The Alaska-Florida Bridge

Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) is best known for his $200 million "bridge to nowhere," but that bridge was actually in Alaska, and actually did serve about 80 of his constituents. An article in today's NY Times indicates he also was responsible for earmarking $10 million for a freeway interchange in Florida.

It is no secret that campaign contributions sometimes lead to lucrative official favors. Rarely, though, are the tradeoffs quite as obvious as in the twisted case of Coconut Road.

The road, a stretch of pavement near Fort Myers, Fla., that touches five golf clubs on its way to the Gulf of Mexico, is the target of a $10 million earmark that appeared mysteriously in a 2006 transportation bill written by Representative Don Young, Republican of Alaska. ...

Until Democrats took control of Congress in January, Mr. Young was chairman of the Transportation Committee, and he and his staff distributed transportation earmarks to lawmakers seeking projects. Mr. Young may have first learned of Coconut Road on Feb. 17, 2005. That is when he flew to the region on a plane owned by Corporate Flight, a Waterford, Mich., charter company that is associated with the Aronoff family, which is based in nearby Bloomfield Hills, Mich. The Aronoffs are among the company’s biggest clients, said its general manager, Tom Hector. ...

At the invitation of the congressman from the district, Connie Mack, Mr. Young visited Florida Gulf Coast University for a meeting on the Interstate and other transportation questions. Afterward, Mr. Young went directly to the fund-raiser at the Hyatt Coconut Point.

His campaign records show that he received more than $40,000 in contributions on one day around that time, mostly from southwestern Florida developers and builders. Mr. Aronoff gave $500 to Mr. Young’s campaign and later gave $2,500 to Mr. Young’s Midnight Sun political action committee. [Emphasis added]

Connie Mack (R-Florida) claims he was as surprised as everyone else when that ear mark showed up in the transportation bill, which seems unlikely in light of the fact that he invited Mr. Young to Florida for a meeting on the issue, and then joined Mr. Young in urging the state commission to spend the money on that interchange or Florida might not get any further federal largesse.

The issue of Mr. Mack's participation in this affair aside, it's clear that Mr. Young charged the developers about $40,000 for a bill that would increase the value of the property they owned by much, much more than that, and they cheerfully paid. Then he inserted the appropriation via the 'earmark' process, which means the appropriation didn't have to go through the usual system for congressional approval.

Democrats promised during the November election campaign that they would put a stop to this kind of secret legislation, but so far, all they've done is insist that earmarks carry the name of the proponents. Those earmarks are still being embedded in often unrelated legislation, usually late in the process, which means members of congress are usually unaware of earmarks existence.

This isn't about pork, which in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing. I have no objection to congress critters working hard to bring money back into their states for needed projects. I, for example, expect the California delegation to be working their backsides off for more federal funds for California public transportation.

This is about a system that actively invites bribery and corruption to sneak in a bill that favors some powerful interest. While the situation described in this article occurred in the 109th Congress, I don't see much improvement so far in the 110th. That has to change.