orleans, Louisiana, and Slidell, Louisiana’’;

   (2) by striking subparagraph (B); and

   (3) by redesignating subparagraph© as subparagraph (B).

   (b) Item number 14 of the table contained in section 1302 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109–59; 119 Stat. 1144) is amended—

   (1) by striking “AK’’ and inserting “LA’’; and

   (2) by striking “Planning, design, and construction of Knik Arm Bridge’’ and inserting “Reconstruction of Twin Spans Bridge connecting New Orleans and Slidell, Louisiana’’.

   (c) The table contained in section 1702 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109–59; 119 Stat. 1144) is amended—

   (1) in item number 406—

   (A) by striking “AK’’ and inserting “LA’’; and

   (B) by striking “Planning, design, and construction of a bridge joining the Island of Gravina to the Community of Ketchikan’’ and inserting “Reconstruction of Twin Spans Bridge connecting New Orleans and Slidell, Louisiana’’;

   (2) in item number 2465—

   (A) by striking “AK’’ and inserting “LA’’; and

   (B) by striking “Planning, design, and construction of Knik Arm Bridge’’ and inserting “Reconstruction of Twin Spans Bridge connecting New Orleans and Slidell, Louisiana’’;

   (3) in item number 3323—

   (A) by striking “AK’’ and inserting “LA’’; and

   (B) by striking “Earthwork and roadway construction Gravina Access Project’’ and inserting “Reconstruction of Twin Spans Bridge connecting New Orleans and Slidell, Louisiana’’; and

   (4) in item number 3677—

   (A) by striking “AK’’ and inserting “LA’’; and

   (B) by striking “Planning, design, and construction of Knik Arm Bridge’’ and inserting “Reconstruction of Twin Spans Bridge connecting New Orleans and Slidell, Louisiana’’.

   (d) Item number 2 of the table contained in section 1934 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109–59; 119 Stat. 1144) is amended—

   (1) by striking “AK’’ and inserting “LA’’; and

   (2) by striking “Improvements to the Knik Arm Bridge’’ and inserting “Reconstruction of Twin Spans Bridge connecting New Orleans and Slidell, Louisiana’’.

   (e) Sections 1949, 4410, and 4411 of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (Public Law 109–59; 119 Stat. 1144) are repealed.

   (f) No funds made available under this Act shall be used to plan, design, or construct, in the State of Alaska—

   (1) the Knik Arm Bridge; or

   (2) a bridge joining the Island of Gravina to the community of Ketchikan.

   (g) Nothing in this section or an amendment made by this section affects the allocation of funds to any State other than the States of Alaska and Louisiana.
   (As printed in the Congressional Record for the Senate on Oct 20, 2005.)

   I guess I’m willing to grant you the point about one amendment not being enough to kill the Bridge to Nowhere — if you can explain to me how this vote against the Coburn amendment is totally unrelated to Biden and Obama’s views on the necessity of the BTN. It certainly does suggest support for it.

   Re: Palin and the BTN:

   From David Goldstein at mcclatchydc.com:

   Q. Was Palin accurate when she said that she opposed Alaska’s “bridge to nowhere,” which became a symbol of congressional spending gone wild?

   A. Yes, but with an explanation.

   “I told Congress, ‘Thanks, but no thanks,’ on that ‘bridge to nowhere,'” Palin told the Republican National Convention last week. “If our state wanted a bridge, we’d build it ourselves.”

   Democrats claim that Palin was for the bridge before she was against it, that she opposed it only when it became a national joke and Congress killed it in 2005.

   Palin did support the $398 million project to build a bridge from Ketchikan to Gravina Island’s 50 residents when she ran for governor in 2006.

   But Congress had already pulled the plug by that time. However, while it had eliminated the project, the money remained and was still Alaska’s to spend on transportation.

   According to Congressional Quarterly, Palin continued to back the bridge “long after it was no longer necessary for Alaska to spend money” on it. She still could have built it, but as governor, chose not to.

   “Ultimately it was her call,” according to CQ, and “not inaccurate for Palin to say she ‘stopped the bridge to nowhere.'”

   CQ says she’s accurate, even when taking her previous statements into account. I would be interested to see information about how the money that Alaska received was spent, because it’s not clear to me that it was spent on a similar pork project. Alaska is a unique state in so many ways, and it’s a big state. I could see how some transportation projects could be justified for that state, so I would have to know the breakdown before I agree that it’s pork.

3. 

   I want a new toaster.

4. 

   Me too. Stainless steel. The ones that cost REAL money. 😉

Comments are closed.