and again non of the money spent in Iraq would have been used for anything in the us for infrastructure

That's not correct. More than $4 billion this year alone has come out of Federal Highway funds (bridges, roads) to pay for Iraq and Hurricane Katrina. I'm not saying it would have made a difference in this case, but let's not ignore facts either.

and again non of the money spent in Iraq would have been used for anything in the us for infrastructure

and if you think other wise look in a mirror before you call any one else an idiot


Minn. bridge problems uncovered in 1990


MINNEAPOLIS - Minnesota officials were warned as early as 1990 that the bridge that plummeted into the Mississippi River was "structurally deficient," yet they relied on a strategy of patchwork fixes and stepped-up inspections.

there see proves my point by the way who was supposed to be president in 1990


[link="http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070802/ap_on_re_us/bridge_collapse"]WWW Link

ok then how much of the money left in the highway funds went to replace bridges that needed to be replaced. and how much of it just went into someones pocket.

What? Are you arguing that the FHWA is corrupt? How does that counter the fact that you are wrong when you say that no money directed to Iraq is being taken away from infrastructure. Besides, I'm sure you could find out how much money is in the bridge fund annually at the FHWA website (dot.fhwa.gov, I think) -- since I find your point to be nongermane, I'm not going to do it for you.

Wow, I am psychic! I knew the author of this piece of trash just from the title! I knew it was written by an insane moron right off the bat!

sorry i can't find any connection between FWHA and Iraq and that web page does not exist

here is the problem the title is good. the article isn't.

It's F H W A not FWHA and the website does exist -- and a simple search for the Federal Highway Administration would have come up with it. Here's the link to the most recent rescission ($871 m) which was a result of the Iraq and Katrina spending bills http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/notices/n4510647.htm

Your inability to conduct basic research doesn't not help you make your point.

Yeah rescission of 2007 funds which hadn't yet been committed to a repair project on this specific bridge is what caused this failure. Uh huh.



"doesn't not help" means it helps right?

What is the purpose of this Notice? This Notice is to notify the States that $871,022,000 of unobligated Federal-aid highway funds apportioned to States are hereby rescinded as required by Title IV, Chapter 8 of the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007, Public Law (Pub. L. No.) 110-28.

What apportioned funds are being rescinded? In accordance with Title IV, Chapter 8 of the U.S. Troop Readiness, Veterans' Care, Katrina Recovery, and Iraq Accountability Appropriations Act, 2007, Pub. L. No. 110-28, an amount of $871,022,000 is rescinded from the unobligated balances of funds apportioned under Chapter 1 of Title 23, United States Code (U.S.C.). The rescission shall not apply to funds distributed in accordance with the first sentence of Title 23, U.S.C., Section 133(d)(3)(A), nor those funds distributed in accordance with Title 23, U.S.C., Sections 130(f), 104(b)(5), 133(d)(1), and 163 as in effect on the day before the date of enactment of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Pub. L. No. 109-59.



this is a far cry from 4 billion.

these are funds that were just there taking up space.

there were no roads in new Orleans that were damaged because of Katrina.

OK some funds that were to go some place in infrastructure was sent to Iraq.

States are encouraged to review projects funded from the older apportionment categories to determine if any of the funds can be de-obligated and applied to the rescission. The States should ensure that a sufficient amount of unobligated funds is available within each program and category selected to bear the rescission. For guidance, refer to Fiscal Management Information System (FMIS) reports M28 and W10 to assist in determining the program code(s), prior fiscal years, and amount to be de-obligated and applied to the rescission. Once the program code(s), fiscal years, and amount have been determined and submitted to the Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Office of Budget (HCFB), no obligations should be incurred by the State on the amounts identified to be rescinded.



looks to me like you missed this part. which means it wasn't mandatory.

it also looks to me like it says if you have a bridge that is about to fall down. make sure you have enough to replace it.

You'll note that I did say that it wouldn't have mattered in this case (comment 27), but that the argument that money isn't being diverted from infrastructure is false.

And yes, you're right, too many negatives in that sentence. Oops!

Danielost -- that's one of two notices (and I mentioned above that there were two notices, and gave the dates they were issued and the dollar amounts -- maybe you are reading too fast to catch the details, but they are there). I'm not doing all your research for you. The second notice was issued on March 20th. It was for $3.471 billion dollars. When you add that to the more than $800 m you get more than $4 b.

And it most certainly was mandatory.


Frankly, I'm not even sure how to respond to this. You clearly do not understand what you read -- and I've not got the patience to explain it to you.

Just to be clear -- I'm not advocating that our infrastructure problems are a result of the war -- they've, for the most part, been around a lot longer and are years, if not decades, in the making. However, the fact that funds used to improve our transportation infrastructure get diverted for things like Iraq, Katrina and most any other "emergency" or "supplemental" appropriations makes it very hard for states to adequately address these problems. This, of course, to the best of my knowledge, is a decision made by Congress (not the President).

what does that sentence say???????????????????????

“and again non of the money spent in Iraq would have been used for anything in the us for infrastructure”

If we had leadership at the top it would have been used to deal with the needs of our country. In addition, IF Bush had not started this war we would have less debt and better able to help pay to repair the infrastructure in our country.

You want to chastise me for blaming Bush. The issue is a lack of real leadership on the part of the President. He did not finish the job against those that caused 9/11 but diverted our military to attack a country that had NOTHING to do with 9/11 and posed no danger to the U.S. He failed to show effective leadership to resolve the energy issues. He failed to offer a real SOLUTION to the Social Security Funding problem. He made the funding issues of Medicare far worse when he insisted on passing the Prescription Drug Plan with no way to pay the added cost. He has failed to lead by enforcing our immigration laws and to protect our borders. He proposes immigration changes that do not fix the problem and are at odds with what most Americans want. I can not think of a single major issue where the leadership of GWB has been shown effective in resoling the many issues at hand. The lack of attention and leadership to deal with our crumbling infrastructure could prove catastrophic!

Reply By: danielost Posted: Thursday, August 02, 2007
More than $4 billion this year alone has come out of Federal Highway funds (bridges, roads) to pay for Iraq and Hurricane Katrina.


ok then how much of the money left in the highway funds went to replace bridges that needed to be replaced. and how much of it just went into someone’s pocket.

Given the fact that 70,000 bridges are rated the same as this one, NOT ENOUGH! Add the 3,500 dams, Water/Sewer systems, Electrical Grid-- GET THE PICTURE!

Reply By: danielost Posted: Thursday, August 02, 2007
States are encouraged to review projects funded from the older apportionment categories to determine if any of the funds can be de-obligated and applied to the rescission. The States should ensure that a sufficient amount of unbigoted funds is available within each program and category selected to bear the rescission.


The magnitude of the infrastructure repairs that are needed FAR exceed what the States alone can provide. The latest estimate from the Civil Engineers is that we need $1.7 Trillion.

gene yo really are a clown. how dare the government take funds from an emergency fund for an emergency.

i told you that the dams are safe.

as for the bridges clinton was in office for 8 years. he was cutting military funds. how come he didn't get those bridges fixed. bush was thrust into a war because of something called 9/11.

on top of all of that it isn't the feds job to do the work it is the states job.

and you want drengin to pay for all of that right.


so drengin you might as well write a check since gene thinks you have to pay for all of our troubles.

1.7 trillion/50=34 billion per state.

yes i know not every state has the same problems and some need more work than others.

but if you do what gene does the problem seems in surmountable. if you break it down it isn't as big.

and i heard on fox news that it would only take 190 billion to fix the 77,000 bridges.

Reply By: danielost Posted: Friday, August 03, 2007
Gene you really are a clown. How dare the government take funds from an emergency fund for an emergency?

“I told you that the dams are safe.”

Then why are 3,500 Dams given a safety evaluation of "D"? YOU ARE AN IDIOT!

Reply By: danielost Posted: Friday, August 03, 2007
“The magnitude of the infrastructure repairs that are needed FAR exceed what the States alone can provide. The latest estimate from the Civil Engineers is that we need $1.7 Trillion.


and you want dredging to pay for all of that right.


so dredging you might as well write a check since gene thinks you have to pay for all of our troubles.”


Guess what you mental Midget-- That is JUST what The Fed is doing now that the bridge collapsed!