Here’s my belated comment on the deal that Gov. Snyder struck with Canada.
Some politicians talk; others get things done. To put it another way, some are show horses, some are work horses.
It’s easy to dismiss the show horse, the politician who is often on the losing end of a 440-1 vote in the U.S. House (I’m looking at you, Ron Paul), or is known more for media appearances than legislative accomplishments (Michele Bachmann).
Gov. Snyder, from the beginning, has refused to throw rhetorical red meat to conservatives. That’s fine; perhaps that’s his personality at work, a political tactic, or both. But from the beginning of his political career, I’ve feared that it was evidence of pragmatism.
To a large extent, pragmatism is a virtue in politics. You’ve got, as the Kenny Rogers song goes, to know when to hold ’em and know when to fold ’em. Better half a loaf than none, don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good, and all that.
But a politician who is good for the people is one who considers both principle and pragmatism–and knows when to draw lines. At some point, being able to say “we got it done” is less important than saying, “we held true to important principle X.”
When it comes to the bridge question, I’ve not been able to take a strong stand one way or the other, but I’ve been uneasy about the Snyder deal from the git-go.
Brother Payne has done an able job here, here, but most especially here, in calling out some problems with the deal, which he calls “a plan to destroy the American business.” (That would be the privately owned Ambassador Bridge, just upriver from where the new bridge will be.)
Granted, building roads and bridges is arguably a more defensible task for government than just about anything it does. Even a fan of limited government would be hard pressed to say there’s no role for government in building a bridge, especially one that spans two countries.
But the existence of toll roads shows that government action is not always required when it comes to roads. And the Ambassador Bridge tells a similar story about bridges. I know the situation with the Ambassador is not perfect. But rather than work to undermine a privately owned U.S. company, Snyder should have recognized the principle that private provision of any good or service is philosophically (and often, operationally) superior to public provision.
Trucks using the Ambassador have to use 17 or 18 stoplights when they are in Canada. That speaks to a deficiency in Canadian infrastructure. Perhaps Snyder should have pressured the Canadians to find a solution that does not endanger an American business (and for that matter, the Blue Water Bridge, an existing public asset).