A pop quiz in clout: South Dakota has but one congressman, same as North Dakota. In the bloated highway bill working its way through the House, South Dakota is down for $60 million in special projects, six times that of its nearly identical twin.

Minnesota has eight Congressional districts. One gets nearly 60 percent of the state’s $140 million special projects total. Alabama has seven districts. Two get more than half of the $190 million state share.

For the grand prize — a lifetime case of dyspepsia — guess which districts have members on the House Transportation Committee.

The highway bill long has been the fountainhead of favors, a bottomless pork barrel of roads, bridges, scenic overlooks and transportation museums, but this year’s model sets a new standard for wretched excess. If there were 10 Commandments for fair and prudent legislation, this bill does everything but erect a graven image.

First, there’s the sheer size of it. The total, $217 billion for six years, is 42 percent more than last time, $30 billion over the cap set in last year’s balanced-budget deal. The $9 billion set aside for special projects, money handed out to individual districts beyond the state-share funding formula, is the highest ever and the tilt toward the districts of the 73 Transportation Committee members has never been so pronounced. At the same time, the crumbs scattered among 350 of the nation’s 435 districts should be enough to ensure passage.

Not everyone is going along to get along. A small band of 11 fiscally conservative Republicans, most relative newcomers, has been speaking out against party leadership for betraying the crusade against free-spending government, for being no better than Democrats. Ohio Rep. John Kasich, making the rounds of Sunday morning public-affairs TV, went so far as to urge President Clinton to veto the bill if his colleagues don’t bring it back into balance. Kasich said he’ll fight to cut the bill down to size even if it means spending the rest of his life dodging cement trucks.

Committee Chairman Bud Shuster, Republican of Pennsylvania, doesn’t like being accused of placing election-year ribbon-cutting ceremonies above conservative principals. Clearly rankled, he dared the “more pure, more righteous, more sanctimonious” rebels to cite one instance, just one, in which he offered to swap a project for a vote.

How about three? Reps. Steve Largent, Tom Coburn (both of Oklahama) and Rep. Sue Myrick (North Carlina), all members of the conservative Class of ’94, say Shuster offered each of them $15 million in special projects for their votes. Like Kasich, they’d best not turn their backs on any heavy equipment for a while.

Unless Congress is suddenly swept with a wave of ethical behavior, Shuster likely wll weather this uprising. It certainly doesn’t hurt that his defense is bipartisan. Rep. Jim Oberstar, senior Democrat on the committee, said any suggestions that lawmakers were “browbeaten or beaten into line is totally inappropriate and totally untrue.” For extra credit, guess which Minnesota district Oberstar calls home.