Let them eat rubble

Bipartisan Push to Fix Infrastructure Horrifies Conservatives [1]

Iraq is still a dangerous place, which is presumably why Chuck Hagel tagged along on Barack Obama's trip to the war zone. The danger is not from insurgents but that the Chicago wunderkind might say or do something that reinforces his image as a lightweight on national security issues. Being a Republican from Nebraska and a Vietnam War vet, Mr. Hagel is supposed to give Mr. Obama cover on the right. Some are even whispering his name as a possible Veep choice.

But that's not the only thing drawing them together. If Mr. Hagel ever had any free-market bona fides that could have helped balance the left-leaning track record of the Illinois Senator, they were lost long ago. In fact, both Senators believe in an ever-expanding role of the federal government in our lives. Exhibit A is their shared philosophy that what America lacks right now is a "national infrastructure bank."

All we need, says Mr. Obama on his Web site, is a big "infusion of federal money, $60 billion over 10 years," to finance projects and the bank will be able to "create" two million new jobs. Now why didn't anyone else think of that? The government funnels billions of dollars into pork barrel and job growth takes off.

To be fair, someone else did think of it. It was Mr. Hagel, together with Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd, who authored a Senate bill that would create such a bank. Also claiming co-parentage during the campaign was Hillary Clinton, evidently irritated that Mr. Obama was pitching the idea as his own. "I'm proud to co-sponsor Senator Dodd and Senator Hagel's National Infrastructure Bank Act that we just introduced to establish a federally-backed independent bank that will evaluate and finance large infrastructure projects by subsidies, loan guarantees, and bonds backed by the full faith and credit of the United States."

This, even as two similar such institutions, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, are already threatening to pull us all down into a sink hole. Such development banks are what Latin American reformers have been fighting to get rid of for 20 years. They are notoriously inefficient but politicians love them for the centers of graft and patronage they become.

That's from the Wall Street Journal op-ed page, of course. We'll be writing more about this right-wing theme—that the only reason politicians want to commit public resources to fix public problems is to feather their nests—as we work our way through Tom Frank's book. Watch this space.