A discouraging amount of the discussion was jingoistic claptrap about how bridges "in America" shouldn't fall down and how bystanders' response to the incident showcased the "goodness of Minnesotans."

Totally agree with you on the politician being shameless re: this, but disagree with you re: the goodness of Minnesotans. As in 9/11, these human kindnesses are the very things that offer any hope if situations like these. Yes, the ground is crumbling under us, we say, but there is still kindness and compassion in the midst of the rubble.

Those stories are surely worth telling.

Yes, Eileen, but are Minnesotans more courageous and generous than Montanans? Or are Minnesota politicians taking an opportunity to parochially praise their electorate?

Or--and this may be, too--am I blogging a bunch of bullshit in vain wish that I had something to contribute to the conversation about a disaster that has little to do with communication and less to do with me?

One thing I am very curious about is where the discussion will go regarding the state of other bridges and infrastructure in the U.S., which structural engineering associations have been bleating about to mostly deaf ears for some time now.

Don't know what the answer is, but if you check on myragan, there are some communicators from MN that have interesting things to say on the topis. I can't even imagine trying to work today if I lived there.

"...which structural engineers have been bleating about to mostly deaf ears for some time now."

Speaking of 9/11 this same thing happened then with "airport security." People in the industry had been saying (if press reports can be believed) for YEARS that security was a joke. And for what seemed like 20 minutes after the attack everybody was all over it. Then less than 6 months later the same foolish things were happening (just one example -the doors to the cockpit, which, had they been locked on 9/11 would have made the whole thing nearly impossible to pull off, were wide open again on most flights).

We are a society of "if it doesn't effect me personally today, I can't be bothered to say/do anything about it even though it's an important issue" (for somebody else to deal with presumablu)

I have no doubt that Minnesotans are wonderful people, but as a species I believe it is laziness and apathy of too many of us too often, which allows things like the bridge collapse to happen. And we are therefore all ultimately responsible for it and other situations like it. I wish I had a solution to that, but, I don't.

I think we have no idea what we should expect of the government.

I think we think about our personal lives, and reflect that no matter what we do, we're always neglecting something: our finances, our family relationships, the oil change, our health, our professional development, our wardrobe.

And we see a Katrina or we see a bridge collapse or we see a 9/11 and we think guiltily: How can we expect our government to remember everything for everybody when we can't keep on top of our own little lives?

Don't know if everybody's always felt this way about their government and themselves, but this is, I'm afraid, how we feel now.

And no, I don't have a solution to that, either.

We shouldn't be so quick to assume that human laziness and apathy are responsible for the failure of the Minneapolis bridge.

Safety is relative. We could stop all auto deaths by outlawing and attaching huge penalties to driving a car, but we don't because the cost is greater than the risk. We could decrease auto deaths by probably 90-95 percent by building automobiles that aren't capable of doing more than 40 mph. Again, we'll never do that. All of our highfalutin' talk to the contrary, we're all willing to see a certain number of deaths rather take certain freedom-limiting measures necessary to make ourselves safe.

Besides, there's never a guarantee. We could outlaw driving and flying and swimming and smoking and drinking and fatty hamburgers and still fall prey to a Sun of Sam or a tsunami.

I was communication director of the ND Department of Transportation for 20 years, and can attest to the stringent bridge inspection, retrofitting, rehabilitation, and replacement standards followed by the states. The cost of a bridge failure in lost lives, slowed commerce, and political fallout is heavy, and a state that knows it has a bridge that's in danger of toppling will close it. Closure is expensive but not nearly as expensive as the alternative. There were signs that the Minneapolis bridge needed replacement, but, to my knowledge, no signs that failure was imminent.

Congress has known for more than 30 years that U.S. bridges and highways are aging faster than we are fixing or replacing them. The cost of building brand-new bridges to replace all of those on the suspect list is astronomical and it's not a sexy topic, so Congress has never given the states all the money they ask for. Still, the states are getting more money with every federal-aid highway bill and doing everything possible to inspect their bridges regularly and often, fix the ones that appear fixable, and replace those that need it.

Rest assured that plenty of fingers will be pointed about yesterday's bridge failure, but sometimes no one is at fault. Sometimes bad things just happen. We can't always be completely safe, and we wouldn't like a life that tried too hard to KEEP us completely safe.

Jane - I agree with virtually EVERYTHING you said. The point I was trying to make (probably not well, as here in Ontario we're into our third week of consistent high 90's weather and I have no A/C in my apartment where I typed my comment) is that people always lament that "nobody said anything about this issue" and "someone should have spoken up" AFTER a tradgedy happens.

I still believe that just a little more attention and noise, by just a few more people, to issues that we COULD address BEFORE a tragedy happens could avert at least some of them. Whether the bridge collapse is one of them, I don't know.

But here's a question - you say officials knew the bridge needed work, but had no reason to believe collapse was imminent. Why would they wait until "collapse was imminent" before closing it? And I also heard that there were only 2 lanes open at the time of the collapse. It seems to me (with my albeit limited knowledge of bridge engineering) that putting that much stress on a small area of a bridge needing work would not be prudent?

Jane--

NOW, we ARE talking about communication. This public-safety issue is up there with education as one of the biggest centers of collective American hypocrisy. (Or, as the communication consultants would call it, a "say-do gap.")

We say "safety first," but we do sports first (Minnesota taxpayers are ponying up a kajillion for a new stadium for the Twins, while their bridges rot).

I agree with your assertion that safety should not be a society's highest priority, because it is a false and meek instinct that, if we had followed it, would have kept us off the moon--indeed, out of the air entirely.

But I do wish that as a society we could have a more honest conversation—and therefore live in a more realistic context—about how safe we can rightly expect to be: from terrorists, from hurricanes, from our own bridges.

David

Oh, and one more thing (can you tell I'm at work in A/C and potentially more coherent?) David: I will concede the government may not have been able to necessarily anticipate the bridge, however as far as Katrina & 9/11 I have to disagree.

If you read the "official" report on 9/11 it is pretty clear even from the government's own agencies that there were lots of warnings about both Bin Laden and of potential attacks. Had they taken action on even a few of those the attacks could have been, if not prevented, at least made more difficult to implement.

And Katrina? Bush refused the funding to shore up those levies every year he's been in office, despite the fact that even I know that Louisiana floods badly almost every year (I mean their cemetaries are above ground!) and there were multiple reports about the increasing weakness of those levies. I saw a documentary recently made by a guy from New Orleans which was begun a year BEFORE the hurricane and went through to about 6 months after it happened. There is no way you can say the information was not clear and available. The people in power chose not to take action.

I realize politicians have to make hard choices everyday, but even one year of funding to shore up those levies could have minimized the devastation, if not averted it entirely. And I think that it is a legitimate expectation of our elected officials to take the actions which will avert a tragedy and save thousands of lives of their citizens when they are able to do so. Even if you want to be mercenary about it, think how much cheaper it would have been to fix the damn levies compared to what's happening now??

Kristen--

I can't disagree with you. I'm only saying that, psychologically, I think we do a little shrug when we hear the government has chosen, unwisely, to keep its fingers crossed regarding a Bin Laden or a Katrina. What else can explain our not impeaching the president over such things?

David

You just proved my original point - apathy, laziness and "it doesn't affect me today"

Kristen, I never argued with your original point, but I don't appreciate your appropriating my corporate brand slogan to make it.

David Murray, CEO
Murray's Freelance Writing
"Apathy, Laziness and 'It Doesn't Affect Me'"®

America's chronic underinvestment in infrastructure is one of the great unspoken political issues in the US. Democratic and Republican politicians have been underinvesting in the maintenance and strengthening of key pieces of the infrastructure for many years, and until now, few have really paid the price. But now, is there sufficient will and budget to take actions that will make a real difference?

Mike Klein
Delft, The NL

Mike, that is THE question of this story. It's harder to imagine a louder wake-up call than this—the Brooklyn Bridge, I guess, would be a bit more symbolic—and if we push snooze on this one, we'll have our answer.

Politicians are good at getting dough to build sexy new things that make them look good, bad at doing boring things that people take for granted.

Our country has reached the age when less of the stuff we have to do is sexy and more of the stuff we have to do is boring.

While everyone fixates on this tragedy-of-the-moment, from an unemotional standpoint it isn't all that significant (although the death of even one person by malfeasance is an abomination).

For example, the Silver Bridge that connected Point Pleasant, WV and Kanaugh, OH collapsed under the weight of Xmas traffic on Dec. 15, 1967.

46 people died in the icy waters of the Ohio River that night.

The bigger story, IMHO, should be what was changed or not changed in bridge construction and maintenance since the collapse of the Silver Bridge 40 years ago that made this recent incident less deadly or an outrage.

This bridge was built right around that time, Craig, and as I understand it, NOT to the revised specifications.

Sorry for the copyright infringement David! Apparently MY laziness meant I didn't check for ownership before using your "slogan"

;-) (I know how you LOVE smilies but I just couldn't resist!)

Kristen

Okay, I will say it: There's virtually no security involved in our train (Amtrak) system. I was sniffed by a dog once, but that's been it. It's not reassuring.

The security involved in our Amtrak system is the complete incompetence and insane over-pricing of Amtrak. I once talked to a baggage handler for Amtrak, a working class guy who had a son in college in Texas. As an employee, he got free tickets on Amtrak. But he habitually flew Southwest Airlines instead.

"What, you think I'm going to take AMTRAK to Texas?"

I like Amtrak; I think flights are way underpriced in an era when someday it will dawn on someone that oil is a limited resource that is being wasted away. I do think security is utterly lacking on Amtrak, however, and that has to be in part lack of government interest.

BTW, it's interesting to note that the Amish and Mennonites who use Amtrak often lack photo IDs and bring along sometimes very old (depending on the age of the rider), much handled birth certificates. I heard the Amtrak employee say to one teenage boy, "That all you got for ID, baby?" and could hear him in my mind saying, like any teenager, "DON'T CALL ME BABY."

I wouldn't take Amtrak to Texas. If I didn't have family in San Antonio, I wouldn't fly there, either. (Insert forbidden smiley here.)

Hey, maybe you're right that airfares are too low, rather than Amtrak being too high. If the bubble bursts and the prices wind up being competitive, I'll be ridin' on the City of New Orleans ....