The New York Times got my hopes up this evening, with an article titled, “Two ‘Bridges to Nowhere’ Tumble Down in Congress”. Reuters’ article says, “‘Bridge to nowhere’ stripped from US funding bill”.

Unfortunately the news is not as good as the titles. From the Times:

Straining to show new dedication to lower spending, House and Senate negotiators took the rare step of eliminating a requirement that $442 million be spent to build the two bridges, spans that became cemented in the national consciousness as “bridges to nowhere” because of the remote territory and small populations involved.

The change will not save the federal government any money. Instead, the $442 million will be turned over to the state with no strings attached, allowing lawmakers and the governor there to parcel it out for transportation projects as they see fit, including the bridges should they so choose.

So they remove the earmark for the bridge, and fiscal conservatives are supposed to be happy? What does it matter where the money goes if it is still spent?