Tellya what, Bill, we'll move your house in the water's path and let the free market prevail.

We have beavers at the statehouse too.

Actually, Art, you and Bill are both partially wrong. The legislative "bond bill" is one of the best examples of form over substance that we have in state government - which is saying something. Dozens and dozens of projects that make the "bond bill" will never actually be funded. In thumbnail, here's how the process works: The legislature votes on projects to include in a bond bill. This is basically a wish list. When it comes time to actually issue the bond to pay for these projects, inevitably the total cost of the projects on the legislature's wish list far exceeds the amount of the bond. So the department of Administration and Finance (in other words: the Governor's office) picks which projects actually get funded. What gets me about this whole process is that every member of the legislature knows that inclusion of a project in a legislative bond bill is but a step toward possible disbursement of funds, and yet these steps are invariably trumpeted as accomplishments in and of themselves - in ways that suggest strongly that the funds have already been secured. I don't blame Representative Dykema or any elected official for fighting to put district-specific items on the wish list. An item on the list MAY never see actual funding, but a project not on the list definitely won't. I just wish they'd be a little more straight with us about what they've actually done.

Mr. Dowd has the uncanny ability to turn even the most positive government actions into a negative!! Flooding has been a problem in that area, funds have been appropriated, it will now be fixed. End of story! As an aside-Ms Dykema will be reelected by an overwhelming majority.

They've been removing the beaver dams, and the beavers as well.

Maybe we should see where the water is being backed up from. God forbid we remove any beaver dams

It's hard to quarrel with an announcement of more state highway funds, but this really has to be put in perspective. This is what's called an "earmark". In legislative process, an earmark is usually a pet project of an indivudual Rep or Senator which gets included in an appropriation despite the fact that the project did not make it onto the "official" list. One of Mass DOT's jobs is to identify and prioritize how best to expend limited dollars on road repair. Their list is where the vast majority of the money in this bonding bill will go. However, individual Reps and Senators get the opportunity to push for projects in their districts that didn't make the DOT cut. This allows for the sponsoring Rep or Senator to announce with fanfare how effective they are at "delivering for their district". Not surprisingly, these things seem to happen with much greater frequency in an election year. Other commenters will no doubt be very thankful to Rep. Dykema for getting money for this perennial flooding problem. For me, earmarks are a corrupt curse in our system. The placement of an earmark in a bill is a legislative payoff for either a favor done before or expected after the bill passes. We need Reps and Senators that not only refuse earmarks, but commit to ridding them from the system.