Bridge plan falling down

By The Daily Progress

Published: September 21, 2008

Last week, a convoy of police and rescue vehicles led the first convoy over the new Interstate 35 bridge in Minneapolis, not much more than a year after the old bridge collapsed, killing 13 people and injuring 145.

And last week the federal Government Accountability Office said that the nation’s bridges still are not being repaired quickly enough.
The new Minneapolis bridge is an anomaly, in almost every way.

It was completed on budget and under deadline. What’s more, the new structure is not a standard-issue bridge. It features smart technology — sensors that allow it to self-monitor critical areas such as load handling, and expansion and contraction, and feed that data back to engineers.
Because of the high level of publicity surrounding the bridge collapse, the replacement bridge was put on a fast track.
That serves as a shocking contrast to the progress of other bridge projects, which languish due to a lack of direction and dearth of funding standards.
The bridge fund should be directed toward bridges most in need of repair or replacement.

Instead, says the GAO, the standards for apportioning money have become so broad that virtually any bridge is eligible for funding.
In addition, there are so many transportation programs — more than 100 — that it has grown impossible to target money toward the greatest needs.
Instead, money often is parceled out piecemeal. That makes politicians look good — sending pork back home often does — but it fails to address the greatest common good.
The Federal Highway Administration issued a statement saying in part: “… Congress’ insistence on establishing over 100 federal transportation programs presents states with needless overlaps, conflicting guidance and cumbersome process requirements.” It reminded Congress that it has called for a significant reduction in the quantity of programs so as to improve quality — that is, to provide “clearer direction on how to ensure that crucial infrastructure needs are fully met.”

Ironically, the total number of structurally deficient bridges declined 22 percent between 1998 and 2007. But many of those bridges were rural, or locally owned.
Such is the result of having 100-plus transportation programs. Money gets parceled out here and there in relatively small amounts. That level of funding may be sufficient to upgrade smaller or less damaged bridges.
But it does nothing for large urban bridges that carry the most traffic and may be at the highest risk. Those structures are “too expensive” to fix, and money parceled in their direction has little impact.
Critics have said that the bridge fund needs more money — and that may be true.

But Congress needs to ensure that the money that is available is directed more effectively.
Targeting a few big projects will not win political influence, in the way that spreading money around wins influence.
But it may save lives.