Minneapolis’ own Barry Casselman was just blocks away from the 35W bridge at the time of its collapse.  Always a keen observer of events and public policy, Casselman’s proximity to the disaster allowed him to render some particularly salient thoughts.

Bridges are not only what we use every day for transport, they are by their nature powerful symbols we use in our language as metaphors for how we understand, and how we relate to others.

It should be no surprise, then, that the collapse of the I-35 bridge in Minneapolis would lead to an avalanche of commentary and interpretation about political and economic matters not directly related to the disaster.

Eusebio Val, Washington correspondent for the Spanish daily La Vanguardia and an astute observer of the United States and Europe, wrote me a few days later from his home in Barcelona (where he was vacationing) that many Europeans were interpreting the Minneapolis bridge collapse as a metaphor for their belief that America’s power was declining in the world. He does not necessarily agree with that, and I certainly don’t, but it illustrates how easily a local and single incident can be transformed into something else.

Back in the United States, it did not take very long for local political partisans, mostly Democrats, to contend that the bridge collapse was the result of the Republican governor of Minnesota not agreeing to raise taxes in the recent legislative session. The legislature is overwhelmingly controlled by Democrats who have called for dramatically increased taxes.

Casselman sees a “very smart guy” in Governor Pawlenty who – bolstered by public opinion – will resist DFL calls for increased taxes.

Gov. Tim Pawlenty of Minnesota, a conservative Republican who had previously and, I think, gutsily resisted tax increases and prevailed, suddenly announced that he might call a special session of the state legislature to raise the gasoline tax, even though Congress had speedily approved and President Bush signed a bill for $250 million to pay for a new bridge.

The local public apparently did not agree. A poll taken at the height of emotion about the disaster showed overwhelming opposition to an increase in the gas tax. Republican Sen. Norm Coleman, a political moderate, wrote an Op-Ed in one of the local daily newspapers suggesting that new taxes were not the solution, but a new approach was, citing three recent bridge repairs in record time at lower cost using private companies and incentives. Newt Gingrich wrote an Op-Ed in the other local daily suggesting the same thing.

Mr. Pawlenty is a very smart guy, and I can’t imagine him going forward with a gas-tax increase. Instead, using a new free-market approach with incentives, he and local officials could get the new bridge built and in operation in time for the Republican National convention next September in St. Paul. What a statement he and Minnesota could then make welcoming delegates and the national media with a ceremony to open the reconstructed bridge in less than a year and under budget.

No one would dispute the “very smart” designation attributed to the Governor by Casselman.  But our gut instinct was to be very worried that the Governor would succumb – a concern validated by Pawlenty’s willingness to put “everything on the table”.  It is for this very reason national conservatives don’t know what to make of Pawlenty. 

But despite conservative misgivings, if Minnesota manages to be well on its way to completion of a new bridge “in less than a year and under budget” – and with no new taxes – Minnesota’s boy governor may prove an irresistable addition to the national ticket.  Could that possibly be the reason DFL officials (and their hacks) are already so critical of the rebuilding effort?