http://www.freep.com/article/2011061...text|FRONTPAGE
If this happens, it has the potential to be a game changer.
http://www.freep.com/article/2011061...text|FRONTPAGE
If this happens, it has the potential to be a game changer.
And how much money has Maroun given this guy?
As of the time last November's election, Sen. Kowall was not one of the four members of his 7-person committee to have taken an acknowledged campaign contribution from a Maroun-connected source. Of course that could have changed in the six months since, or maybe the Senator's ambivalent statements about the new bridge means he's angling for a check before he makes up his mind.
I don't know that swearing in witnesses at this hearing will change anything, other than the level of attention, which may be the point.
I love the part in the article about taking a trip to Detroit to see the site of the new bridge. Some of these guys may indeed need to be shown where Canada is, to say nothing of Delray. Now if I were a legislator, I would go on the tour, so as to hit Mexicantown for lunch.
...how much taxpayer money will be spent in all the "research" by the committee?
I hope this just is not a way to constantly come up with delays. This needs to be greenlit as soon as possible.. no more excuses..
After watching Kwame Kilpatrick go through the ringer after lying under oath, a lot of people involved may be compelled to change their tunes when direct questions will call for direct answers that will hold them legally accountable. Not to mention, if Maroun and his employees that will end up testifying before the committee, are as dishonest and underhanded as they are made out to be. Having to answer questions under oath could not only seriously jeopardize their chances of blocking the DRIC. But, it could also destroy their chances, slim as they may be, of ever getting a second span built.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sandhouse
And forget the tour, I'll be hitting Armando's for the Tuesday special tomorrow anyway.
I don't think any private company should be allowed to own and operate a key road bridge linking major highways between two nations. It is not in the best security interest of either nation. I suggest the Ambassador Bridge should be purchased by compulsory order and run by a Canadian-USA joint governmental organization. If the level of traffic is such that a second Bridge is needed then the same organization should build it and operate it
Absolutely YES. I agree wholeheartedly. I'm sorry to inform the 'free marketers' here [[there is no such thing), but it is in the best interests of our security that this crossing be run by a governmental organization.Quote:
Originally Posted by coracle
Great point.Quote:
Originally Posted by 1KielsonDrive
In this case, the free marketers have been lied to. Maroun has very smartly painted himself as the champion of the independent, free business, just struggling to get along. All the while, he's raping them with a charge that's 30-45% higher than the 10-year old Bluewater Bridge. And he bought his bridge at a great discount to current cashflow value. Brilliant man.
10 years old? Wasn't the Blue Water Bridge built back in the 30's?Quote:
Originally Posted by Wesley Mouch
Two bridges. The second bridge was built in 1997. The original bridge was renovated in 1999.
http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,1607,...2062--,00.html
Thanks, Novine.