by Larry Bivens
WASHINGTON — Since taking their seats in Congress, Rep. Sean Duffy and Sen. Ron Johnson have distinguished themselves as guardians of taxpayer dollars, railing almost nonstop against excessive government spending.
But the hawkishness of the Republican freshmen on fiscal matters has not stopped them from backing controversial legislation to clear the way for construction of a $700 million bridge across the St. Croix River that critics condemn as a waste of money.
The House of Representatives on Thursday approved legislation that exempts the proposed $700 million bridge at Stillwater, Minn., under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act. The Senate approved the legislation in January. It now heads to President Barack Obama.
The new bridge would replace the historic, but decrepit, Stillwater Lift Bridge connecting Minnesota and Wisconsin across the St. Croix River.
The measure also has the support of Democratic Gov. Mark Dayton in Minnesota and Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, a Republican.
"This legislation was a top federal priority for my administration and is a great example of bipartisanship teamwork that will create thousands of jobs," Walker said. "The construction of this safer, better bridge will bring a welcome economic boost to the region."
Advocates of the bridge have said it is long overdue and will ease congestion in the St. Croix Valley while creating jobs and helping interstate commerce. They also say there are safety concerns: The Stillwater Bridge currently connecting the two is a lift-bridge built in 1931.
Rep. Betty McCollum, the Democratic congresswoman who stands to inherit the bridge in a newly configured congressional district, has labeled it a waste of government money. Environmental groups have objected to the project, saying it will harm the river.
While she agreed the outdated lift bridge needs to be replaced, she said there is a less costly, more practical alternative.
Supporters say the new bridge is needed to relieve traffic congestion. They contend the original estimated cost in 1992 was $80 million, but the price tag has grown as a result of delays and lawsuits.
Supporters also say Minnesota and Wisconsin have set aside funding for the project, and no additional federal dollars will be required.
Taxpayers for Common Sense, a fiscal watchdog group in Washington, objects to the size and scope of the proposed bridge. The group pointed out the new bridge would accommodate a daily average of 18,000 cars, while the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis cost $234 million to rebuild after it collapsed and serves 140,000 cars a day.
The group said "wasting cash on the boondoggle bridge" would delay action on dozens of other bridges in Minnesota and Wisconsin that need work. It also said the bill resembled an earmark, designated funding for pet projects like the "Bridge to Nowhere," despite a ban on such funding.
Brandon Moody, a spokesman for Duffy, who in one of his first acts as a new member of Congress introduced legislation to ban earmarks, said critics are using disingenuous arguments to block the construction of a bridge they don't want to see built.
The bridge legislation, which also has the support of Rep. Ron Kind, D-La Crosse, calls for no additional federal spending, Moody said. It removes the federal government as a hurdle, he said.
Johnson agreed.
"The new bridge will be financed largely by the state governments who are taking the lead on this initiative," Johnson said. "The only question at this point is whether the federal government will continue to prevent the states from acting to address this longstanding problem. I believe Washington should get out of the way."
Fiscal hawks support St. Croix bridge plan (Green Bay Press Gazette)
Discussion
Sign Up for Updates
