Mitt Romney will campaign in New Hampshire today to complain about a "bridge to nowhere" that he sees as a misuse of taxpayer funds in the face of a growing national debt.

Specifically, Romney will cite a 19th century bridge no longer used for traffic that was restored with state and federal funds.

Mollie Reilly reports in Huffington Post that "Romney's attack on the $288,000 bridge restoration will run into several immediate challenges":

Funding for the project was overwhelmingly supported by state Republicans, including a significant number who have now endorsed Romney for president. The infrastructure project created much-needed jobs during tough economic times. And it left behind a public park enjoyed by Granite State residents who take great pride in their early-American and colonial history -- and who will be casting critical, swing-state votes in November. It's a curious breed of conservatism that would find offense in the job-creating conservation of a stone arch bridge that is one of the earliest examples of dry-laid masonry vaults in New England.

A bigger question is why Romney isn't campaigning in front of the Oakland Bay Bridge?  The center span of the new bridge was built with steel imported from China.  Problems with that imported steel have led to lengthy delays and billions of dollars in cost overruns. 

If the center section of the Bay Bridge had been built with American steel, it could have supported thousands of U.S. jobs and would have meant safe, quality, reliable steel sections.

Furthermore, since Romney has been a critic of China's undervalued currency and closed procurement market, why doesn't he focus his remarks on outsourcing of U.S. bridge construction to China?

Hopefully Mitt Romney will pick up on the Buy America message soon...