This week, Alabama Republican Rep. Gary Palmer had touted funding from the bipartisan infrastructure bill that recently passed the House and was signed into law. He bragged about funding for a project in Alabama that would partly encircle Birmingham and “[build] a better future for the Birmingham metro area,” he said in a statement.
But Palmer voted against the infrastructure bill, despite calling getting funding for the project “one of my top priorities.”
Indeed, Palmer joined the 200 other Republicans who voted against the bill in the House earlier this month despite having cosponsored a proposal to finish the Northern Beltline, which has been criticized by Indigenous and environmental groups for plans to raze forests and potentially pollute and destroy vital tribal waterways.
Democrats like Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) and Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-California) pointed out Palmer’s hypocrisy. In response to a tweet from Palmer promoting the funding, Swalwell said, “You mean the funding you voted against? That funding?”
A spokesperson for Palmer responded by saying that, if the funding for the project had been brought as a separate bill, he would have voted for it. As it was, “the bill was full of problems,” the spokesperson said.
The funding for the Alabama project, however, has been framed by media and lawmakers as a win for the state within the relatively small bill. The infrastructure bill allocates $550 billion in new spending for 11 Appalachian states. Alabama and West Virginia will claim about half of that, reports E&E News, with most of the $369 million for Alabama going toward the beltline.
For a highway project that’s reliant solely on funding from the federal government’s Appalachian Development Highway System, it would seem that voting for the funding would be a priority for Palmer. But, even if Palmer wanted to vote for the bill, he may have feared stepping away from the party or appearing to support a bill originally proposed by President Joe Biden, standing apart from the vast majority of the rest of the GOP.
Indeed, the 13 House Republicans who voted for the bill have faced ridicule from other GOP members. Rep. Fred Upton (R-Michigan) said that he received several death threats over his vote after extremist Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia) posted his office number on Twitter, referring to the Republicans who voted for the bill as “traitors.” One voicemail was particularly violent and vitriolic, and threatened the lives of Upton, his family and his staff, according to a recording of the message.
The GOP has also been considering formal punishments for members who voted for the bill, including stripping them from their committee assignments.
Palmer’s brag isn’t the first time that Republicans have taken credit for provisions bills that they’ve ultimately voted against. Many Republicans, including House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-California), touted provisions of the stimulus package passed in March, including popular provisions such as funds for struggling restaurants. But every single Republican in Congress voted against the bill, which has helped to push poverty levels to record lows in the country.
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.