35W Bridge Collapse: Bush Visit, Pawlenty on Taxes, Bachmann vs. St. Cloud Times

By Andy Birkey
Saturday, August 04, 2007 at 3:46 pm

President Bush visited the scene of the 35W bridge collapse Saturday morning and promised a quick rebuild: “[There is] a lot of paperwork involved with government, and one of our jobs is to work with the governor and the mayor and the senators and the members of the Congress to cut through that paperwork. And to see if we can’t get this bridge rebuilt in a way that not only expedites the flow of traffic but in a way that can stand the test of time.”

Gov. Pawlenty says he will approve a tax increase in special session: “The governor will work with legislators on a comprehensive and long-term approach,” Pawlenty spokesman Brian McClung told the Star Tribune. “We would expect that to include some of the governor’s ideas and some of the legislature’s ideas and under those circumstances, a gas tax could be included… Yes, it’s accurate to describe this as a breaking of the [no-tax] pledge,” McClung said. “But these are extraordinary circumstances. The governor feels we need to come together and work as aggressively as we can to address these issues. He thinks that’s the right thing for our state.”

The St. Cloud Times wrote that Michele Bachmann and John Kline, both R-Minn., voted “yes” to a procedural vote to adjourn before a federal aid package for the 35W bridge collapse was passed: “Earlier in the day, Bachmann and Republican Rep. John Kline had voted to adjourn the House before it approved the federal aid. Republican Rep. Jim Ramstad and Democratic Reps. Tim Walz, Betty McCollum, Keith Ellison, Collin Peterson and (James) Oberstar voted against adjournment that failed 180-237. Bachmann’s office did not respond to e-mails or a call for a comment.”

Bachmann told 1280 AM’s The Patriot Saturday afternoon that it simply isn’t true. “We’re going to ask for a letter to the editor to the St. Cloud paper saying the truth of what happened,” Bachmann said. “There was a motion to dismiss on the intelligence bill because of…some problems with the intelligence bill so a motion to adjourn was made so we could have time to get something done. It was completely unrelated to the bridge bill. So we would have come back in and dealt with the bridge minutes later… The St. Cloud paper printed it, and they shouldn’t have.”

Follow Andy Birkey on Twitter

Categories & Tags:

Comments

6 Comments

Karl Bremer
Comment posted August 5, 2007 @ 9:00 am

Is anyone keeping track of how many times Bachmann blames the media? It’s always someone else’s fault isn’t it? If Michele was so right on this one, why did she not return phone calls or e-mails to the reporter? Maybe someone should ask her Republican colleague Jim Ramstad why he didn’t vote to adjourn. And what is Bachmann doing all over this bridge issue anyway? It’s not in her district. She’s not on any relevant committees (indeed, she serves on only one committee). And she voted against the transporation bill a week before the bridge collapsed.

If Michele wants to get her name in the paper, maybe she should start explaining her vote against the transportation bill. But that would mean a reporter would have to ask her, and that’s not likely to happen outside of the St. Cloud Times.

Veritas
Comment posted August 5, 2007 @ 10:53 pm

Not a whole lotta there,there All Minnesota congress people voted to adjourn..do you really think she was against money for the bridge…your hatred is clouding your vision……. yea the media routinely gets it wrong in regards to Mrs. Bachmann

Robin Marty
Comment posted August 6, 2007 @ 4:41 pm

Veritas http://clerk.house.g…

a list of who voted to adjourn at 4:28 pm, and who voted against

Karl Bremer
Comment posted August 5, 2007 @ 4:00 am

Is anyone keeping track of how many times Bachmann blames the media? It's always someone else's fault isn't it? If Michele was so right on this one, why did she not return phone calls or e-mails to the reporter? Maybe someone should ask her Republican colleague Jim Ramstad why he didn't vote to adjourn. And what is Bachmann doing all over this bridge issue anyway? It's not in her district. She's not on any relevant committees (indeed, she serves on only one committee). And she voted against the transporation bill a week before the bridge collapsed.

If Michele wants to get her name in the paper, maybe she should start explaining her vote against the transportation bill. But that would mean a reporter would have to ask her, and that's not likely to happen outside of the St. Cloud Times.