I have an idea -- why don't we pass a Constitutional Amendment declaring that Congress shall only have the power to regulate "commerce between the States."

That way, all of this wasteful spending will be eliminated at the source. The federal government simply won't have the authority to engage in these kinds of make-work projects.

Oh, wait ...

As Traffic Non-Santa notes -- and which I've noted before -- yes, it's true that pork is not the biggest part of the budget that needs to be trimmed.

I assume you wanted a 'not' in there...

Errrgh...

Anybody look at a road map of Alaska recently?
Not a lot of roads here. We're aren't as old a state as most (we're the 49th, you know) and our infrastructure is relatively sparkling new and incomplete, compared to most states that have been around a lot longer and thus had a chance to establish their's more thoroughly.

Problem is, we can't really drive anywhere in this state. That's because of the lack of an adequate road system. This misnamed 'Bridge to Nowhere'.. isn't that sort of a misleading misnomer? It's being built to give the folks road access to their own airport instead of having to take a ferry, right? Sounds like a reasonable expense to me. I fail to understand why people suddenly want to jump on us for the bridge. There seems to be a lot of frothing from people I regularly read and greatly respect, including Michelle M. and a few others.

Mayor Nagin complained the reason they weren't able to afford adequate preparation was that all the money was going to projects like this bridge. Thing is, wasn't he given a couple billion a while back to reapir levies and the like? Where'd that money go?

I don't think impeding our attempt to improve the infrastructure of our state and taking away our ability to create jobs is going to solve the problem.
In the words of our Uncle: Kiss my ear. You don't live here. Guess that makes it a moot point.

AKRonin-- Just a few questions for you.

1. How much is in Alaska's oil derived superfund? How much additional profit have you made since oil prices went through the roof.

2. How much state income tax do you have to pay? (What's that, you not only don't pay income tax, you get money from the state? )

Maybe you guys can pay for your own bridge this time.

And maybe New Orlean's can pay for their repairs themselves.

Either is an assinine suggestion. How much of LA's income is derived from gambling or tourism?
The money Alaska gets from oil revenues isn't predicated upon market prices. We get a certain amount from the companies who drill and operate here and also a certain amount from whatever flows down the pipeline. Part of this money is put into a fund, but most of it is put into the stock market. We (the state, not the royal 'we') reinvest it and it is the money made off the investments that is payed out as a dividend to the residents of this state.

One might also consider that there aren't a great deal of people that live here. Our number one industry isn't even oil... it's tourism! Which isn't that great either.

And don't worry about the state tax thing. Plenty of democrats here would Love to institute a state tax. It'll never happen. A couple towns or cities may have city taxes, but that's as far as it'll go.

Patty Murray (D, Wa) says woe to all who dare vote for the anti-porktacular bill. She blackmails by saying the members of the Appropriations Committee will examine that rep's state's "goodies in return.

The biggest problem with the porkbusting project is that it attempts to persuade senators/representatives to find and cut pork directed to their own state, which is politically hard. But it is not difficult to find, point out, and recommend cutting pork from other states, which is where the focus should be. It removes the disincentives from the project.

Regarding the Alaska bridge: I'm not an expert, but the biggest problem seems to be with spending a couple hundred million dollars for a few people to have easier transportation. It would probably be cheaper just to just each resident an amphibious car.

I visited Ketchikan about ten years ago courtesy of Uncle Sam and the U.S. Navy, and I understand that you need to take a boat to get to the airport. My problem with the "bridge to nowhere" is that they're asking for almost $300 million to build this thing. For what? The necessary span just ain't that big. If we simply must spend money to improve Ketchikan's practically non-existent traffic situation, how about only $10 or $20 million over several years to help subsidize a better ferry service, as well as imposing fees for the tourists on the cruise lines (the real reason the airport is there)?

Tullock and Buchanan's Public Choice Theory:

apply general economic assumptions about incentives and outcomes to political actors (as opposed to economic actors) and you'll observe familiar patterns.