New at Reason
Jim Peron takes it to the bridge and analyzes the problems, pork, and politics of Minnesota's tragedy.
Comments to "New at Reason":
Michael Pack | August 8, 2007, 3:16pm | #
We have federal and state taxes on gas to pay for roads.The more you use the more you pay.Why can't we use all that money?Because it goes to a general fund.Russ 2000 | August 8, 2007, 3:36pm | #
but the New York Times notes that $10 million of that "is slated for a new 40-mile commuter rail line to Minneapolis,Same thing happens with public transit, as users of Chicago's Blue Line know all too well. Maintenance funds were skimped in order to fund "studies" and other various money-wasting activity for a new "circle line" which won't happen for at least 10 years if ever.
Chicklet: Sorry, but where was the joke you are referring to? I can't tell if you mean the text, the title or the description. I'm responsible for the text and don't see a joke. And I couldn't find anything that was joking in the title or the description either. You've lost me. Can you be more specific?
Russ 2000 | August 8, 2007, 3:39pm | #
To finish my post:Meanwhile, the Blue Line "rapid transit" speeds along at a quick 15 MPH for most of the downtown-to-O'hare leg because the rails are in such disrepair, which essentially means driving in stop and go traffic is now at least 30 minutes faster.
Ironchef | August 8, 2007, 3:43pm | #
Turning over administration of the Interstate Highway system to the states would be a nice start. We don't need any more Interstate highways - we have enough.Most of the effort in past decades has been on very local projects: for example the Big Dig (Mass road welfare paid for by you and me); and you've all seen this - the widening of your local freeway from the exurbs to the suburbs.
Jerry | August 8, 2007, 3:43pm | #
I wonder about the case of conflicting responsibilities, the state of Minnesota was responsible for taking care of the bridge, which was federally owned. Yet, Minnesota is for a large part dependent on federal subsidies for its road program. But what is the federal government's incentive to make the appropriate funds available to Minnesota? Do the House Reps really care?Warren | August 8, 2007, 3:44pm | #
Politicians are drawn to tragedy like flies to pie.Yes, and they feel compelled to "do something" too. Unfortunately, the tragedy is usually the consequences of the last "something" they did. And now they want to do it again, only more so.
It's a lovely idea Peron, but it could only happen under the Paul administration.
And Speaking of RON PAUL. I'm driving up to Iowa this Sat. You should too.
Will Allen | August 8, 2007, 3:49pm | #
Well, I agree with the author's take on misplaced priorities, but in regards to this incident, I think it likely that absent an inspector saying, "Hey, this bridge is in danger of imminent collapse!" any user fees collected on the interstate in question, or even if the sensers had been set up to collect fees on the bridge particularly, they would have been used for some other road project. What was lacking here was any strongly worded report that stated that the bridge needed to be replaced, and needed to be replaced now. In fact, it now seems as if the people doing the inspecting were saying that the structure of the bridge pretty much prevented in-depth examination, which sounds as if the inspections were a waste of time.To head off an anticipated response, that an owner of a privatized bridge would have had better incentive to make sure the bridge didn't collapse, remember that private building owners, like those who own parking garages, sometimes have their structures fail as well. Commercial aircraft are privately owned, and sometimes the people hired by the private owners to do maintainence do crappy jobs, and the planes fall out of the sky, like the Alaskan Airlines 737 off the coast of L.A..
People screw up sometimes and bad stuff happens. Yes, incentives matter, but they aren't controlling.
Alex | August 8, 2007, 3:58pm | #
Well chicklet, which should be longer? The amount of time passed before a weak pun is made? Or the amount of time passed before someone tries to take partisan advantage of a tragedy? I saw lefty bloggers furiously posting screeds about how conservative and libertarian leaning people destroyed the bridge by defunding infrastructure maintenance within hours of the bridge collapse.JasonC | August 8, 2007, 4:06pm | #
Russ2000 - Sing it brother!20 minute halt last night on the outbound blue line because it was running on one track and we had to wait for an inbound train to pass. Good times.
Old and Consumed | August 8, 2007, 4:39pm | #
Do we know why the bridge collapsed yet? I didn't think that we did.Isaac Bartram | August 8, 2007, 4:47pm | #
Turning over administration of the Interstate Highway system to the states would be a nice start. We don't need any more Interstate highways - we have enough.Ironchef, the states are responsible for the maintenance and operation of the the Interstate highways within their boundaries.
All the feds do is fund part (a big part - about 95%) of the initial construction costs and the costs of major upgrades.
I wonder about the case of conflicting responsibilities, the state of Minnesota was responsible for taking care of the bridge, which was federally owned.Jerry, there is no conflict. The state was responsible for the bridge. The catch is that they only get money from the feds to add capacity or do a substantial rebuild (like a complete deck replacement, say).
Some of the work that was underway at the time of the collapse, for example, may have gotten federal money since it involved safety modifications (new barrier wall etc). But routine maintenance is totally the state DOT's responsibility.
But, as Jim Peron points out in the article, MN apparently though it needed a new baseball stadium (and a new Tyrone Guthrie theater) instead of a funtioning bridge.
I would be interested to see how much of the gas tax goes to the DOT's budget in MN. And further how much actually goes to roads and bridges.
Will Allen | August 8, 2007, 5:30pm | #
The state is not funding the Twins stadium, Hennepin County is. That doesn't make the subsidy any more legitimate or wise, but it simply is in error to claim that monies devoted to the stadium would have been shifted for bridge replacement, under any scenario. There is no scenario in which Hennepin County would have become involved in replacing a bridge that is part of the interstate highway system.Again, I'll wager that once the investigation is complete, we'll see that the major drivers of this catastrophe were initial underdesign combined with an insufficiently alarmist inspection regime. I don't think tax policy or a change in road ownership in the last few years would have made any difference.
Everyone of us needs to put these facts into a letter to the editor of our local paper. Thanks to Bush and the entitlement mentality, Minnesota gets new stadiums and the rest of the country gets to rebuild their bridge.
Marcvs | August 8, 2007, 5:42pm | #
Everyone of us needs to put these facts into a letter to the editor of our local paper. Thanks to Bush and the entitlement mentality, Minnesota gets new stadiums and the rest of the country gets to rebuild their bridge.That'll show 'em! Just think of all the grandmothers you'll reach with your message!
Will: I believe state funds are also mixed in and certainly are in the $1 billion package. But the state first passed the measure to have the county tax imposed, and the legislature voted down any referendum on the issue. So the state and the county are both involved.
S.A. Miller | August 8, 2007, 10:04pm | #
Politicians are drawn to tragedy like flies to pie. Take the Minneapolis bridge collapse. President Bush took a 10-minute helicopter fly-over of the bridge—just long enough to appear compassionate and promise to rebuild the bridge.The media outcry is what makes this a ederal responsibility. After the beating that Bush took over Katrina, just like the nonsense over his father's actions regarding Andrew, they couldn't just leave the states to deal with it.
But you have to wonder what makes this a federal responsibility.
Reason was more than happy to jump all over Bush for Katrina, and it is that pile-on effect that drive Bush to say such idiotic things as "when someone hurts, government has to move."
Kenobi | August 8, 2007, 11:37pm | #
People screw up sometimes and bad stuff happens. Yes, incentives matter, but they aren't controlling.The difference is, a bridge company with a stake in the operation of a bridge wouldn't profit off of a bridge collapse, while politicians, the bureaucracy, and politically connected contractors profit from wasting as much tax money as possible.
Robert | August 9, 2007, 1:03am | #
Wow, Jim, I hadn't seen any of your stuff for years. Good to see it.PS--Hawaii has Interstate hwys.
Robert: Thanks. Stuff has been around, if you know where to look. If you email me I'll be happy to point you to sources.
Xenophun | August 9, 2007, 12:22pm | #
"After the beating that Bush took over Katrina, just like the nonsense over his father's actions regarding Andrew, they couldn't just leave the states to deal with it."Hell, I'm surprised Bush doesn't show up everytime there's a kitten stuck in a tree.