Vote no and take the dough

Vulnerable CA Republicans sought infrastructure dollars after slamming the bipartisan law

The four House incumbents join a time-honored tradition: “Vote no and take the dough.”

By Lara Korte and Melanie Mason

To California Republicans, the bipartisan infrastructure law was “terrible,” “reckless” and “the last thing middle class families need.”

But once it opened a spigot of funding, they were eager to ask for the cash.

Four vulnerable House Republicans — Reps. Mike Garcia, Ken Calvert, David Valadao and Young Kim — all voted against the law in 2021, but subsequently lobbied the Department of Transportation for hundreds of millions of dollars for bus, road and other transit projects, according to letters obtained by Playbook.

The law, which passed with bipartisan support, is now seen as a signature legislative accomplishment of the Biden-Harris administration.

There’s a long tradition of squabbling over members who “vote no and take the dough.” Democrats say such actions are the height of hypocrisy, while some Republicans say once a bill becomes law, it’s their duty as a representative to try to secure a piece of the pie. Nay-voters are often dinged for publicly celebrating projects funded by legislation they opposed. But the missives from these four California Republicans reveal how the lawmakers actively angled for funds.

Valadao, who is running against former Assemblymember Rudy Salas in the Central Valley’s CA-13, originally blasted the multi-trillion-dollar package, saying it could become the “most expensive piece of legislation” in American history and one that could severely burden middle-class families.

He had much nicer things to say years later, when he wrote letters to Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg requesting grants for local projects, including a pedestrian bridge over a highway that bisected the city of Hanford.

“The project will boost commercial and business opportunities as it will provide a safe and convenient route to grocery stores, shopping centers, schools, healthcare, and recreational activities,” the congressmember wrote.

Valadao asked for at least $168 million in funding from the package in 2023 and 2024, according to the letters. It’s unclear how much of that was granted.

His campaign, as well as Garcia’s, didn’t respond to a request for comment.

Garcia, meanwhile, kept up his public bashing of the legislation long after he cast his “no” vote — and as the behind-the-scenes jockeying for dollars that he participated in was well underway. He appeared on Fox Business twice last year to say it was partially to blame for rising inflation.

At the time of those TV hits, however, Garcia had already boosted a number of grant applications from his district, including requests by the city of Santa Clarita to fund new zero-emission buses and a Los Angeles County ask for a hydrology and debris flow study for the community around Castaic Lake. (The latter ended up receiving $3.2 million from the Federal Highway Administration.)

Garcia, who is running against Democrat George Whitesides in one of the most fiercely contested House races in the country, wrote or co-signed seven letters to Buttigieg backing at least $69 million in requests for funding from the infrastructure law.

The Santa Clarita Republican also knocked the law’s emphasis on equality and equity, telling one radio program “you don’t pay for equality through an infrastructure bill.” But this year he supported an application for a “Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity” grant, touting how the city of Lancaster’s proposed safety and connectivity project would serve disadvantaged communities.

Garcia also joined fellow targeted Republicans Calvert and Kim in supporting a $44 million request from Metrolink — Southern California’s regional passenger rail network — that sought to replace some of the system’s oldest and most polluting locomotives with new, cleaner trains.

Kim, who’s in a less-competitive race against Democrat Joe Kerr for her Orange County seat, said at the time of her “no” vote that she could not “in good conscience” support the package, arguing it would raise prices and endanger the country’s economic recovery.

“Rep. Kim has never taken credit for something she voted against. She will always fight to secure resources for her district — that’s the duty of a member of Congress,” a Kim spokesperson said in a statement.

Calvert — now fending off a challenge from Democrat Will Rollins — went on a tirade against the law in a 2021 Facebook post, where he claimed it was “reckless spending” that would further inflame inflation. The final deal, he said, “erodes our individual liberties and freedoms.”

In the following years he would request at least $100 million in bipartisan infrastructure law funds for transportation projects in the district.

Calvert, in a statement, said he’s proud of his record bringing home money for Californians and that it’s disingenuous to argue that members who vote against the bill should turn down money for projects that they did support just because they disagreed with other items in the package.

“The bill easily could have received more support from Republicans if it hadn’t been so recklessly overloaded [with] other wasteful programs,” he said.