WASHINGTON -- Alaska will get up to $170 million for transportation projects from unused federal earmarks -- funding long ago allocated by Congress for specific projects that were either dropped or finished for less money than was allocated.
The move, carried out by the federal Department of Transportation, was borne out of the latest "omnibus" spending bill Congress passed in December. Lawmakers included a provision allowing states to spend unused transportation earmarks that are more than 10 years old. The projects must be identified as closed by the state -- or they can be considered closed if less than 10 percent of the allocated amount was spent.
Nationwide, the move unleashes $2 billion in unused funding. In Alaska, the funds will come from at least 90 projects, identified in several lists released by the federal Department of Transportation.
There are a range of reasons why the earmarks went unused for more than a decade: projects were punted by state politicians, required state matching funds were not offered, or some were perhaps unwanted by those in charge of spending.
To use the money, the state must provide a 9 percent match: 9 dollars to every 91 federal dollars. The state can spend the money on anything highway-related, including marine highways, but the law says it must go to a project within 50 miles of the original earmark.
The state is still figuring out how it might use the new influx of funds, and has several months to make a decision, said Jeremy Woodrow, communications officer for the state Department of Transportation and Public Facilities.
But the new law offers the state a bit more flexibility, Woodrow said. "I'd say this is a good thing for Alaska," and it "will free up millions of dollars for the construction industry" and the jobs that come with it, Woodrow said.
The Alaska earmarks are wide-ranging in amount, location and type of project. Some represent leftover funds, with 90 percent of the original earmark spent. For many, none of the original earmark was spent: $1.4 million to improve dry-dock facilities in Ketchikan; $2 million for a trail between Lake Lucille and Big Lak?e; $5 million for an inter-village road in Chignik; $2.5 million for road improvements in Kenai.
In recent years, Congress has pretty much done away with earmarks entirely because some lawmakers see them as a symbol of pork-barrel spending, pet projects for powerful lawmakers and inefficient fiscal governance.
The hold-outs, like Rep. Don Young, argue that it's better to put elected representatives in charge of spending than to put it in the hands of federal bureaucrats.
Young and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) were at the heart of the battle over earmarks in 2005, when some lawmakers objected to Alaska earmarks and the now-infamous "bridge to nowhere" became a symbol of pork-barrel spending. The still-unbuilt Gravina Island Bridge was meant to replace the ferry connecting Gravina Island to Ketchikan.
There are three Gravina Island bridge earmarks the Department of Transportation listed as available -- funds mostly spent on a project now considered dead. The remaining funds from the project add up to $14,246,887.13, roughly 21 percent of the the money allocated in the three remaining earmarks -- far short of the estimated $400 million to complete the project.
Young helped ferry through many of the unused earmarks that are now being freed up for spending. A comparison of legislative lists and the project descriptions provided by the federal government shows that roughly 50 earmarks, accounting for more than $90 million in unused spending, were part of the 2005 "SAFETEA-LU" transportation bill, named for Young's first wife.
More than a decade later, there is still no road to the still non-existent Donlin gold mine, no "bridge(s) to nowhere," no new $7.5 million ferry terminal in Unalaska.
And apparently, the state didn't need that $300,761 to construct handicapped access improvements for the 2006 National Veterans' Wheelchair Games. A reader letter published in the July 15, 2006, Anchorage Daily News noted that the city's facilities "aren't ready for large numbers of wheelchair-bound guests," but that the games were a success nonetheless.
"Sometimes you don't spend all that money on a project, sometimes that project never really gets off the ground," and often priorities change, he said. And "if we choose not to use any federal earmark money, we don't lose it," Woodrow said. Large transportation projects can take up to two decades to finish.
Young's spokesman Matt Shuckerow said that while the congressman "would have preferred to see support from the state Department of Transportation" on the original earmarked projects, he's happy to see the funding freed up to have a financial impact on the "communities they were intended to help." The earmarks came from requests in Alaska, and it is "important to have these dollars in the state," Shuckerow said.
CORRECTION: An earlier version of this article included an incorrect acronym for the 2005 transportation bill. It is "SAFETEA-LU," not "SAFETY-LU."