Pawlenty’s first order of business should be to explain to the American public what he learned from the collapse of the I-35W bridge into the Mississippi in 2007. The bridge fell down at the end of Pawlenty’s first four years as the ultimate person in charge of the state’s infrastructure.
Barry LePatner, a top construction lawyer, wrote about the bridge failure in his 2010 book, Too Big to Fall:
‘No, we would never do that because of money,’ said a [Minnesota Department of Transportation] engineer … when asked if financial constraints had played a role in the decision not to reinforce steel members deemed particularly susceptible to cracking.
Yet there should be no doubt that inadequate funding was a key factor in MN/DOT’s decisions not only to call off the planned retrofitting of the bridge but also to forgo nondestructive testing that would have revealed the full extent of fatigue cracking on the bridge. And it was inadequate resources for remediation that led to the decision to put off until 2022 the deck replacement that would have added redundancy to the bridge. Moreover, it was not until after the I-35W Bridge fell into the Mississippi and killed 13 people that Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty gave up his previously unshakable opposition to raising the state’s gasoline tax, thus providing needed revenues for the financial starved MN/DOT.
This issue will undoubtedly come up in Pawlenty’s campaign for president (maybe it just did!). Pawlenty should answer sooner rather than later:
-
Does he agree with LePatner’s assessment? (LePatner has previously helped write such potboilers as Structural and Foundational Failures: A Casebook for Architects, Engineers, and Lawyers.)
-
Does the former governor think that the bridge collapse was preventable, or should Americans expect such tragedies to occur without warning from time to time?
-
If the collapse was preventable, who or what should have prevented it?
-
Does Pawlenty wish that he had done something differently, as governor, in terms of prioritizing spending in the state budget to make money for infrastructure, and then making sure that the infrastructure money was spent well?
-
Was the I-35 tragedy a wake-up call for Pawlenty to pay more attention to aging infrastructure in his state? If so, how did he wring something positive out of the disaster?
-
What are Pawlenty’s suggestions to Congress on a new transportation-funding bill?
— Nicole Gelinas is a contributing editor to the Manhattan Institute’s City Journal.
Pawlenty's first order of business should be to GO AWAY.
Lackluster RINO from a liberal state... NEXT!
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseMaybe the lesson should be that the DOT should spend more on maintenance and less on bike paths.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseTim Pawlenty should respond, "The National Transportation Safety Board concluded that the 35W bridge collapse was attributable to a design failure and was not a maintenance issue. You are repeating a favorite falsehood perpetuated by the DFL party in Minnesota."
External Link
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIsn't funding for the interstate highway system supposed to come from the Feds. Wasn't that the deal when they were created?
And if the comments section is going to devolve into a series of "any guy who isn't my preferred candidate is a RINO" posts, I'd rather NRO go back to a no comments policy.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseIt seems a bit much to take a criticism from a trial attorney, writing with a specific agenda, i.e. to find deep pockets and assign culpability thereto. Really, why not look at the reaction to the collapse, and note how quickly and efficiently the new bridge was built. You are attempting to create an issue out of nothing more than Pawlenty's refusal to raise taxes.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis is silly - the bridge had a design flaw from the time it was built. Ongoing maintenance, or the lack thereof, was not the cause of the collapse.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseAm I the only one who sees the logical disconnect in the occupation, "construction lawyer"?
When we have created a system that is so litigious that America needs to have "experts" in construction law, we really have lost all hope. Maybe that's one of the reasons the bridge fell. What should have been spent on engineering and maintenance was spent paying $600/hour "construction lawyers" instead.
I would love to know what product and worker liability adds to the overall costs of any construction project, much less a project that spans a large river.
BTW, I heartily echo redlim's comments about the reflexive RINO labeling of all but a handful of bombastic Republicans.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThis may become one of the most deceptively demagogued events in this campaign.
The bridge was maintained and inspected diligently without delay or deferral, in fact was being maintained when it fell. The design was a bad one. The bridge was opened in 1964, under Governor Rolvaag.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseDon't get me wrong; I am a bit underwhelmed by Pawlenty at this point, and woulld be delighted at a Christie candidacy. I comment to defend not Pawlenty but the truth.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseP.P.S. My esteem for Pawlenty just rose upon reading of his principled stand on subsidies. Not a cynical political move. Nor perhaps a smart one, alas.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abusewow ... nice hit job Nick ... way below the belt ...
Pawlenty’s first order of business ???
really ??? are you kidding me ? on NRO ??? why don't you join Frum if you can't help yourself from shooting at GOP candidates ...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseRINO from a liberal state... NEXT!" Bob Dole on Ronald Reagan in 1980.
My god, they aren't even trying anymore. Can we ban RINO from the conservative vocabulary please?
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI think DexterScott is just another liberal troll ... could be wrong ... he could be an ultra-liberal troll, not sure which ...
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseScott Wilson: Before you get too holy than thou on us, you've taken some pretty cheap shots against candidates that you don't like in the last few weeks.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe NTSB report can be found here.
The problem was bad design and inspection and procedure issues, not "aging infrastructure." Ironically, one issue was the load created by construction equipment on the bridge during repairs.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseUm, what sources did Barry LePatner use?
Pawlenty did not shift his position on the gas tax in Minnesota. In fact, he vetoed the legislation again in the 2008 session. The heavily Democrat legislature found 6 willing Republicans to override the veto and managed to tack the tax on.
Considering the collapse was based on a design flaw that wasn't fully apparent until after I-35 fell, Pawlenty has nothing to explain and certainly nothing to apologize for on this matter. But if he gains any traction, I expect us to hear about it non-stop.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseI would rather know what pork style highway construction projects were done in the years leading up to the collapse. It's always about too little money with the left, and priorities usually take a back seat to buying votes.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse"RINO from a liberal state... NEXT!" Bob Dole on Ronald Reagan in 1980."
Both wrong. Reagan was never a RINO, and California was not a liberal state in 1980 (it went GOP in every election but one from 1952 to 1980).
But, thanks for playing!
"Can we ban RINO from the conservative vocabulary please?"
I'll quit saying RINO as soon as all the RINOs go away.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse@DexterScott, Not only are you mistaken in your perception that Pawlenty is a RINO but also that Minnesota is a liberal state. In fact, Minnesota is almost evenly divided between liberals, who dominate the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul and the northeastern portion of the state, and conservatives, who are more prominent in the Twin Cities suburbs and the rest of the outstate area. That's why we have have Keith Ellison representing the 5th Congressional District while Michele Bachmann represents the 6th right next door. Oh, I know; Bachmann's probably a RINO to you. Sigh.
Reply to this commentLinkReport AbuseThe trial lawyer charges forth with his objective take on things!
OK! Well, if Nicole Gelinas is done recycling trash, let's point out to her crowded mind that the state of Minnesota has deeper pockets than the team of engineers and architects that originally designed the bridge.
Some questions for Gelinas:
1) Do you always blindly recycle drivel from trial lawyers, or only when it comes at the expense of Tim Pawlenty?
2) Are you STILL really as totally clueless as you seem to be on what has been determined to cause the bridges' collapse?
3) Given that you generally present as intelligent, what explains this lapse in your cogent thought process?
4) What are your ulterior motives to stop the Pawlenty campaign? Why is HE particularly sinister, to warrant recycling a hit job from the man who wants 33% of the largest amount possible?
No answers received = ignore Gelinas pieces in the future.
Reply to this commentLinkReport Abuse