Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rick Santorum, as Senator, Preached the Gospel of Transit
Transportation Nation ^ | 01/09/2012 | Matt Dellinger

Posted on 01/11/2012 12:25:33 PM PST by Happy Valley Dude

n March of 2005, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) and its Pennsylvania counterpart (PPTA) honored Senator Rick Santorum for his dedication to public transportation. APTA president William W. Millar noted Santorum’s “tireless advocacy” and contributions on “both the national and local level.” This recognition came shortly after Santorum appeared on Meet the Press with Joe Biden and vowed to oppose President Bush in his efforts to cut Amtrak funding. “Without substantial government funds or other intervening action, Amtrak would quickly enter bankruptcy and shut down all of its services, leaving millions of riders and thousands of communities without access to the essential and convenient transportation that Amtrak provides,” Santorum wrote in a Philadelphia Enquirer piece later that March. Regions outside the Northeast, he admitted, needed to “take steps to become more efficient and profitable.” But in the meantime “it is critical to Pennsylvania’s workers, businesses, visitors, and most specifically to the more than 3,000 Amtrak employees that we do not decrease funding for Amtrak.”

The APTA release noted that Santorum’s position on the Senate Banking Committee and the Senate Finance Committee had allowed him to play “an important role in securing funding for various transportation projects throughout Pennsylvania.” And indeed it had.

Santorum’s primary challengers are now characterizing the Senator’s fondness for federal largess as a sign that he’s not a real fiscal conservative. In late December, as Santorum was surging in the Iowa polls, Rick Perry began criticizing him as “a prolific earmarker.” One Perry ad called Santorum “a porker’s best friend.” “I love Iowa pork,” Perry said in a speech. “But I hate Washington pork. Senator Santorum loaded up his bills with Pennsylvania pork and even voted for the Alaska bridge to nowhere.”

All true. But a little context, if you’d like: In 2005, earmarking was de rigueur. Congressmen and Senators brought pork back from the Washington hunt and hung it triumphantly at press conferences and shovel ceremonies. In July of 2005, when the final Senate vote was taken on the transportation funding bill that contained the “Bridge to Nowhere” earmark, only four Senators opposed it. And the Republican president signed it.

Does that mean that the earmark-baiting of the other candidates is nothing more than “pious baloney?” Well, Perry and his Texas Department of Transportation certainly had their hand out back then too. (The Governor often cited the disappointing funding stream from Washington as one reason he wanted to see his privatized Trans-Texas Corridor plan enacted.)

But who has credibility in this regard? If 96 Senators jumped off a cliff, who wouldn’t? John McCain, who was one of those four Senators who voten nay on the 2005 transportation reauthorization, who took a brave lead in criticizing the earmark-laden bill, and who is now on the stump for Romney, criticizing Santorum (and Gingrich) for earmarking.

And to the horror of The Club for Growth, Santorum says he has no regrets on earmarking. “I don’t regret going out at the time and making sure that the people of Pennsylvania, who I was elected to represent, got resources back into the state after spending money,” he said recently. The Huffington Post also quoted Santorum explaining to a crowd of voters in Iowa: “In the Constitution it says who has the power to appropriate funds. Congress does. So we appropriate funds.”

Former Pennsylvania Governor and Infrastructure cheerleader Ed Rendell chimed in last week to praise Santorum’s effectiveness in funneling money home. “He understood that those type of earmarks translated into jobs and investment,” Rendell said.

Indeed his support of infrastructure, particularly transit, seems to run deep. From 1984 to 1986, Santorum served as the director for the state senate transportation committee as an administrative assistant for Pennsylvania state senator J. Doyle Corman. He understood what rail meant to Pennsylvania and its cities. “The ‘T’ light rail line in Pittsburgh was my daily means of transportation for many years while I worked downtown,” Santorum said in 2005 when he was honored by the APTA. “I understand the importance of maintaining the various forms of public transportation for those who rely on it every day.”

Midway through his first term as senator, during the drafting of the TEA-21 authorization bill, Santorum helped create the new Job Access and Reverse Commute program, which was meant to address “the unique transportation challenges faced by welfare recipients and low-income persons seeking to obtain and maintain employment.” When the authorization bill came up for renewal in 2005, Santorum appeared before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs and offered a full-throated endorsement of the program—and federal transit funding in general—from a socially conservative angle.

“Robust [transit] systems are also an important component of economic development,” he said. “Throughout my tenure in Congress, one of my highest priorities has been assisting those who are transitioning from welfare to the workplace…. In my home state of Pennsylvania, the cities of Pittsburgh and Philadelphia in particular have provided access to employment for thousands of individuals through the JARC program. The creation of the program has allowed Pennsylvania to provide welfare recipients and other low-income individuals an opportunity to secure and retain employment and achieve self-sufficiency.”

Interestingly, that May of 2005, at a time when privatization was spreading and the Bush Administration was promoting state-level responsibility for transportation, Santorum offered a strenuous defense for a strong federal participation in transportation funding.

“Every State in the country has a transportation department. Why do we need a Federal transportation department?” He asked. “We need it because we have to make sure the goods that are produced in New Jersey can get to Ohio to Texas, or the goods produced in California can get to Georgia.

“The fact is it is important for us to be connected… We have a situation where we have States that shoulder a large burden when it comes to that interstate commerce, and we have other States that are the great beneficiaries.” The Federal government, he argued, should continueto redistribute national gas tax revenues disproportionately to “pass-through” states such as Pennsylvania. “Given the topography, the climate, and the congestion and traffic we bear, it would be a State that should do well under a Federal formula.”

So there you have it. Rick Santorum is a man quite comfortable with Washington’s role in redistributing tax revenue, at least when it comes to transportation. He’s a man who quite likes trains and buses, a man who sees federal spending on public transportation not as welfare, but rather as a way to help people of lesser means get to work, as economic development.

TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: amtrak; default; distributism; feminism; pork; santorum; stealthsocialism

1 posted on 01/11/2012 12:25:41 PM PST by Happy Valley Dude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Happy Valley Dude

Show me your perfect angel candidate.

Wish Santorum had put Los Angeles transportation together. NIMBY killed it.

2 posted on 01/11/2012 12:29:06 PM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy Valley Dude
In general Santorum was a Senator from one of the larger states. The rule in the disposition of government largess is that unless the big state Senators go after it the small state Senators get it all.

This was going on right up to the current Congress. Nothing new to it.

Frankly, some of the complaint about the practice of "earmarking" arises from individuals who know that if all the capital projects were left up to the President (acting through the Executive agencies) they would get the project before the Senator's homestate got the same project.

We might as why the Executive would prioritize other projects? Well, maybe a cabinet secretary (presumably one of his buddies) wanted it in his hometown. Or, like LBJ, he wanted the Space Program Headquartered in Houston!

There's probably enough Executive branch intrigue in all of this that folks who complain about Earmarking probably ought to be checked for their own non-meritorious plans.

3 posted on 01/11/2012 12:35:13 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Happy Valley Dude

All of this pales in comparison to the fact that Romney created Obamacare.

4 posted on 01/11/2012 12:37:05 PM PST by Thane_Banquo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muawiyah
This was going on right up to the current Congress. Nothing new to it.

I have nothing against the practice of earmarking per se; it's some of the projects earmarked that are the problem.

Look. Santorum may well be the last candidate standing that can pretend to be called a conservative. But denying his history of big-government spending is delusional. People should know what they're getting.

Supporting Amtrak?

5 posted on 01/11/2012 3:14:01 PM PST by BfloGuy (The final outcome of the credit expansion is general impoverishment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Happy Valley Dude
You keep demanding perfection you are going to end up with Romney.

Romney ain't perfection.

6 posted on 01/11/2012 3:22:44 PM PST by Tribune7 (Vote Perry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Tribune7

Romney ain’t even mediocrity.

7 posted on 01/11/2012 3:23:18 PM PST by dfwgator (Don't wake up in a roadside ditch. Get rid of Romney.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: BfloGuy
Amtrak has its only profitable lines in the NE. Pennsylvania is in the NE.

The rest of the system is pure pork.

8 posted on 01/11/2012 3:31:05 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: BfloGuy

Rest assured that almost any “projects earmarked” are going to be decided on by Executive Branch bureaucrats anyway.

9 posted on 01/11/2012 3:33:15 PM PST by muawiyah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson