Replies

When an employee or a contractor acts on his own, he can be held individually responsible. When he is acting under "color of authority" then he is acting to further the policy of that agency, so it is the agency that should be held responsible. You can't just tell someone to go fix the sidewalk and absolve yourself of the responsibility to ensure that it was actually done.

This is wrong on two accounts: it charges the innocent (taxpayers) with a penalty and it frees the negligent from responsibility.

Are the taxpayers innocent? it is the government that they elected to represent them that failed to maintain that bridge. They allowed those representatives to spend money on projects that got them re-elected rather than maintain the State's infrastructure. I'm reminded of P.J. O'Rourke's comment that our government is a Parliament of Whores, and the Whores are us.

In cases like the WTC or Katrina, I agree that taxpayer money should not go to reward those affected. But this bridge case clearly appears to be due to negligence. The government the people selected failed to exercise its duty of care, and those responsible for selecting those to make those decisions will ultimately bear the cost (citizens of MN, not the U.S.).

"The government the people selected failed to exercise its duty of care, and those responsible for selecting those to make those decisions will ultimately bear the cost (citizens of MN, not the U.S.).
Sorry; that's not the ultimate result. When the people of MN are fleeced to pay the cost of the "government's negligence", the funds expended will be replaced from Federal Funds gained through earmarks from their Congressmen for other projects, so that the budget can be balanced. The American taxpayers are already bearing the cost of the bridge reconstruction (Federal funding), which is the REAL cost of the bridge failure (not the "punitive damages" yet). When the PUNITIVE award in the millions of dollars comes through, then Federal funding (aka, American taxpayer dollars) will be appropriated through some earmark to replace those State funds lost in the litigation.

Count on it. No State will lose General Funds and not replace them from other sources, and, in this case, you can bet it will be the Federal funds they seek (same ol' deep pockets at work).

“Are the taxpayers innocent?”

Yes. They most certainly are in cases of negligence.

PJ and you can speak for yourselves, if you knowingly elect whores.

The rest of us try to elect the most just, in the Platonic sense, and those that will serve us well.

In our democratic republic, we elect representatives as best we can. They represent us. That makes them responsible for their actions. They should be aware of that when they seek to represent us.

But those who work on contracts such as we have been discussing are not elected. They are hired by bureaucrats who are appointed. The chain of appointment is part of what blurs people of their responsibility. I don’t want them hiding in those blurred areas.