November 12, 2008
By Chuck Hustmyre
Investigative reporter, author and former federal agent Chuck Hustmyre has seen the ugly side of life, from A to Z. Here he gets the last word on politics, crime, local government and pop culture.
Last Thursday I caught a brief exchange on WJBO between Mayor Kip Holden and morning talk show hosts Matt Kennedy and Kevin Meeks. The topic was bridges and how to fund them now that voters have shot down the mayor's billion-dollar tax package.
Instead of answering questions or proposing alternative solutions to the parish's infrastructure problems, the mayor spent most of his seven minutes on the show berating the previous caller, a guy named Phil. The mayor did a "Joe the Plumber" on Phil, a tax-paying citizen, belittling him for having the audacity to disagree with the mayor.
As I recall from Civics 101, it is the mayor who works for us, not us for him.
Phil didn't even talk about the mayor's failed tax plan. Before his call was interrupted to allow the mayor on the show, all Phil said was that last year's deadly Minnesota bridge collapse wasn't due to negligence, as the mayor has suggested, but rather the result of a design failure.
The mayor ripped into Phil, who was off the air at the time. "He's entitled to his opinion," Holden said. "We have a different opinion. We have 38 bridges ranked at or below the level of the bridge that collapsed in Minnesota."
According to the mayor, the lack of proper maintenance caused the I-35 bridge collapse, which killed 13 people, and the same thing could happen here, unless, of course, we tax ourselves into oblivion in time to prevent it.
Last week, The Advocate reported that the mayor said he needs $35 million to repair those 38 parish bridges, the ones he implied were on the verge of collapse.
“We are not going to play Russian roulette in this parish with those 38 bridges,” Holden told The Advocate.
Well, guess what, Mr. Mayor? The National Transportation Safety Board, the agency that investigated the fatal bridge collapse, disagrees with you, too.
According to the NTSB's report, design flaws, not a lack of maintenance, brought down the bridge in Minneapolis.
Here is what the New York Times reported on Jan. 15, 2008:
Faulty design led to Minnesota bridge collapse, inquiry finds
Investigators said Monday that the Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis, which collapsed into the Mississippi River on Aug. 1, killing 13, came down because of a flaw in its design. ...
Just last month, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported this:
I-35W bridge was doomed from the start
Original designers of the Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis likely neglected to calculate the size of key gusset plates that eventually failed, a human mistake that culminated 40 years later when 13 people died after the span collapsed, federal safety investigators have found. ...
By raising the specter of Minneapolis's I-35 bridge collapse and using the phrase "Russian roulette," a game in which random chance determines life or death, Holden is resorting to the most base form of fear-mongering in his effort to lay a guilt trip on the majority of voters who voted against his billion-dollar tax and spend boondoggle.
Meanwhile last week, the mayor unveiled his proposed $700 million dollar budget for next year. Yet, when WJBO host Matt Kennedy suggested the mayor might be able to find the money he needs for bridge repair inside that proposed budget, without going back to taxpayers for more money, the mayor dismissed Kennedy's comments out of hand. "That sounds good, but I'd rather deal with reality."
You want to talk about reality? Does the mayor really believe that in a budget of $700 million, he can't peel away the 5% he says he needs to fix the bridges he claims are life-threatening to cross? I don't know about you, but I love art. However, I'd rather see fewer new paintings hanging in government buildings than see pictures of mangled bodies crushed during a catastrophic bridge collapse.
If he really wants to make some progress, why can't the mayor cut 10% out of next year's budget and dedicate that $70 million to bridges and roads? Does anyone think our parish government is so lean and efficient it's not carrying around at least 10% of fat?
Why is it that governments at all levels think they have a divine right to constant growth, that they can always expand but never contract? The government loves to tell us to lose weight, to cut the fat out of our diets and off of our bodies. But what example do government officials set? They spend every dime they have -- and then they spend more. After that, they demand we give them still more of our money. That's why the state is looking at a billion-dollar deficit next year and the federal government is now $10 trillion (with a "t") in debt.
The mayor treated Phil the Caller exactly like a lot of pundits and operatives treated Joe the Plumber recently -- with arrogance and condescension. Holden showed his true colors last week. He was angry and bitter about the failure of his tax proposal, and when asked what new options he was considering to fund the parish's infrastructure needs, his only answer was to try again for another tax hike.
"We'll go back with a modified version of the same thing," Holden said.
In other words, the mayor, like a gracious and patient parent, wants to give us a chance to recognize our mistake and correct it.
Even though the voters spoke last week, the mayor didn't hear the message. In fact, he's convinced himself that a majority of people really wanted his nearly billion dollars in new taxes to pass. "The failure has generated so much enthusiasm that people are saying, 'You've got to go back and do this again,'" Holden said.
As for Phil the Caller, whom the mayor somehow linked to failed mayoral candidate Wayne "Spider" Carter, he can either get in the tax hike game or sit on the sidelines and pout. In classic straw man style, the mayor spent several minutes attacking Phil for arguments Phil never made.
"I doubt he even voted for the proposal," Holden said, "but he wants to be the Monday-morning quarterback."
In the mayor's mind, you're only really in the game, you're only a part of the solution, if you're willing to tax yourself into the poorhouse.
What do you say?
Chuck out.
Share your tips and opinions with Chuck below.
Comments
Posted by CowboyinBRLA on November 12 at 3:19 p.m.
Considering the usually huge margin by which major initiatives typically fail in Baton Rouge, and the narrowness of the vote by which this one failed, I think Holden may be right that a majority of people DO want at least a significant portion of the program he proposed - just not necessarily all of it.
The Audubon element was always controversial. I thought that was a great idea, myself (God knows Baton Rouge always loves to portray itself as the be-all, end-all of the western world, with nothing to actually show for it), but OK, let's accept that maybe this is something which should be build with private money. Strip that part of the package, and I suspect the issue might have passed.
As for whether we can find $35 million in the budget for bridges - I invite Chuck to go get a copy of the current year's budget and decide what he thinks should be cut. Maybe there is that much "waste" (as he calls it); I call it things we don't necessarily need, but for which there is a large and vocal constituency. It's always easier on the outside to rail against waste. Harder, perhaps, to tell parents that their neighborhood library will only be open half days on Saturdays and close by 5:00 on weekdays, and all day Sundays.
As long as a bridge stays up, nobody's screaming too loudly for it to be fixed. Politically, it takes a brave politician to propose that people tax themselves extra for the things we all know they "need" but won't scream for, so that we can also afford the stuff we'd vote them out of office for cutting, even if it's non-essential. Oh wait - Holden did that, didn't he?
Posted by Me1124 on November 12 at 6:05 p.m.
Yes hard to tell parents about closed libraries but even harder to tell parents "Mr & Mrs Parent - the bridge collapsed today and little Johnny and Suzie are never coming home again"
But to be honest it appears that the point of the story is that the mayor is twisting facts to get a tax passed and that he acted like a complete jerk to Phil the caller, following suit with other politians from the most recent elections.
The mayor should keep in mind that while Phil is just one caller there are a lot more Phil's out there, and I would suggest that the Mayor listen and comprehend what the caller might have to say, instead of berating them or the next time he is up for reelection there will be a narrowness in his margin for NON Reelection
Posted by Being_Stupid on November 13 at 9:18 a.m.
I won't be driving on any bridges in Baton Rouge.
For now on...I am going to fly.
Post a comment
(225 magazine reserves the right to remove any comments from this site we deem offensive, malicious or otherwise inappropriate.)