How Lobbyists Almost Derailed a Much-Needed Canada-U.S. Bridge

David Frum reports on this pretty unbelievable story, How lobbyists almost derailed a much-needed Canada-U.S. bridge.

The Ambassador Bridge over the Detroit River is the busiest Canada-U.S. border crossing...Shippers have long urged the construction of an entirely new border crossing that could connect U.S. Interstates 75 and 94 directly to Ontario’s Highway 401. On the eve of the 2008 financial crisis, those shippers finally got their way: The new crossing gained approval from the Michigan and Ontario highway departments."

"The existing Ambassador bridge is privately owned, and the main owner — Forbes 400 member Manuel Maroun — does not welcome competition...Maroun has mounted a furious lobbying campaign against the second river crossing. He has gained some unexpected allies, including Americans for Prosperity, the Tea Party group headed by Dick Armey. The Michigan chapter of AFP posted convincing-looking (but fake) eviction notices on homes near the proposed crossing route. The group acknowledged that the tactic “was meant to startle people.”

"Bridges cost money: In this case, almost $4-billion. The state of Michigan’s share of the cost would have been $550-million, with the balance to come from the province of Ontario and the U.S. and Canadian federal governments. That $550-million sounds like a lot of money, but put it in context: Almost $500-million in traffic crosses the river every day. Yet the Tea Party Republican majority in the Michigan legislature — perhaps influenced by their friends, allies, supporters and donors at Americans for Prosperity — has objected to the cost, and passed a law forbidding the state to spend any money to build the bridge."

"On Friday, Michigan governor Rick Snyder (also a Republican) announced a last-minute reprieve: Michigan would borrow its $550-million contribution from the government of Canada, with the money to be repaid from a bridge toll."

It's a clever and embarrassing solution to a stupid problem. Is it really the case that we can no longer spend money because the numbers sound big but aren't when viewed in context? Paul Krugman keeps pointing out that yes $1 trillion is a lot but US GDP is $15 trillion a year. In this case a Republican governor had to get around the tea party by borrowing from Canada.