Ultimate Blame in Bridge Disaster? Clinton, if Anybody
The I35W bridge disaster in Minneapolis has, predictably, devolved into a flurry of fingerpointing.
The debate over the backlog in bridge maintenance brought up finger-pointing in Washington over transportation spending. In his comments on the 35W collapse, Bush also used the occasion to rip Democrats in Congress for failing to finish work on the government's spending bills for the coming year, including an annual transportation appropriations bill.It's sad that the lesson learned from this tragedy is to attack the jugular of the political opposition. And it's not particularly true that it's the fault of one party or the other.He faulted the Democrats for exceeding his spending targets, prompting a sharp response from Senate leaders who accuse the White House of underfunding the nation's infrastructure needs.
"And when we try to invest what we believe is a better number, we just get veto threats," said Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., chairwoman of the transportation appropriations subcommittee.
Congressional Democrats and Republicans have been feuding since last month over an Office of Management and Budget report projecting a $4.3 billion shortfall in the federal Highway Trust Fund by the end of 2009.
Oberstar said that the Bush administration's unwillingness to commit to a "robust" transportation budget has led to the neglect of the nation's infrastructure, specifically bridges.
The Strategic Plan of the Federal Highway Administration calls for reducing the number of deficient bridges in the US to 25% within 10 years. That plan was established in 1998, when the number stood at about 29%. Thus, the current FHA plan was established during the Clinton administration. Here's how we're doing:
The blue line shows the % of deficient bridges from 1992 to 2003 (data from ASCE), and the dotted maroon line draws a straight line between where we were in 1998 (29%) and where Clinton's FHA wanted us to be in 2008 (25%). As shown, we were pretty much right on track as of 2003, exactly in line with the Clinton-era plan.
The Clinton administration could have set more ambitious goals, as could the Bush administration, as can the new administration in 2009. But since Clinton's administration set the goals for a 10 year plan, it was reasonable for the following administration to leave them in place, so Clinton's share of the blame is larger than Bush's. Honestly, though, trying to pin the Minneapolis disaster on one party or the other, or one branch of government or another, is pointless - all involved are guilty at the least of benign neglect.