$700 Billion for Wall Street, No Money for Health Insurance and Infrastructure

The New York Times asks a great question:

How is it that the administration and Congress, which have not tried to find huge amounts of money to, say, improve the nation’s health insurance system or repair bridges and tunnels, can now be ready to come up with $700 billion to rescue the financial system?

And then punts....

[This] question will surely come up again, involving as it does not just issues of spending policy but also more profound questions about national aspirations.

I understand that the goal is for Treasury to eventually resell toxic mortgages, making the price tag possibly less than $700 billion. And I'll trust that this action is necessary to avoid a greater catastrophe. But can someone answer the NY Times question?

-Law Dude

PS- I don't think anyone can argue that earmarks are a good thing. But on days when Congress is expected to spend 700 BILLION DOLLARS, McCain's railing against a few million spent on pet projects seems a bit out of place.