This was bipartisan incompetence. Plenty of money, but the bridge had no lobbyists.
Jim Oberstar and the I-35 Bridge To Hell
By Erick Posted in Congress — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
There's been a lot of attention on the I-35 bridge in Minnesota that collapsed.
Apparently, the bridge's need for repairs became critical in 2005.
Consider this from Rob Bluey:
In 2005, while Congress was debating funding the Bridge to Nowhere and 6,300 other earmarks that totaled $24.2 billion, there was nothing for the I-35 bridge.
Consider also that Jim Oberstar, now the Chairman of the House Transportation Committee was then the ranking member. As Rob notes
Minnesota, site of the heart-breaking I-35W bridge collapse, received 147 earmarks, which totaled about $495 million, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense. They included “high priority” projects such as $1.578 million for bicycle trail construction, $1.3 million for a new visitor’s center, and $1.52 for streetscape construction.
Oh, and don't blame the GOP for this one. Oberstar played a vital role in securing lots of the earmarks.
Don't believe that there isn't enough money. There's plenty of money to go around. There's just a bipartisan culture of corruption preventing it from going to needs over wants.
« Rep. Capuano's Newspeak for Censorship — Comments (5) | So um, is Nancy Pelosi a closet arms dealer? [UPDATED] — Comments (2) »
This was bipartisan incompetence. Plenty of money, but the bridge had no lobbyists. 4 Comments (0 topical, 4 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
As far as I've seen, the 2005 assessment did give the bridge low marks, but concluded that there were not any serious structural defects that needed urgent attention. It was given a no worse assessment than many bridges in the state and country.
No one, not even the engineers that inspected the bridge, thought it needed serious repair or replacement. At least that is as much as I've heard. Being here in MN, I would think that anything that says different would be all over the news.
The bridge had no lobbyist because the bridge needed no lobbyist, as far as anyone knew.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes.
We need a standing committee of transportation and economics experts to group transportation projects into two or three categories. The first category should be composed of projects that are deemed to be necessary because the safety conditions are unacceptable. After that, congressionally directed transportation spending should be prioritized based on economic benefit for federal transportation dollars. Local and state contributions should be deducted from the size of the project - which should move said projects up the priority list because the economic benefit per federal dollar spent should, in theory, rise as the price drops.
After the list is finalized by the commission, they should be bundled with other projects that are prioritized the same into packages that total a certain dollar amount. For example, $50 million increments - with all projects bigger than that voted on individually.
Along with this bill should be a provision banning earmarks for individual transportation projects altogether.
Okay, all earmarks should be abolished, but this seems like it would be the best way to go about eliminating the transportation earmarks, at least.
Thanks for highlighting this Erick. I was thinking along the same lines that you were but was too busy to write anything about it.
Your link doesn't show why the need for repairs became critical in 2005. Where does that info come from?
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes.