Ed Luce of the Financial Times made an astute observation today, regarding the mostly Republican group of senators that filibustered the most recent legislation to invest $60 billion in creating infrastructure jobs:
Until now, America has never faced an ideological divide on infrastructure: both parties accepted the need to upgrade roads, dams, bridges, energy and water systems … We need go back only to 2005 when a Republican-controlled Capitol Hill pushed through the infamous $280bn Highways Act, which was the largest transport bill in US history. Dubbed the “Bridge to Nowhere” because it was stuffed with boondoggles, including the notorious $223m Alaskan bridge to an island of 50 people already served by ferry, the bill won near-unanimous support. A few years later, those seem like the good old days.
That's right, just six years ago, Congress passed a massive infrastructure bill with near unanimous support: 412-8 in the House, 91-4 in the Senate.
So committed to cause of infrastructure was that Republican-controlled Congress in 2005, that they weren't concerned that some of the 6,361 earmarked projects may not have constituted the most efficient use of taxpayer dollars.
But today? At a time when the need for jobs is painfully greater than six years ago?
A Democratic president proposes an infrastructure bill to create jobs. And every Senate Republican filibusters it.
A Democratic president proposal an infrastructure bill that does not increase the deficit. And every Senate Republican filibusters it.
A Democratic president proposes an infrastructure bill with no earmarks at all. And every Senate Republican filibusters it.
A Democratic president incorporates a bipartisan proposal for an independent infrastructure bank precisely so decisions about funding projects can be made based on the merits instead of on crude earmark politics. And every Senate Republican filibusters it.
Many senators from 2005 are no longer in Congress, as some voters were not impressed with their results in 2006 and 2008.
Yet, there are 25 senators who are still around — including current Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell — who decided in 2005 that the “Bridge to Nowhere” was good enough for your taxpayer dollars, but President Obama's infrastructure bill was not.
Those 25 senators are:
Sen. Sessions (R-Ala.)
Sen. Shelby (R-Ala.)
Sen. Murkowski (R-Alaska)
Sen. Lieberman (I-Conn.)
Sen. Chambliss (R-Ga.)
Sen. Isakson (R-Ga.)
Sen. Crapo (R-Idaho)
Sen. Lugar (R-Ind.)
Sen. Grassley (R-Iowa)
Sen. McConnell (R-Ky.)
Sen. Vitter (R-La.)
Sen. Collins (R-Me.)
Sen. Snowe (R-Me.)
Sen. Cochran (R-Miss.)
Sen. Nelson (D-Neb.)
Sen. Burr (R-N.C.)
Sen. Coburn (R-Okla.)
Sen. Inhofe (R-Okla.)
Sen. DeMint (R-S.C.)
Sen. Graham (R-S.C)
Sen. Thune (R-S.D.)
Sen. Alexander (R-Tenn.)
Sen. Hutchison (R-Tex.)
Sen. Hatch (R-Utah)
Sen. Enzi (R-Wyo.)
These are your champions of hypocrisy. These are the people who support infrastructure only when it might help them get re-elected.
These are the people who are standing in the way.
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.