Posted on 08/07/2011 4:16:34 PM PDT by Bean Counter
PORTLAND — One casualty of the coming federal budget crunch could be a new $3 billion bridge carrying Interstate 5 across the Columbia River.
At best, its sponsors acknowledge, the bridge project is going to take another whack. At worst, the sponsors say, are options they’re not ready to consider, including shelving $130 million worth of plans until the nation’s balance sheet looks better or scaling back the project.
The current I-5 bridge linking Oregon and Washington is considered at risk in an earthquake, and its tie-ups infuriate commuters and truckers.
Proponents of a replacement say the nation can’t afford the delays and risk at a critical transportation link: I-5 from Mexico to Canada is the economic spine of the West Coast, not only moving goods and people but also serving as a magnet for new jobs.
However, hours after the House voted last week for the debt ceiling bill, Oregon Rep. Peter DeFazio, a senior Democrat on the House transportation committee, was angry at Republicans as well as the Democratic president. And he was pessimistic about the chances for the one-third share of the bridge costs the federal government was expected to bear.
“I would say that there is a very, very, very, very grim prospect for transportation investment with these people in charge and Obama in the White House, since he won’t stand up to them,” DeFazio told The Associated Press.
He said Republicans want to cut current transportation spending by about a third, leaving little room, if any, for new projects.
In the Northwest, sponsors said they were confident that the bridge wouldn’t be shut out entirely, and that little about a new transportation bill is settled.
But, said Gov. John Kitzhaber, “I think we need to assume there’s going to be fewer resources.”
Kitzhaber has called for bridge construction to begin in 2013. He was elected with strong support from trade unions eager to build it. He’s also courted business interests, who are pushing the project, and he has long ties to officials at the Port of Portland, a key proponent.
“The starting point is: Nothing looks good,” said Mark Rupp, who directs operations for Washington Gov. Chris Gregoire in the nation’s capital. “But we don’t know at the end of the day where the cuts are going to be taken from.”
Aides to the House transportation committee chairman, Republican Rep. John Mica of Florida, didn’t return phone calls.
The current bridge consists of two spans, one dating to 1917, the other to 1958.
Plans for replacing them are ambitious. Six lanes of vehicle traffic would be expanded to 10. Portland’s light-rail mass transit would be extended into Vancouver in Washington state. Pedestrians and bicycles would get more space.
The price tag reflects the ambitions, and has long been in question.
One round of budget cutting got the cost under $4 billion. This spring, to cut more and resolve a divisive aesthetic question, Kitzhaber and Gregoire stepped in to declare the bridge’s design would be functional and proven rather than striking and innovative.
Most recently, in an analysis Kitzhaber requested, Oregon State Treasurer Ted Wheeler found formally what project critics had said for years: The traffic assumptions the project’s planners relied on were too optimistic.
That means, said Wheeler, the toll revenues expected to cover about a third of the bridge’s cost would be way lower than forecast — by $500 million or so.
Kitzhaber responded by asking for options to stretch out the construction timetable, a solution he and aides turned to again last week.
The project can’t be built without federal money, and given the money already spent, it’s not time to start scaling back, said Patricia McCaig, Kitzhaber’s campaign director and now his top adviser on the bridge.
“We still have to fundamentally move forward with a project that looks like this,” McCaig said.
The federal dollars aren’t the only sources of uncertainty about the financing. Neither state legislature has figured out how to raise the $450 million each state is expected to pony up.
There’s also an important vote next year in Clark County on mass-transit financing. Although commuters on the Washington side face some of the worst delays, opposition is strong to two key elements of the bridge, tolls and the light-rail expansion.
Portland economist Joe Cortright was prominent among critics pointing out flaws in the toll projections. He says the bridge can’t be built as designed, but it’s not evident what sort of fallback plan could satisfy all the interests that have signed on.
“It strikes me as very interesting that nobody has appropriated the first dollar for actual construction,” Cortright said. “At some point, you have to ask: Will there be money to build it?”
Oregon & Washington *ping*, please!
Pedestrians and bicycles would get more space.
Let’s see, that’s $10,000,000 per daily non-motorized user.
The gas tax should be fully returned to the states, and let the voters decide whether they want this. Tolls are a valid option (especially with automated collection) so the users can pay to save the commute time.
They don’t need my money.
Heaven forfend we should fix or upgrade bridges when there are millions on welfare to be subsidized.
“I would say that there is a very, very, very, very grim prospect for transportation investment with these people in charge and Obama in the White House, since he won’t stand up to them,” DeFazio told The Associated Press.
He said Republicans want to cut current transportation spending by about a third, leaving little room, if any, for new projects.
Oh, boo-frickin-hoo. That was four 'very's, so he must think it's very serious. Listen, you better figure out how to pay for your own damn bridges, states. Here in Texas we've figured out how to build roads by making the people who drive on them pay for them. They're called toll roads, and while I don't like having to pay for my roads here in Texas, I sure as hell don't want to pay for yours in Oregon, too. WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY!!!!! IT'S ALL BORROWED!!!! WAKE UP!!!!!
One of the few things I think government actually should be doing is infrastructure construction.
Unfortunately the inefficiency, waste, outright corruption, and welfare leech on society is causing America to grind to a halt.
The Mackinaw bridge is an example of where we came from. An enormous bridge 5 miles long built in the 50s in 3 years with no winter construction. Today we couldn’t do it because it would take 20 years.
You mean to tell me that they spent all that money on shovel ready infrastructure projects and they still did not build this bridge? Where did all the money go?
Wait a minute, no money is being cut from the budget. Republicans managed to reduce a fraction of one percent of the INCREASE and gave the President a “super congress” of 12 politicians who will “compromise” on future spending. Since compromise got us here in the first place, I don’t see that tax and spend Democrats have anything to worry about.
A large percentage of the people who use this bridge live in Vancouver WA. Many choose to live in WA to avoid the state income tax, but work and shop in OR to avoid a state sales tax. So, you can’t feel too bad for them if they are ones upset about this.
Of course there is always the I-205 bridge a few miles to the east.
Unfortunately we do have the money for what we actually need many times over. If anything we “give” government far more money than they should ever have access to. Our friends in DC are just throwing money away faster than they can suck it out of us which is why they borrow it.
Simple...just tell Oregon & Washington Libs to ride their bikes to work. That would be = to 3/4’s of each State . Planet Saved .
Simple...just tell Oregon & Washington Libs to ride their bikes to work. That would be = to 3/4’s of each State . Planet Saved .
Simple...just tell Oregon & Washington Libs to ride their bikes to work. That would be = to 3/4’s of each State . Planet Saved .
Right you are. Here in the San Francisco Bay Area the powers that be decided that the eastern half of the Bay Bridge was unsafe ( well part of it did fall down during the Loma Prieta Earthquake). But the lawmakers from Southern California ( after years of sucking up most of the state highway construction funds) didn’t think it was “fair” for the SoCal residents to pay for the new bridge so now we have an extra two dollars a trip toll to cover the construction expense. And that’s what needs to happen here. It’s time that local populations paid for their own infrastructure and at the same time the Feds quit collecting any money for highway construction.
DeFazio doesn't get what he wants, so he whines and blames. However, it is interesting that he basically just called Obama a spineless wimp!
Yes, but probably not at "prevailing" union wage.
$5 billion for a bridge? Perhaps they should build it out of steel and concrete rather than silver.
Union labor (required by PLAs) don’t work cheap.
I'm sorry, I won't be able to help you. It's my understanding that Baynative is managing the Washington State pinglist now.
Gertie is quite an accomplishment. There was no EPA to ensure impact studies of the local Sturgeon or White Fish or Zebra Muscle populations, to ensure that the beach sand would not be damaged and no NLR to keep the Ferry Boats from being put out of business. Yes, it was a simpler and more efficient time.
1954 to 1957. Eisenhower.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.