Good post, Kari. You're right about it not being a "sexy issue," though certainly one that demands attention.

I, too am proud of Gov. K.

At the western edge of Prineville, one of the Guv's bridges is going up, almost done, we are already driving on it. Our old bridge almost fell down, and had a big metal bandaide on it.

If not for this plan, Les Schwab tires would have had extreme difficulty with their production and warehouse facilities as the old bridge would have had weight limits.

Now, as a rural Democrat, I have a literal concrete argument regarding taxes, social responsibility, what government is good at, etc. etc. If Republican's don't like it, they can take the 15 mile detour, and avoid driving on the bridge.

Then why doesn’t he step up and vote NO on 49 and save peoples land from the government? “Measure 49: Our one chance to protect what's special about Oregon.” The only thing special here is that the government wants to take control of peoples property rights. That’s it in a nutshell, screw the person that has lived here for 30 plus years. Once they control your land they will control the color of your house, the type of plants you can have, style of fences and so on. This is just the beginning of government control. A yes vote is the beginning of the end!!! Vote NO!!!

Yes, our state leadership took a huge step forward in 2002 to address infrastructure issues. We are fixing our bridges now because the reports were not ignored.

I'm not a fan of our Governor, but applaud his move here. Let us not forget that this was all supported by a legislature controlled by the other side in 02. It takes good bipartisan support to make these things happen.

Now if we can just get studded tires banned outright, we can keep the replaced and repaired bridges longer in operation.

Although it's true that some House Republicans supported the Oregon Bridge Repair package in 2003 (along with all the House Democrats), things have changed in Salem.

House Republicans are now completely opposed to transportation repairs, as proven by their unanimous opposition this year to a $10 fee for new license plates that would have created $115 million to repair Oregon roads and bridges. Every single House Republican voted NO, which killed the bill since it required a two-thirds majority. They also opposed every other proposal that the business community made this year to repairs roads and bridges. Unbelievable.

House and Senate Democrats consistently stand up for strong and safe infrastructure; unfortunately, Republicans don't.

Eric J and studded tires -

You must live in the valley.

As I have written many times on Blue Oregon, Oregon is not the Willamette Valley. Studded tires are a life and death issue in Central/Eastern Oregon.

I am lucky enough to afford good quality alternatives to studded tires, at about twice the cost of regular studded tires. They are not as good as studded tires on ice. I have a job that requires winter time travel. Many of those that live over here also have jobs that require travel, and there just isn't mass transit available. So, travel we must.

Must we endanger our lives and the lives of our families and other drivers on the road? Yes according to you.

If you ban studded tires, the winter driving death toll WILL increase in Central/Eastern Oregon.

Eric J - democracy used as the tyranny of the majority is exactly what the founders of our Constitution feared. The lifes of the minority are alway in peril when the majority acts in its own cause without taking into account the needs of the minority.

So Eric J - as the minority I would appeal to you, please don't try to kill me and my neighbors with the tyranny of a ban on studded tires.

The provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan in Canada have the same if not MORE trecherous driving conditions as does Eastern Oregon, yet they have banned studs for quite a long time and have had no "life or death issues" as you are so paranoid about. The death toll will not increase as you so selfishly dictate. You, Steve, have bit the propaganda bug too hard on this one. The statistics in those provinces have told me that banning studs will not kill you or others and keeping studs are just propaganda from paranoid and selfish people.

And one more thing. I grew up in Hermiston and my family never used studs on any highway. I have lived in every part of the State in my life. Ted was right to get the bridges fixed and now it is our turn to keep them in good shape by doing the correct thing with our tires.

"Insider": revenue raising bills require a 3/5 majority...not 2/3.

Steve: agreed.

Eric J - it's not propaganda. I wasn't even aware that there was propaganda on this issue. It's simple experience.

I grew up in a very rural area and can attest to the necessity of studded snow tires. If there are alternatives out there, as Steve suggests, we never even saw them. It was an extremely poor area, though.

Look, I'm all for finding alternatives, I know the damage that these tires can cause to our infrastructure, but banning them outright just seems silly. And, frankly, somewhat insulting to people who depend on snow tires in the winter for their lives. Where I come from, you have to do several things to prepare for winter, such as cut your firewood. On that list, getting studded tires is usually considered one of the most important.

It's great to see Governor Kulongoski supporting the concrete and aggregate industry (again) like he did in 2003. We ALL want our bridges and roads safe for our environment and communities. Bridges in Danger

I wonder if the Minneapolis tragedy justifies a special session here to bring back up the infrastructure/license fee bill the Republicans stymied last time? Let's see them vote no after seeing the consequences of disinvestment in public infrastructure.

When Bush said, in the 2000 campaign, that Americans were overtaxed, and then as Prez gave a huge windfall to the top 1%, somehow the vast unfunded needs of even uncontroversial stuff like roads, bridges, national parks and forests, etc. didn't make it into the national discussion. I wish it didn't take disasters like Minneapolis to remind everyone that there's no free lunch, no matter what the Republican anti-taxers say.

It's great that Oregon has been taking transportation infrastructure seriously for the last few years.

Trouble is, the State has thrown money around in a haphazard and costly way. For instance, an audit by the Secretary of State's office criticized ODOT for putting bids out so quickly that they made major errors in how they prioritized which bridge repairs would get funded first http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/reports/full/2007/2007-02.pdf.

Another review found that ODOT didn't even have the right accounting procedures in place before putting these projects out to bid, and consequently they don't know where much of the money went http://www.sos.state.or.us/audits/reports/management/2007/730-2007-03-01.pdf.

These reports don't even get into the run-of-the-mill conflicts-of-interest and bad management that have been occurring on most of the big construction projects ODOT has put out to bid. Just yesterday the Oregonian had another story about the fiasco at Highway 20. Those contractors destroyed hillsides, contaminated sensitive salmon habitat, and caused years of delays and tens of millions in overruns.

If the Governor and ODOT were doing such a great job at investing our infrastructure, they'd be implementing the right controls to ensure that public funds serve the public good.

-John

This is pet peeve with me. Does anyone remember two years ago when the Gov's willingness to sign this bridge bill was cited as a failure of leadership?

During the 2003 session, while the Governor signed into law a bill that the Rep's supported and that raised taxes and spent $1.3 billion over 10 years (this bridge repair bill), he allowed the R's to get away with voting against, then campaigning against a comparatively tiny $35 million dollar tax increase that would have kept out schools open and continued to allow us to prosecute meth. users and car thieves.

So Bruce Starr gets credit from all the construction industry for having foresight to raise taxes even during a recession, but that same Senator and the other R's pay no price for their position on shutting schools and letting criminals run free because of their refusal to....raise taxes during a recession.

The Governor could have said that if we can raise taxes, then the first dollars should go to full school years and public safety, then to bridges, and if the Rep legislature wants to bring me a bill that funds both, I'll be happy to sign it.

So while I am fine with the Bridge Bill, I guess for me it doesn't remind me so much of strong leadership.

<hr/>