Alaska’s infamous “bridge to nowhere” became a rallying cry for earmarks critics and a symbol of government spending run amok.

Now, another controversial highway project is at the heart of a budding investigation. And the tarnishing of both projects is viewed by government waste watchers as an opportunity to press their case against lawmakers’ penchant for earmarking spending for home-state projects.

But some transportation advocates are beginning to fight back, arguing the upside of earmarks, and some states and localities are hiring outside lobbyists to help keep the money flowing to their highway and rail projects.

Alan Mauk is one of those lobbyists. On retainer with the Oklahoma Department of Transportation, he’s arguing to a wary Congress that all the earmarks he’s advocating have been pre-cleared with both state and federal officials as top priorities.

“I haven’t asked a member of Congress to fund a project that hasn’t been a good one,” Mauk said. “If bad earmarks are anyone’s fault, it’s the fault of states that don’t work closely with Congress.”

Oklahoma relies heavily on earmarks to keep up its major roadways. And it’s currently rebuilding the crumbling Interstate 40 Crosstown, an elevated piece of highway through Oklahoma City that will require 20 projects to complete, at a cost of at least $560 million.

More than half of the funding — about $241 million — has come through earmarks, particularly with the help of Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe, the ranking Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

“There isn’t one penny we can’t put to good use,” said Oklahoma Transportation Department spokeswoman Terri Angier. “Our project costs are so overwhelming and over budget that there is no other way to deal with them except to get earmarks.”

The Oklahomans are not alone. In California, a $125 million earmark has helped pay for the Alameda Corridor East Project, a 20-mile stretch of rail that connects the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach to the transcontinental railroad network and major ports.

The project has significantly relieved traffic problems long the Long Beach Freeway, and the rail reroutes trains to avoid roadway intersections that previously caused major traffic backups.

Advocacy work for corridor funding is ongoing, though. Freight cars are still snarling traffic in San Gabriel and other downtown areas. A state agency recently approved a $337 million goods movement grant to divert the freight traffic into a trench and construct overpasses at four major traffic intersections around the area.

“While earmarks carry some problems, these priority-type projects are a definite need,” said California Transportation Department Director Will Kempton.

There were 1,850 earmarks worth $9.3 billion in the 1998 bill, compared with 6,371 projects worth $24.2 billion in the most recent bill.

But many of the earmarks were marked for low-priority projects, according to a federal audit.

Critics call that bad pork and blame it for adding to the nation’s crumbling roadways, tying up millions of dollars for low-priority projects that will never be completed. These projects have also created major political problems for a few members of Congress, especially those in the Alaska delegation.

Lawmakers are still assailing a more than $200 million carve-out by Senate Appropriations Committee Chairman Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) for the “bridge to nowhere,” which would connect a borough of fewer than 15,000 people to the local airport.

Now, Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) is under scrutiny for a $10 million highway earmark in Florida, many thousands of miles from his home state.

The Justice Department has opened an investigation into the earmark for Coconut Road near Fort Myers, which mysteriously appeared in the transportation authorization bill after it was passed.

Ethics groups and earmark opponents, including Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), say they are determined to keep pork barrel politics out of the bill, forcing Washington’s thriving transportation lobby to play defense.

Under the highway bill, states receive money from the National Highway Fund, fueled by federal gasoline taxes. But funding levels are dropping rapidly, since the 18.4-cents-per-gallon tax hasn’t been raised since 1994.

Earmarks take a portion of a state’s federal highway money and designate it for a key project, like a bridge. States are often required to contribute matching funds.

But sometimes the projects are low-priority, the earmark is too small or the state can’t come up with the matching money. So the earmark remains in the federal treasury and can’t be moved unless Congress passes new legislation. In the end, the money comes directly out of the state’s pocket and taxpayers bear the brunt, transportation officials complain.

The Texas Department of Transportation said it has been dealing with bad authorization earmarks for years.

“What most people don’t realize is when you get an earmark in an authorization bill, it comes out of your funding,” said Chris Lippincott, government affairs spokesman for the Texas department. “It doesn’t make the pie any bigger, and it has the potential to be corrosive.”

As the cost of construction rises and the economy slumps, even more earmarks could go to waste, tying up more crucial roadway funding. States with members on high-ranking committees often receive a disproportionate share of the funding.

“Earmarking is probably the most visible symptom of a budget process that has fallen severely ill,” said National Taxpayers Union spokesman Pete Sepp.

On Capitol Hill, congressional staffers say members are bracing for an earmark onslaught. Democratic and Republican leaders alike have called for additional earmark disclosure and even a one-year moratorium on earmarks. The president has threatened to veto any appropriations bill that doesn’t cut the number and cost of earmarks in half.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, one of the groups that sought an investigation into Coconut Road, is pushing for the development of an independent ethics office to regulate unethical earmarks.

But experts doubt many lawmakers will part with their pet projects — a deeply entrenched tool that can help members get reelected.

Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) says he isn’t a fan of earmarks, but he has helped bring home more than $98 million in pork in 2008 appropriations bills, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense. And Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), one of the biggest earmarkers in the Senate, helped get more than $342 million.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who has run on a strong anti-earmark campaign, brought home nothing.

“Many members believe this anti-earmark thing is a passing fad,” said Heritage Foundation earmark expert Robert Utz. “Most of them can see no downside to opposing earmark reform.”