I said the other day that that bridge collapse in Minneapolis, would end up being a political tool. I pointed up one leftie blogger yesterday, and have noted several more in my travels. (The one I mentioned, by the way, is now squealing like a stuck pig that I misrepresented his intentions, which of course I did not.)
But, of course, here come the remainder of the democrats, Dirty Harry Reid at the head of the mob screaming the old Bill Clinton line “invest in America” . Politico says: [1]
It took less than a day for the disastrous bridge collapse in Minneapolis to turn into a political uproar on Capitol Hill.
As Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) opened the Thursday session of the Senate, he warned that the bridge disaster was a “wake-up call” regarding infrastructure investment across the country.
…
“This is what I worry about every day. The lack of investment in infrastructure is frightening,” Murray said. “This is what [Bush] is threatening to veto — investment in infrastructure for [roads] we go to work on every day.”
And, of course, the Democrats join together in the Iraq Chours:
Reid even suggested that Bush has been too distracted by the Iraq war and post-Sept. 11 national security needs to focus on the country’s water, sewer and transportation infrastructure.
“Since 9/11, we have taken our eye off the ball,” Reid said.
All that, of course, is utter nonsense. The agreement under which that bridge, and indeed, most bridges on the Interstate system were built, specifically stated that the state… not the federal government was responsible for the upkeep and maintenance of that bridge, even though it was to be kept to Federal upkeep standards. It should be further noted, the state government up in Minnesota is rather heavily weighted toward the Democratic party. So, whose fault is this, again? Of course, their push, lately, in terms of spending tax money, has been toward spending on welfare programs such as health care, etc.. infrastructure, ends up being a poor stepchild to socialist spending.
As such, laying this at the feet of congressional Republicans, is disingenuous at least, and in truth ludicrous.
The argument, of course, is that the collapse of that bridges caused by lower taxes. The complaint, is that because of those lower taxes and the resulting lower income, we are unable to support our infrastructure. This, of course, assumes two things, which are not true:
- Tax cuts produce lower income in the tax coffers
- The whole thing is a zero sum game.
Even if we assume both, just for the sake of argument, does it not stand to reason that if we were spending less on social programs, and direct payments to citizens, out of the Federal and state treasuries, that we would be able to spend more on infrastructure issues?
If there is blame to be placed at the financial level of governmental involvement, it is the irresponsible, and frankly unconstitutional spending on socialist programs that is forced us to cost cutting on infrastructure. As such, we have no guarantee whatsoever that sufficient monies would be diverted to infrastructure, were taxes to be raised. No, we would find more in the way of social spending and misdirected earmarks. Infrastructure, would still go wanting. Further yet, is the idea that the democrats have held sway in Minnesota for many years. If infrastructure was such a hot item for them, where was the action on the matter? Similarly, let’s look at the democrats who held sway in Congress for all those decades. If infrastructure was such an issue to them, why is it that they never fully addressed it? Spending too much on social programs, perhaps?
At the risk of putting too dramatic to face on this, I suggest that that bridge in Minneapolis went down the other day under the weight of the social spending programs the state is forced to divert its money to.
.
Funny how they never mention that one. No, their answer is more taxes.
Further, we don’t even know what the cause of the failure of that bridge was yet. We probably won’t know until after the election. Thing is, the Democrats desperately need a talking point that they can latch onto before the election. So, between now and then, we’re going to hear about how Minneapolis is all the fault of the Republicans and their tax cuts, which of course has a translation that all Americans will understand as uniquely Democrat party:
You’re not paying enough taxes.
I think you know the correct response to that one.
Do the Democrats really want to run on a platform of raising taxes? If the Democrats really want their fight to end up on this particular ground, I say:
Bring it on….This will be the easiest presidential cycle for Republicans since Reagan/ Carter … or perhaps Mondale… both of which wanted to raise your taxes.
Addendum:(Bit)
Boortz agrees, [2] and adds a couple salient points… saying in part that they’d like…
…us to believe that more taxes would have saved these people, and it is all the Governor’s fault for refusing to increase those taxes. The fact is that the problem wasn’t low taxes, the problem was fiscal irresponsibility.
Let’s take a look at Citizens for Government Waste’s “The Pig Booklet” for the state of Minnesota [3] for the year 2006. Take a look at all of the “pork” projects. I’ll give you a taste of a few:
- The state bailout of the Minneapolis Teacher’s Retirement Fund, which puts state taxpayers on the hook for $972 million in unfunded liabilities
- A new $776 million Twins Stadium to be paid for with a Hennepin County sales tax increase — (approved by state legislators with no voter referendum)
- $97.5 million for the Northstar Commuter Rail line
- $34 million in subsidies to ethanol producers that have seen a 300 percent increase in profits in the last year
- $30 million for bear exhibits at the Minnesota and Como Zoos
- $12 million to renovate the Shubert Theater in downtown Minneapolis
- $1 million for a replica Vikings ship in Moorhead
- $500,000 for a skating rink in Roseville
- $310,000 for a Shakespeare festival in Winona
- $129,000 for state art grants for North Dakota museums and theaters
And the list goes on and on, folks. This was all tax money spent in Minnesota while that bridge remained un-repaired. Now we’re told that the problem is that taxes weren’t high enough.