Why Do Some Michigan Democrats Fail The Test

Let us have some fun and do a test in Government 101. Let us see if you could pass the examination by answering this question.

You are a Legislator in Michigan and there is a choice to build an international bridge between Canada and the United States. Which option would you choose:

• Option A—the Government should finance the entire project on the Michigan side of the river at a cost of at least $1 billion and disrupt the lives of several hundred residents and businesses in Delray, Michigan by forcing them to move while Ontario residents are virtually unscathed
  
  
• Option B—the Government should allow the existing operator of the Ambassador Bridge to build its Enhancement Project at no cost to the Government and the State would also receive about $2 billion of matching funds from the US Federal Government to use with their highway system with no disruption of residents or businesses on either side of the border.

Honestly, I would have thought that the choice is a no-brainer no matter if you are a Republican or a Democrat. Unfortunately, not so.

It seems that the House Democrats are apoplectic because some do not want the Governments to spend $1 billion to build a public bridge or rather a public P3 bridge. Or are they really apoplectic because the Bridge Company wants to do build their Enhancement Project?

One cannot really be too mad at the Democrats because the State is completely unfamiliar, with the odd small exception, with P3 projects. You see, there is no legislation that permits P3s in Michigan, although MDOT people at the Cropsey hearings said that they have spoken with Australians about P3 projects. At least they learned how to put a shrimp on the barbie and drink Foster's lager.

It appears that the House Democrats have few reasoned arguments that they can use so they have chosen a different tactic to support their position. To be blunt, the positions put forward by MDOT at the Cropsey hearings were so bizarre that I too would be embarrassed to back what was being said.

The first blow was an article in the Detroit Free Press by Steve Tobocman, the Democratic majority floor leader in the House. I am certain that some members of his party may be pleased that he is term limited after what he wrote.

To be generous, it was a smear on two members of Congress, one Republican and one Democrat so it was a bipartisan attack, because they dared write “letters to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters on the Detroit River International Crossing (DRIC) study.” The July 2007 letter

• “would demand that Secretary Peters direct the Federal Highway Administration and the Michigan Department of Transportation "to cease participation in the DRIC (study)," while the April and May 2008 joint letters would seek a six-month delay in the study.”

It seems that to a Michigan House Democrat this is virtually sacrilegious because it means that they must support the position of the Ambassador Bridge Company. And that cannot be allowed.

It seems that Representative Tobocman’s attack achieved very little other than to make him look childish so then along came Representative Lee Gonzales. Now he held some hearings on the DRIC matter but he was so unimportant in the scheme of things that the best that the Michigan MDOT Director would do was to send a 10 or 15 minute videotape to his hearings as his contribution.

However, he had to get his licks in because Senator Cropsey did so well in the Michigan Senate. The Representative obviously felt that someone had to stand up for the DRIC project or it would be buried. He was going to be their champion and so he too wrote an opinion piece in that Free Press. It is at the least a little bit more reasonable in tone so I decided to fisk it

Get going on new bridge, jobs
BY LEE GONZALES

Now more than ever, Michigan's leaders must unite in working toward a common goal: creating and protecting good-paying jobs for our residents. Everyone should understand, then, the ramifications of the state Senate's refusal to move forward on Michigan's largest infrastructure project since the Mackinac Bridge. [The Enhancement Project is not exactly chopped liver. What the Representative has not figured out yet is that this project actually gives to the State billions of Federal dollars that can be used on their road system since they have a huge shortfall in funds available given the needs of their system. It also means that taxpayer money does not have to be spent on the project in the first place.]

Building a second bridge between Detroit and Windsor would create thousands of Michigan jobs and help protect almost a quarter million of them. [This applies no matter which project is chosen]

The House Appropriations Transportation Subcommittee, which I chair, has heard extensive testimony about this project's importance. But the Senate is holding up the Michigan Department of Transportation budget to stop this bridge project. If the Senate keeps stonewalling, all MDOT projects will shut down on Oct. 1 -- including the development of this critical crossing. [The Senate had extensive hearings too and required the presence of the Michigan MDOT Director. The Representative just seems unable to get it through his head that not wanting to waste a billion Michigan taxpayer dollars is not a crime. The crime is wasting that kind of money and not looking at other ways of accomplishing the same objective and getting federal matching funds to spend. Perhaps the Republicans should blame the Democrats for trying to push through a project that makes no sense. It seems to me that stopping MDOT wasting a billion, even if it means shutting down projects temporarily, is in the best interest of taxpayers. All that is happening now is silly pressure tactics in the media by MDOT designed to scare politicians into acting irresponsibly. Hmmmm perhaps the Legislators could counter that tactic by cutting MDOT's budget, say by the amount of the salaries of some MDOT execs!]

We're talking about the busiest commercial border crossing in North America; $122 billion in commerce crosses the bridge annually, supporting about 221,000 Michigan jobs.

Truck traffic between Detroit and Windsor is expected to more than double over the next three decades. The Ambassador Bridge, which opened in 1927, is already congested. According to studies, if capacity is not added, Michigan could lose up to 25,000 jobs by 2035. [I think if I hear the story anymore about traffic doubling I will scream. I hope that the Representative read my BLOG August 29, 2008 “Cropsey 2 The Sequel: The Cow Bridge.” He would find it most instructive about traffic and about the ability of the Bridge Company to handle whatever has been thrown at them. He will also find it instructive that new methods of technology mean that more traffic, more capacity can be handled at the existing border points. If a truck can be cleared in 30 seconds rather than two minutes, capacity has quadrupled without spending a penny.]

Ontario and Michigan are collaborating on the plan to add that capacity -- and vastly improve border security and redundancy in a post-9/11 world by building a second, publicly owned bridge, paid for primarily by future tolls. The Michigan business community stands united in supporting this plan. [The Representative knows very well that the DRIC bridge will have to be subsidized just like some of the other Government bridges in Michigan. If there is fair competition, their tolls will be three to four times higher than that of the Ambassador Bridge. Moreover, even according to the DRIC DEIS, the other border crossings may well have financial problems as the new DRIC bridge takes away so much traffic from them. Taxpayer subsidies will be needed to support those crossings. Again, if he had listened to the Senate Hearings he would have heard that capacity is not the issue i.e. lanes over the river, but the ability to process trucks at the Customs booths in a timely and efficient manner. It seems that the Representative forgot what he was told by the Bridge Company about their plan for security and redundancy at the Ambassador Bridge. ]

GM, Chrysler and Ford back the project, which will keep just-in-time deliveries coming to Michigan's auto plants and save thousands of jobs. The Detroit Regional Chamber supports it, recognizing that the safe and efficient flow of border traffic is necessary for the success of Michigan's workers and businesses. The road builders and construction industry also back it. [Everybody backs it just as everybody would back the Enhancement Project if MDOT had only helped the Bridge Company with their project years ago. MDOT’s position at the Cropsey hearings about why they did nothing was a disgrace. After all, only about a quarter of a billion dollars was spent at the Ambassador Gateway project which was designed specifically to accommodate a second bridge. That MDOT is ignoring this is something that the Representative should have been more concerned about at his hearing.]

L. Brooks Patterson, the Republican Oakland County executive, supports the public bridge; he understands that Michigan's economic development trumps partisan politics. [The Representative should ask L. Brooks why he called Windsor’s Mayor an SOB, why he did not know about the destruction of Delray and if he had a chance again, would he attend such a press conference! As I Blogged, L. Brooks “was under the impression that the Enhancement Project bridge would never be built. For that reason, the DRIC bridge was his second choice as the only viable alternative."]

Only the GOP-led state Senate and the Ambassador Bridge owner stand between Michigan's working families and the good-paying jobs that support them. Certain senators would rather side with the special interests behind the bridge owner, who is pushing an untenable proposal to build another private bridge that will maintain his monopoly but put Michigan's physical and economic security at risk. [Do you see what I mean? If one opposes DRIC, then one is smeared. It is a nice tactic to use when you have no other position. The Representative just seems unable to understand that one might just want to oppose the DRIC project not because one favours that of the Ambassador Bridge but because one does not want to waste $1 billion and give up $2 billion in Federal matching grants. How hard can this be to explain so even a Democratic Representative can understand it?]

No Michigan company or group supports another privately owned bridge that's not accountable. Michigan's citizens deserve a publicly owned bridge that's regularly inspected and assesses reasonable tolls. Besides, our Canadian partners simply won't accept a private bridge. That's a bridge to nowhere. [Wow. Quite a paragraph. Unfortunately, and it is not the Representative’s fault, it seems that MDOT forgot to tell him and almost forgot to tell Senator Cropsey what is in the Agreement between the Bridge Company and the State and Federal Government with respect to the Ambassador Gateway project. It was left to the Bridge Company's Dan Stamper to do that and he destroyed many of the myths surrounding inspection and maintenance. What are “reasonable tolls?” Tolls such as in the Soo where there is not enough money to improve the bridge because tolls are too low. Again he spreads the story about Canada not allowing a private bridge to be built. Who has said that? Let him name names. He cannot.]

This is a bipartisan, binational issue that requires immediate action. Anything less will put Michigan's economic development and thousands of Michigan jobs in serious jeopardy. [This is the only part of what the Representative said that make sense. Perhaps now that he understands a little bit more than what he did before he can work with Senator Cropsey and end DRIC for good!]