Earmarks do not represent an efficient use of taxpayers' money  Earmarks usually represent expensive programs of little worth to the American people. As the main means of pork barrel politics, earmarks are typically vanity projects with little economic benefit. Examples include the Alaskan “Bridge to Nowhere” (a $400 million project to connect an island community of just 50 people to the mainland), [1] $1 million for shuttle buses at Western Kentucky University, [2] and a grant of $300 000 for the Polynesian Voyaging Society of Hawaii. [3] Worse, a recent Harvard Business School study found that states which received the most federal spending via earmarks from well-connected Congressmen actually suffered economically as a result, because the federal money crowded out private investment and distorted the local jobs market. [4]  [1] Volpe, Paul, ‘Politifact: ‘Bridge’ Going Nowhere Before Palin Killed It’, 2008  [2] WKU News, ‘Funding secured for 2 more projects’, 2009  [3] Mendoza, Jim, ‘McCain criticizes Voyaging Society earmark’, 2010  [4] Coval, Joshua et al., ‘Do Powerful Politicians Cause Corporate Downsizing?’, 2011