Greg Mankiw asserts that the "Democratic Party is attacking some Republican congressmen for both opposing the stimulus bill and also helping direct some stimulus spending into their districts," and -- correctly, given the premise -- goes on to argue that the alleged attacks are illogical. The problem with Mankiw's argument can be easily seen when you examine what the Democrats are actually arguing:
Democratic National Committee Chairman Tim Kaine is holding a conference call today with reporters to counter GOP criticism of the stimulus bill as the one-year anniversary of the legislation approaches. Democrats are steamed that Republicans, who almost unanimously opposed the bill, have also touted money for projects in their home states. “All but three Republicans in Congress voted against the ARRA, but scores of them have attended ribbon cuttings, taken credit for projects in press releases or even noted the job creating potential of projects in their districts and states in letters to federal agencies seeking funds from the Recovery Act,” said the DNC in a statement.
The Democrats, in other words, aren't attacking Republicans in Congress for refusing to take stimulus money for their districts that they're entitled to under the law (they couldn't do in any case, although Republican governors might be able to). Rather, they're attacking them for taking credit for policies they strongly opposed, which is entirely fair. To use Mankiw's analogy, it's not hypocrisy to keep the money from tax cuts you opposed -- the tax cuts will remain in place either way -- but it certainly would be hypocrisy to claim credit for the lower taxes of your wealthy constituents if you voted against them. The attack on Republican members of Congress who voted against the stimulus and then take credit for its benefits among their constituents, hence implying their support, is fully justified.
--Scott Lemieux
