The Biden administration has seen quite a few Republicans seek credit for investments they voted against, and as Politico reported, the White House “seems intent to inflict a modicum of political pain” on hypocritical GOP members.
Fortunately for the president and his team, the Republican Party is offering plenty of examples deserving of scorn.
Yesterday, for example, we discussed Sen. Tommy Tuberville, who publicly celebrated broadband infrastructure investments in his home state of Alabama, calling the funding “crucial,” and adding the federal spending on broadband “is vital for the success of our rural communities and for our entire economy.”
This, of course, is the same Tuberville who voted against the legislation that made the investments possible.
It was against this backdrop that the Post and Courier in Charleston, S.C., published a report on an even more egregious example of the larger phenomenon.
A routine press conference on a federal grant for Charleston’s bus system put Republican U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace on the defensive after Democrats pounced on the fact she actually voted against the bill that made it happen.
As the local report explained, at issue is a multi-million-dollar grant for a regional transit hub that will help the Charleston Area Regional Transportation Authority transition to a fully electric bus fleet. The $26 million investment was made possible by the infrastructure package negotiated and signed by President Joe Biden — a package Mace voted against.
But as the Post and Courier noted, the South Carolinian didn’t just oppose the measure, she also condemned it as a “fiasco” and a “socialist wish list.” That did not, however, stop the GOP congresswoman from showing up at a press event yesterday in support of the local project.
Mace, naturally, went on to promote her appearance online and celebrate the federal spending. She neglected to mention the fact that the investment wouldn’t have happened if she’d successfully killed the underlying bill.
To be sure, when it comes to Republicans seeking credit for infrastructure investments they opposed, there are degrees and nuances. That said, I find Mace’s style of hypocrisy to be the toughest to defend.
The GOP lawmaker defended herself by arguing, “If federal dollars are being appropriated, you better believe we’re going to do everything we can to make sure they are spent here in South Carolina.”
On the surface, this isn’t absurd. As regular readers know, 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 opposed the spending, 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. Mace saw the bipartisan bill as an example of “socialism.” Months later, Mace apparently concluded that funding from the infrastructure package would nevertheless improve the economy in her district and give the local community a boost. Several other GOP members said the same thing.
It’d be one thing for Republicans to make the case that their constituents deserve their fair share of a larger federal pie, but it’s something else when Republicans condemn a bill as “socialism,” only to argue soon afterward that socialism would work wonders in their districts.
Biden had a little fun at the GOP’s expense during remarks at an automobile plant last fall, saying to laughter, “I didn’t know there were that many socialist Republicans.” He added, “Folks, look, you can’t make this stuff up. I’ve got to say, I was surprised to see so many socialists in the Republican caucus.”
The quote is every bit as applicable now as it was at the time.