By
Partway through President Joe Biden’s State of the Union address last week, he touted federal investments in initiatives made possible by Democratic legislation, and added a brief dig at some of his Republican detractors.
“By the way, I noticed some of you who’ve strongly voted against it are cheering on that money coming in,” the president said, adding, “If any of you don’t want that money in your district, just let me know.”
Biden’s comment was an acknowledgement of a phenomenon that pops up more often than it should: GOP lawmakers have a habit of voting against Democratic legislation, only to turn around and take credit when the Democratic legislation makes investments in their states and districts.
Take this week, for example. House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik issued this press release touting news in her upstate New York district.
In case you missed it, today, North Country Now reported that Congresswoman Elise Stefanik secured $1.8 million in funding for a Water District Development Project in the Town of Massena through the Consolidated Appropriations Act. This funding will be used to provide public water service to the residents of Massena who are currently inadequately served by failing well systems.
It was accompanied by a social media message in which the GOP congresswoman said how “proud” she was to announce the federal investment in her community.
A day later, there was some discussion about the funding for the local project coming by way of the Inflation Reduction Act, which Stefanik opposed and condemned.
But that apparently wasn’t quite right: The funding came from a different Democratic bill — which Stefanik also opposed and condemned.
As we’ve discussed, when it comes to Republicans seeking credit for federal investments they opposed, there are degrees and nuances. For as long as there’s been a Congress, there have been lawmakers seeking federal funds for their states and districts — even when those resources came from bills they voted against. The thinking behind the appeals is obvious: They might’ve opposed the legislation, but if the government is going to make the investments anyway, these members figure they might as well make the case for directing some of those funds to their own constituents.
I’m not unsympathetic to this argument — it’s certainly rooted in the American tradition — but the details matter.
When the legislation in question reached the House floor, Stefanik said the spending would advance the Democrats’ “far-left radical agenda,” adding that House Democrats had “proven” that “their priorities are not for hardworking Americans.”
Stefanik went on to argue in December 2022 — the last full month before Republicans would take over the House — that in the new Congress, GOP members would “rein in reckless spending.” It came on the heels of a related statement in which the congresswoman declared, “We need to absolutely stop the spending.”
What Stefanik neglected to mention is that she also apparently came to believe that the Democrats’ “far-left radical agenda” would be quite effective, just so long as it was directing funds to her home district.
“We need to absolutely stop the spending,” but apparently not in New York’s 21st.