Death toll expected to rise at U.S. bridge collapse

[dong20]

I read about this yesterday but refrained from posting because I assumed someone else closer to events would do so. Maybe it's not well publicised, though that seems unlikely.

Anyway, I hope nobody here was involved, directly or indiectly. It's a tragedy that such things still happen.

Death toll expected to rise at U.S. bridge - Yahoo! News UK

 

[SpeedoGuy]

The bridge had passed inspections the past two years, Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty said, though it was among thousands of bridges across the country deemed to be "structurally deficient" in a 2005 U.S. government report.


"(The rating) was by no means an indication that the bridge was not safe," U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary Peters said at the scene. "None of those ratings indicated there was some kind of danger here."

I'm not familiar with all the technical nuances of engineering studies but I confess I'm having trouble reconciling the two statements listed above.

I'll go out on a limb here. I have a sneaking suspicion that lack of attention to fundamental roadway maintenance due to budget stringency in many states may have had a hand in this mishap.

 

[mindseye]

I'll go out on a limb here. I have a sneaking suspicion that lack of attention to fundamental roadway maintenance due to budget stringency in many states may have had a hand in this mishap.

It's not lack of attention, it's lack of money (like you said). Minnesota Public Radio ran a story on the state's transportation budget less than two months ago.

From the article:

Nearly half of the funding for state road projects comes from the federal highway trust fund. The prediction is that unless Congress acts to either raise the federal gas tax or find some other source of revenue the federal fund will be out of money by 2010.

The current federal administration has been too-friendly to big oil. They've allowed gasoline prices to skyrocket while freezing the federal gasoline tax (because "raising taxes" has become a mantra of evil for them.) This means more of the money you spend to fill your tank is going into CEO's pockets, than into highway repair.

The federal gasoline tax today is the same as it was on October 1, 1993, before the so-called "Republican Revolution" of 1994.

 

[IntoxicatingToxin]

Yeah, that story scares me. Now I'm going to be all paranoid about the bridges around here, of which there are many, thanks to the Missouri River passing by me.

 

[SomeGuyOverThere]

What scares me is that a bridge collpasing in Minnesota is deemed so important that it was headline news here in the UK.

 

[socoken]

If its sensational, dramatic, and frightening, it will make the news. Very little else does.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

The federal gasoline tax today is the same as it was on October 1, 1993, before the so-called "Republican Revolution" of 1994.

mindseye:

Do this mean federal tax rates or total federal tax revenue? Its not clear which.

The reason I brought up the roadway maintenance issue is that there have been a number of studies conducted in Oregon pointing out the deteriorating condition of many spans and highways. These are all, of course, roundly ignored until a tragedy occurs.

In my opinion this constitutes a "homeland security" issue just as important as preventing terrorism.

 

[mindseye]

Do this mean federal tax rates or total federal tax revenue? Its not clear which.

The actual tax rate (18.4 cents per gallon). They temporarily lowered it once, in 1996, before returning it to its previous rate; there hasn't been an increase in the federal gasoline tax in almost 14 years.

 

[whatireallywant]

This is going to add to my paranoia about going on highway bridges!

Just about every time I drive on one, I think about "It could possibly collapse while I'm up here!" And that was before I heard this news (first heard it this morning.)

 

[SpeedoGuy]

The actual tax rate (18.4 cents per gallon). They temporarily lowered it once, in 1996, before returning it to its previous rate; there hasn't been an increase in the federal gasoline tax in almost 14 years.

The conclusion I gather from this, then, is federal funding for roadway maintenance has long since fallen behind inflation despite a clear increase in the number of vehicles and miles driven.

Would it be reasonable to conclude, then, that the states are complicit for failing to make up for the shortfall in federal dollars toward highway maintenance?

In either case, shifting the tax burden from the feds to the states hardly constitutes a savings for taxpayers (although it may allow a few DC politicians to posture and grandstand about tax policy).

Just interested in these questions.

 

[mindseye]

The conclusion I gather from this, then, is federal funding for roadway maintenance has long since fallen behind inflation despite a clear increase in the number of vehicles and miles driven.

Would it be reasonable to conclude, then, that the states are complicit for failing to make up for the shortfall in federal dollars toward highway maintenance?

Heh. Funny you mention that; what's going on at the state level, at least in Minnesota, mirrors what's going on at the federal level:

As a result of Democratic victories in the 2006 elections, the Minnesota State House changed party control this year. Recognizing the need to make up for lost revenues, the legislature passed a gasoline tax increase in May, which was vetoed by Republican governor Tim Pawlenty.

Of course, even if the governor had signed the bill, it's unlikely that the money would have gotten to this bridge in time, but who knows how many bridges are "on deck"?

 

[chico8]

The biggest issue here is that a lot of US infrastructure was built in the late 40s, 50s and 60s. Nothing lasts forever and without adequate maintenance, things are bound to fail.

Given that the republicans have slashed highway maintenance budgets, it's not surprising that this happened. Be prepared, because more are on their way. There's simply no possible way for all bridges to be repaired/replaced at once.

Deferred maintenance is a sign of a society on the decline.

 

[SpeedoGuy]

Recognizing the need to make up for lost revenues, the legislature passed a gasoline tax increase in May, which was vetoed by Republican governor Tim Pawlenty.

As I feared.

It seems governor Pawlenty is gonna have some 'splainin' to do.

 

[b.c.]

Whether it's highway and roadway maintenance, the construction and reliability of levees, or the safety and maintenance of airports, officials (elected and otherwise) who put monetary constraints, politics, and personal agendas ahead of the safety and welfare of the public violate a trust.

A disaster becomes more so a tragedy when it is one that possibly could have been avoided.

Our hearts go out to the victims and their families.

 

[IntoxicatingToxin]

I just saw this video on MSN... thought it was interesting... MSN video

 

[SteveWood]

I predict the following short-term results: a rapid increase in talk about funding for highway maintenance at Federal and state levels, and a slew of scary stories on your local news about bridges in your area that are about to collapse from neglect. Sadly, people often don't react to potential disasters until one actually happens. In theory, everybody understands that bridges need to be maintained or they fall down. However, until yesterday none had actually fallen down for quite a while, so it was easier to ignore the issue. In fairness to politicians, the public shares some of the blame for inadequate highway funding by loudly protesting BOTH tax increases AND spending cuts in other programs to shift money to highways. The money has to come from somewhere, folks.

A second factor (not an excuse, but a factor) is that big bridges in urban areas - like the I-35W bridge in Mpls - are hell to replace. Because they carry huge traffic volumes, closing them for replacement in place is almost out of the question, and there's little or no room to build another bridge nearby, even if funding were available.

 

[Principessa]

As I feared. It seems governor Pawlenty is gonna have some 'splainin' to do.

More proof that when Republicans rule, innocent people die.

 

[bobabooey69]

Screw safer roadways and bridges, let's spend one trillion dollars on Iraq instead!

Cost of Iraq war could surpass $1 trillion - Eye on the Economy - MSNBC.com

 

[SpeedoGuy]

I predict the following short-term results: a rapid increase in talk about funding for highway maintenance at Federal and state levels, and a slew of scary stories on your local news about bridges in your area that are about to collapse from neglect.

Concur. Its happening as we write.

Sadly, people often don't react to potential disasters until one actually happens.... However, until yesterday none had actually fallen down for quite a while, so it was easier to ignore the issue.

Again, concur. There were plenty of bi-partisan studies prior to Sep 11th 2001 highlighting the weaknesses and loopholes in the US aviation security system. Sadly, they were ignored because it was deemed much more important to spend millions of dollars demonstrating that the president had indeed lied about a blowjob.

In fairness to politicians, the public shares some of the blame for inadequate highway funding by loudly protesting BOTH tax increases AND spending cuts in other programs to shift money to highways. The money has to come from somewhere, folks.

Again, concur. The citizens wanted less government. They got it.

 

[dong20]

What scares me is that a bridge collpasing in Minnesota is deemed so important that it was headline news here in the UK.

Perhaps because the UK media takes an interest in events outside its own back yard? Also, it's sensationalism, which sells.