‘STICK A FORK IN CONGRESSIONAL PORK’: That’s the slogan for a new effort by 10 senators to permanently ban earmarks, amid renewed interest on Capitol Hill in lifting the ban. Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), one of the sponsors, said “Republicans were beaten like a borrowed mule” in 2006 in part because of the waste and corruption associated with earmarks and suggested the party “not test the voters again” in 2018. The nine Republicans and lone Democrat, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, introduced a bill Tuesday that would create a procedural obstacle to any attempt to direct spending to a “specific recipient or group of beneficiaries.”

Better or worse? Many have noted that the absence of earmarks have made it harder to pass transportation bills, but Steve Ellis, vice president of Taxpayers for Common Sense, would like to remind everybody that earmarks are not “some sort of magic pixie dust to move legislation” and that indeed, since the ban, Congress has passed a five-year transportation bill and finally got water bills back on regular order. In an email to your MT host, Ellis blamed “divided government (until recently) and the [Budget Control Act] budget caps” for legislative delays.

SO, THOUGHTS? We checked in with senators Tuesday about the supposed draft of the White House’s infrastructure “principles.” Whether they had read the document or not, Democrats and Republicans had the same question: Where’s the money? “I’m just trying to figure out where the revenue’s gonna come from,” Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) told reporters, adding that Republicans turned down an “opportunity to lock down some money on the public side in the tax legislation” last year. But Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) remains an optimist, saying there’s “a bipartisan group that wants to get this done.”

A step back? Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.) mentioned that she is concerned about how much of the plan will involve broadband infrastructure. “One thing I’m going to make sure is in an infrastructure discussion is broadband and broadband deployment,” she said. “I think there was maybe a withdrawal somewhat in the principles that were in that document, so I’d like to see that fleshed out a bit.”