More Border Issues

No, not those borders. Rather these issues which are of concern to Windsor/Detroit.

Here are some more thoughts that you may want to consider.

DO THEY REALLY SUPPORT THE AMBASSADOR BRIDGE COMPANY

I am sure that you were as surprised as I was to see L. Brooks Patterson, head honcho of Oakland County, and Richard Blouse Jr., President and CEO of the Detroit Regional Chamber, support the DRIC project rather than the Ambassador Bridge Project in a Free Press commentary.

We know that L. Brooks was involved in the embarrassment along with our Mayor in a press conference in Detroit where he endorsed DRIC and the Chamber has been a staunch DRIC supporter for some time.

A County Executive butting in again in a City of Detroit matter. Is he trying to undercut Ken Cockrel Jr. before he even has a chance to get going as Mayor! As I wrote before:

• "One has to ask the question, as disagreeable as it may seem given the turmoil in Detroit over the last few months, what motivated the County Executive to make his comments at this time..."

Was this statement a Joe Corradino event? It may be a mystery that can never be solved just like the press conference:

• “Patterson’s spokesman Robert Dustman said Joe Corradino of the Corradino Group handled the invites. The Corradino Group is a consulting firm working with MDOT on the project.
  
  Corradino said Dustman was responsible for the guest list.
  
  “I didn’t handle any of that,” Corradino said.
  
  Francis, Windsor’s mayor, also said Corradino put the list together.”

Bear with me. What if you are these two people and you want to drop your support of DRIC. How do you do so and not look like a fool?

Of course, one way is to tell people that you have examined the situation and that you have changed your mind and are now supportive of the Ambassador Bridge project moving forward in an expedited fashion. That does not mean that you have to withdraw your support of DRIC. All it means is you have looked at the arguments, as an example made by Senator Cropsey, and believe that they make sense today for the region.

Of course, some people in positions of power might be unable to ever admit that they might have made a mistake in the past. People might start questioning some of their other decisions.

The other approach then it is to create a "strawman" as the basis of your support and then when it is knocked away, you can change your position. That has to be exactly what these two gentlemen have done.

I cannot believe that these two smart man and their staffs are so out of touch that they did not know what the true legal position in Canada is. I am sure that they did not want to spread deliberate falsehoods so they are hoping that someone will clarify the situation for them so that they can back off. They made this comment:

• "The current fight in Lansing is whether to build another private bridge across the Detroit River or to construct a publicly owned bridge through DRIC. This is really a moot debate, because the Canadian government passed a law prohibiting the proposed location of a private bridge that would dump additional traffic into downtown Windsor. Therefore, the next viable option is a public bridge, which is what DRIC is attempting to accomplish."

THERE IS NO SUCH LAW IN CANADA!

Do you see how clever they are? Look at what they also say:

• "The next viable option is a public bridge"

Once they are told that there is no such legislation, then they can support their preferred alternative, the Ambassador Bridge Enhancement Project.

Eddie Francis really should have invited L. Brooks to come over here when they met and should invite Mr. Blouse as well. Then they would know that the Ambassador Bridge does not route traffic through downtown Windsor.

They made one other comment that is completely incorrect as well so that this myth can be shot down also:

• "However, the longer the delay with DRIC, the greater the risk the bridge project will move somewhere else. Buffalo, a community that would welcome the jobs and investment from the project, is poised to build another international bridge if the DRIC process falters."

They have to know that a new bridge is going to be built in Buffalo regardless of what takes place here. Moreover, MDOT itself has said that our region does not compete with Buffalo for a border crossing:

• "Myth Debunked: Michigan & New York are in Competition
  
  ►Different trade corridors
  
  ►Different markets for commodities
  
  ►No indication of traffic shift from new crossing
  
  ►Both new crossings needed to support economic growth of region
  
  ►Southwestern Ontario land bridge between Michigan & New York

So these two gentlemen will now be able to switch their support to the Bridge Company after they are "corrected" in what they are saying.

I just don't know why such convoluted thinking is necessary. Why not do things the simple way. Politics!

Again, some people, dear reader, may say that this is wishful thinking on my part again. How wrong they are. These two gentlemen desperately want out of supporting DRIC but are afraid to admit the error of their way.

If they were such strong DRIC supporters, don’t you think that their comment would have been placed in the Free Press BEFORE the vote in Lansing and not AFTER everything was done. Clearly, they did not want to influence anyone to be negative against the Ambassador Bridge Company.

They have realized that the border crossing issue is not “moot” anymore. As more and more people are coming to understand, the DRIC bridge is not a viable alternative at all for Michigan.

Nor should it be one for Canada!

One final thought. If these men already knew the true legal position in Canada and they already knew that the Buffalo competion was a debunked myth, and yet they still made the statement, how should we judge them? If they chose NOT to look into these matters before they made their comment, how should we judge them?

More importantly, we would need to ask WHY they spread these statements if they knew they were wrong or if they did not do their homework to find out even after the negative comments after the L. Brooks/Eddie press conference! That is what really interests me!

ANOTHER BLOW TO DRIC SUPPORTERS

If only DRIC supporters would read the newspapers and figure out that new technology increases capacity at the existing border crossings at minimal costs compared with spending billions on a new bridge and plaza with connecting roads about a mile away from the huge Ambassador Gateway project.

If only they were ever able to get past their hatred.

Here's a story out of Port Huron that is another nail in the DRIC coffin:

• "ID system could cut wait at border
  Port Huron Times Herald
  
  U.S. Customs and Border Protection is installing new technology on the Blue Water Bridge that will use radio frequencies to upload biographical information about international travelers.
  
  The system, which officials say will reduce border wait times, comes as the Michigan Secretary of State takes the final steps toward launching a new driver license that will work with the technology.
  
  The new radio frequency machines, which are being installed at border crossings nationwide, work by reading a random digital number assigned to certain government documents, including passport cards and NEXUS, SENTRI and FAST cards.
  
  Chief Ron Smith, spokesman for the border agency, said the technology will allow border guards to view travelers' information on computer screens without having to type or scan information into a computer.
  
  When a car approaches the security booths, a machine will be triggered to read the
  numbers on the government documents. By the time the car is to the checkpoint, the guard will have information on a computer screen, Smith said.
  
  Having the information automatically available will save 10 to 15 seconds per vehicle, Smith said.
  
  "That is going to wipe out seconds per car," he said. "And that doesn't seem like a lot until you realize that 3,500 cars cross that bridge every day."

DRIC IS AN "OFFICIAL" MEGAPROJECT

I only wish I had found the MDOT presentation before.

As you can tell from these two slides, MDOT admits that their project should be viewed in the context of being a MegaProject.

Without belabouring the point, I wonder now if we should analyze whether the MegaProject formula set out by the Danish Professor in his thesis fits in our context:

• "In fact, there seemed to be a formula at work:
  (underestimated costs) + (overestimated revenues) + (undervalued environmental impacts) + (overvalued economic development effects) = (project approval)
  
  Many project proponents don’t hesitate to use this Machiavellian formula for project approval, even if it means misleading parliaments, the public and the media about the costs and benefits of projects. The result is an unhealthy ‘‘survival of the unfittest’’ for large public works and other construction projects."

Hey, he may have something there! This might be a nice project for our new University of Windsor Ontario Research Policy Chair in Cross-Border Transportation Policy, Bill Anderson, to undertake! Perhaps I could get my Doctorate if he sponsored my studies too, assuming the strike ever ends.