If you haven't already heard, Senator Ted Stevens is willing to spend $200+ million dollars on a bridge for fifty Alaskans, but believes $15 million (over four years) may be too much for an open database of funding/pork projects.

Apparently Alaska doesn't require a whole lot of its senators. Neither does Massachussetts or California (I couldn't let that one pass, but I'll admit that Senator Dole's been a disappointment too, and I won't be voting for her ever again).

NOTE: For the record, I would support the Senate using its Constitutional authority to "with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member" (and, yes, I have a few members in mind). Yes, that's largely for discipline issues or when a lawmaker becomes a absolute liability on the rest of government. But the Constitution doesn't put any restrictions on it. And one-third of all Senators are up for re-election in even-numbered years, so a lot of noise could get us halfway to expelling Senator Stevens.

No, it's not "fair," but to me it doesn't matter. It's not fair that Alaskans get a cash payment each year for having the oil pipeline up there, and still get $200 million (from the rest of the country) to buy a bridge to nowhere.