Tory Gattis and I recently generated some interesting discussion regarding mass transit generally and light rail in particular in a series of posts (here, here and here). Part of the psychology in favor of the light rail projects discussed in that blog thread is that the federal government — regardless of economic merit — is going to throw some political pork barrel funds at light rail projects, so light rail proponents reason that we might as well claim our fair share.
Although that line of reasoning is understandable, it doesn’t really make me feel any better about the pork being distributed in the first place. This Washington Post article provides a good analysis of the politics of the new transportation bill:

Three years ago, President Bush went to war against congressional pork. His official 2003 budget even featured a color photo of a wind-powered ice sled — an example of the pet projects and alleged boondoggles he said he would no longer tolerate.
Yesterday, Bush effectively signed a cease-fire — critics called it more like a surrender — in his war on pork. He signed into law a $286 billion transportation measure that contains a record 6,371 pet projects inserted by members of Congress from both parties.

$286 billion in 6,371 pet projects? Let’s see, we have 535 representatives and senators in Congress. So, that’s about 12 pet projects per representative or senator. But if the number and cost of those projects troubles you, just remember that it’s all relative:

[White House spokesperson Trent] Duffy replied [to a question about the bill’s cost] that Bush pressured Congress to shave billions of dollars off the bill, and he said spending is “pretty modest” when spread out over five years. The transportation bill, at $57 billion a year, is a fraction of Medicare’s $265 billion.
Besides, Duffy said, “the president has to work with the Congress.”

In other words, we are supposed to feel better because the annual cost of the pork, when spread over five years, is only about 20% of the blackhole of annual Medicare expenditures.
Somehow, that doesn’t make me feel all that much better. Here is another critical analysis of the bill.