Francis Scott Key Bridge (I-695) complete collapse after large ship hits it

[Rothman]

I find Beltway's summary of events to be slanted and inaccurate.  MAP-21 removed the $100m cap for all states when it came to ER funds.

Once again, we'll see him come up with a very unique perspective on reality and defend it no matter the evidence brought up against it.

[kphoger]

the $100 million cap normally imposed by the Emergency Relief (ER) program under 23 U.S.C. §125.

MAP-21 removed the $100m cap for all states when it came to ER funds.

For the record, here are the 2011 version and the current version of 23 U.S.C. §125.  Compare section (d) between the two for the pertinent $100 million cap that's no longer in there.

[Road Hog]

Q: Do horses vomit?

A: Horses are anatomically and neurologically incapable of vomiting, a trait that sets them apart from most other mammals. This is due to several physiological factors: the cardiac sphincter at the junction of the esophagus and stomach is exceptionally strong and does not reopen once food enters the stomach, even under pressure.

Additionally, the esophagus enters the stomach at a steep angle, making reverse flow nearly impossible.
Horses also lack the neural coordination required for vomiting, as their brain's vomiting center is poorly developed or absent. Compounding this, the stomach is positioned deep within the rib cage, preventing effective compression by abdominal muscles. These design features, while evolutionarily stable, come with serious health implications.

Because horses cannot vomit, they are especially vulnerable to digestive emergencies such as colic or gastric rupture. If they ingest something toxic or suffer from severe bloating, they cannot relieve pressure through vomiting, making early veterinary intervention critical. So while it may seem like a quirky biological fact, it's actually a high-stakes limitation in equine care.

I'll make it clear, you can write this down, I want to fuck a woman as a horse. None of this is a secret, I just, to be clear, many jokes have been made about this but I stand by it. My moral principles are ROCK SOLID. I'm... my feet are firmly planted in the ground. I've got my boots up, they're planted firmly, you cannot move me from my position. This isn't a secret. Talk to a therapist? Why do you want to be the horse Vaush? Because then I'd have a giant dick. Okay? Couldn't you have an uh, a big dick the other way? Well yeah, I mean yeah um, I could have a big dick hypothetically in any variety of scenarios but then it wouldn't really be a horse dick. "Well you could be a human with a horse dick", yes but then I wouldn't have that powerful stallion energy using it. There you go, that's it, that's the whole thing.

I'm going to send this to ChatGPT as a Wet Leg lyric and make a song.

[Rothman]

the $100 million cap normally imposed by the Emergency Relief (ER) program under 23 U.S.C. §125.

MAP-21 removed the $100m cap for all states when it came to ER funds.

For the record, here are the 2011 version and the current version of 23 U.S.C. §125.  Compare section (d) between the two for the pertinent $100 million cap that's no longer in there.

Not sure what your point is.

[Scott5114]

Not sure what your point is.

I think he's just trying to proactively state what the facts are, as a reference point in the event later posts contradict the facts.

[kphoger]

Not sure what your point is.

I was supporting your assertion with proof, to make it easier for everyone to see you were right.

[Beltway]

I find Beltway's summary of events to be slanted and inaccurate.  MAP-21 removed the $100m cap for all states when it came to ER funds.
Once again, we'll see him come up with a very unique perspective on reality and defend it no matter the evidence brought up against it.

Lemme see now ...

23 U.S.C. 125 authorizes $100 million annually for the ER Program. Congress has periodically provided additional funds for the ER Program through supplemental appropriations. MAP-21 eliminated the $100 million per State event cap.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/erelief.cfm

In addition to the permanent authorization, SAFETEA-LU authorized from the General Fund of the Treasury such sums as may be necessary to supplement the permanent authorization in years when Emergency Relief allocations exceed $100 million. Appropriation legislation would be necessary to make the additional funds available. [SAFETEA-LU §1112]
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/factsheets/er.cfm
. . . . .

My interpretation is --

The $100 million annual authorization is a nationwide cap, not per state. That amount comes from the Highway Trust Fund and has remained unchanged since its establishment in 1972, despite inflation and the rising cost of disasters.

What MAP-21 did was eliminate the $100 million per-state-per-event cap, which previously limited how much a single state could receive for a qualifying disaster. So now a state can receive more than $100 million for a single event, but the baseline national funding still sits at $100 million annually, unless Congress provides supplemental appropriations (for something like I-35W bridge in magnitude, albeit that one predated MAP-21, but did need special legislation to exceed the $100 million).

[underlining mine]

So the solution to this could be going to Congress it obtain special legislation ala I-35W bridge for a new Baltimore outer harbor crossing, and work out the details there.

[vdeane]

Plus -- the lack of Key Bridge is not an emergency. The two Interstate highway cross-harbor tunnels carry the 225,000 AADT now and have a total of 12 lanes. That is about the same AADT as the I-495 American Legion Bridge which has 8 thru lanes.  The 400 or so hazmat shipments per day can use surface routes.

Would this be the same American Legion Bridge that people on this forum routinely complain is in dire need of widening?

[Beltway]

Plus -- the lack of Key Bridge is not an emergency. The two Interstate highway cross-harbor tunnels carry the 225,000 AADT now and have a total of 12 lanes. That is about the same AADT as the I-495 American Legion Bridge which has 8 thru lanes.  The 400 or so hazmat shipments per day can use surface routes.

Would this be the same American Legion Bridge that people on this forum routinely complain is in dire need of widening?

Yes indeed -- the northern Potomac River crossing for I-495 Capital Beltway. It is also structurally obsolete.

Actually the full name is American Legion Memorial Bridge.

The bridge is jointly managed by Maryland and Virginia, but ownership and operational responsibility primarily fall under Maryland's jurisdiction. The bridge is part of the MDOT SHA system.

[Rothman]

I find Beltway's summary of events to be slanted and inaccurate.  MAP-21 removed the $100m cap for all states when it came to ER funds.
Once again, we'll see him come up with a very unique perspective on reality and defend it no matter the evidence brought up against it.

Lemme see now ...

23 U.S.C. 125 authorizes $100 million annually for the ER Program. Congress has periodically provided additional funds for the ER Program through supplemental appropriations. MAP-21 eliminated the $100 million per State event cap.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/programadmin/erelief.cfm

In addition to the permanent authorization, SAFETEA-LU authorized from the General Fund of the Treasury such sums as may be necessary to supplement the permanent authorization in years when Emergency Relief allocations exceed $100 million. Appropriation legislation would be necessary to make the additional funds available. [SAFETEA-LU §1112]
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/factsheets/er.cfm
. . . . .

My interpretation is --

The $100 million annual authorization is a nationwide cap, not per state. That amount comes from the Highway Trust Fund and has remained unchanged since its establishment in 1972, despite inflation and the rising cost of disasters.

What MAP-21 did was eliminate the $100 million per-state-per-event cap, which previously limited how much a single state could receive for a qualifying disaster. So now a state can receive more than $100 million for a single event, but the baseline national funding still sits at $100 million annually, unless Congress provides supplemental appropriations (for something like I-35W bridge in magnitude, albeit that one predated MAP-21, but did need special legislation to exceed the $100 million).

[underlining mine]

So the solution to this could be going to Congress it obtain special legislation ala I-35W bridge for a new Baltimore outer harbor crossing, and work out the details there.

Therefore, it is not a special situation pertinent to solely to Maryland and part of some sweetheart deal as you described, especially when we're talking about an emergency as big as this one.  Whether it happened in Texas, North Dakota or New York, inaction on Congress' part to not allocate the funding would have been met with public outrage.

[Beltway]

So the solution to this could be going to Congress it obtain special legislation ala I-35W bridge for a new Baltimore outer harbor crossing, and work out the details there.

Therefore, it is not a special situation pertinent to solely to Maryland and part of some sweetheart deal as you described, especially when we're talking about an emergency as big as this one.  Whether it happened in Texas, North Dakota or New York, inaction on Congress' part to not allocate the funding would have been met with public outrage.

$2 billion in 100% highway special federal funding for a non-emergency? Nothing like this has been done elsewhere.

I-35W bridge collapse at under $200 million would be the closest, and that -was- an emergency -- 130,000 AADT 8-lane urban Interstate highway -- and they did not charge a toll.

So I think it should be reviewed in Congress to see if special project specific funding legislation can be arranged -- that is a decent compromise.

[Rothman]

So the solution to this could be going to Congress it obtain special legislation ala I-35W bridge for a new Baltimore outer harbor crossing, and work out the details there.

Therefore, it is not a special situation pertinent to solely to Maryland and part of some sweetheart deal as you described, especially when we're talking about an emergency as big as this one.  Whether it happened in Texas, North Dakota or New York, inaction on Congress' part to not allocate the funding would have been met with public outrage.

$2 billion in 100% highway special federal funding for a non-emergency? Nothing like this has been done elsewhere.

I-35W bridge collapse at under $200 million would be the closest, and that -was- an emergency -- 130,000 AADT 8-lane urban Interstate highway -- and they did not charge a toll.

So I think it should be reviewed in Congress to see if special project specific funding legislation can be arranged -- that is a decent compromise.

It was already approved by Congress.  No need for additional review.

https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/congress-funding-bill-key-bridge-rebuild-disaster-relief-government-shutdown/

[Beltway]

So I think it should be reviewed in Congress to see if special project specific funding legislation can be arranged -- that is a decent compromise.

It was already approved by Congress.  No need for additional review.
https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/congress-funding-bill-key-bridge-rebuild-disaster-relief-government-shutdown/

Dec. 2024.

Did you read the news articles in the last few days? It can and should be canceled pending new legislation.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-wes-moore-key-bridge-baltimore-national-guard-b2813409.html

I am one of the people who has sent letters to the current administration about this matter.

I-70 in Baltimore and I-83 extension to I-95 in Baltimore were congressionally approved Interstate highways. Did they get built?

[Rothman]

So I think it should be reviewed in Congress to see if special project specific funding legislation can be arranged -- that is a decent compromise.

It was already approved by Congress.  No need for additional review.
https://www.cbsnews.com/baltimore/news/congress-funding-bill-key-bridge-rebuild-disaster-relief-government-shutdown/

Dec. 2024.

Did you read the news articles in the last few days? It can and should be canceled pending new legislation.

I-70 in Baltimore and I-83 extension to I-95 in Baltimore were congressionally approved Interstate highways. Did they get built?

Designation of Interstates and allocation of funds are totally different animals, especially with a project already headed towards construction.

I have seen nothing that would indicate that the project should be canceled.

[Beltway]

I-70 in Baltimore and I-83 extension to I-95 in Baltimore were congressionally approved Interstate highways. Did they get built?

Designation of Interstates and allocation of funds are totally different animals, especially with a project already headed towards construction.
I have seen nothing that would indicate that the project should be canceled.

I have asked this several times before --
do you know the history of the I-266 Three Sisters Bridge?

The substructure contract was well under construction with piles and foundations in the river.

Did it get built?

[Rothman]

I-70 in Baltimore and I-83 extension to I-95 in Baltimore were congressionally approved Interstate highways. Did they get built?

Designation of Interstates and allocation of funds are totally different animals, especially with a project already headed towards construction.
I have seen nothing that would indicate that the project should be canceled.

I have asked this several times before --
do you know the history of the I-266 Three Sisters Bridge?

The substructure contract was well under construction with piles and foundations in the river.

Did it get built?

I think the lack of response to that question from all users on here shows that you're the only one that thinks it's relevant.

[Beltway]

I have asked this several times before --
do you know the history of the I-266 Three Sisters Bridge?
The substructure contract was well under construction with piles and foundations in the river.
Did it get built?

I think the lack of response to that question from all users on here shows that you're the only one that thinks it's relevant.

Because it is directly relevant to the Key Bridge contract not being a done deal.

Besides, I-70 and I-83 cancelation left a lot of pavement and bridge stubs that were never to be used.

[Plutonic Panda]

So are you basically trying to say you don't want this bridge built? Cause I don't think either of these states are gonna come up with that money.

[LilianaUwU]

The only opinion I have on the replacement bridge is that the new bridge should have the same number of lanes as on either side of it, unlike the old one, if only for consistency.

[Rothman]

I have asked this several times before --
do you know the history of the I-266 Three Sisters Bridge?
The substructure contract was well under construction with piles and foundations in the river.
Did it get built?

I think the lack of response to that question from all users on here shows that you're the only one that thinks it's relevant.

Because it is directly relevant to the Key Bridge contract not being a done deal.

Baloney.  You're talking about a bitter, local fight over fifty years ago for a new bridge compared to a needed emergency replacement for an existing crossing.  Even the legal framework is totally changed from back then and I'd assume the nasty experience of I-266 probably fed into why we have the public outreach requirements under NEPA today.

[Plutonic Panda]

The only opinion I have on the replacement bridge is that the new bridge should have the same number of lanes as on either side of it, unlike the old one, if only for consistency.

That seems pretty reasonable. Even as someone that likes large freeways there's no point in adding lanes to the bridge if they're not gonna widen the freeways leading to and from it which they aren't. What would be nice if they added shoulders and a pedestrian/bicycle element to it.

[Beltway]

Baloney.  You're talking about a bitter, local fight over fifty years ago for a new bridge compared to a needed emergency replacement for an existing crossing.  Even the legal framework is totally changed from back then and I'd assume the nasty experience of I-266 probably fed into why we have the public outreach requirements under NEPA today.

It is not an emergency -- and it no longer exists -- and will not without a massive expenditure.

[PColumbus73]

The only opinion I have on the replacement bridge is that the new bridge should have the same number of lanes as on either side of it, unlike the old one, if only for consistency.

That seems pretty reasonable. Even as someone that likes large freeways there's no point in adding lanes to the bridge if they're not gonna widen the freeways leading to and from it which they aren't. What would be nice if they added shoulders and a pedestrian/bicycle element to it.

Maybe if there was some redevelopment plan in the Hawkins Point area it would be easier to justify pedestrian / bicycle facilities. As-is, other than Fort Armistead Park, it would feel like a dead-end.

[kphoger]

$2 billion in 100% highway special federal funding for a non-emergency? Nothing like this has been done elsewhere.

I-35W bridge collapse at under $200 million would be the closest, and that -was- an emergency -- 130,000 AADT 8-lane urban Interstate highway -- and they did not charge a toll.

So I think it should be reviewed in Congress to see if special project specific funding legislation can be arranged -- that is a decent compromise.

It is not an emergency

You keep saying this.

A bridge collapses on an Interstate in a major city in 2007.  Both the mayor and the governor declare a state of emergency.  Apparently, this is an emergency.

A bridge collapses on an Interstate in a major city in 2024.  Both the mayor and the governor declare a state of emergency.  Apparently, this is not an emergency.

The only difference I see is that the President didn't declare a state of emergency after the Key Bridge collapse.  But that's only because the governor didn't ask the President to declare one.  And, in turn, that was likely because the President had already promised:

"It's my intention that the federal government will pay for the entire cost of reconstructing that bridge, and I expect congress to support my effort. This will take some time. But the people of Baltimore can count on us to stick with them every step of the way until the port is reopen and the bridge is rebuilt. We're not leaving until this job is done."