Will Hwy. 40 case help Haas’ political hopes?
Ah, what could have been.
Had Bill Haas somehow succeeded in thwarting the Highway 40 shutdown, his place in the pantheon of beloved St. Louisans would have fallen somewhere between Eero Saarinen and Stan Musial.
That the case was argued in front of Rush Limbaugh’s uncle might have been good for some bonus street cred among fellow Democrats.
Instead, Haas’ populist pitch managed only to provide a fleeting hope to commuters dreading next week’s traffic crunch.
Though Haas may get high marks for effort - he spent the holiday weekend composing a 28-page motion - Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh found the former School Board member’s case fatally flawed.
Technically, Haas named the wrong defendant - the state Department of Transportation instead of the Highways and Transportation Commission.
âOn this point alone, the court could dismiss this cause,” Limbaugh wrote in a footnote.
Though Limbaugh’s ruling is packed with opaque case law - my sympathies to the law clerk who, on top of the usual dicta, had to research the history of the Highway 40 reconstruction project - the case was thrown out on two key points:
- Haas failed to offer any alternative solution to fixing the aging highway.
- Haas did not show personal harm beyond âairing general grievances shared by a large contingency of affected commuters.”
Even so, the case might help Haas’ political aspirations - now focused on Todd Akin’s Congressional seat.
Haas can rightly claim that he fought the highway shutdown - red meat for West County voters, who would be less familiar with Haas’ serial attempts at public office. (Mayor, alderman and circuit attorney, to name a few.)
Limbaugh’s ruling does not touch on Haas’ political fortunes, but it does wax optimistically about the region’s response to the highway shutdown.
His honor opined:
The Court fervently believes that the citizens of Missouri, especially the St. Louis metro area commuters directly affected by the I-64 Project, will meet the challenges presented by such a highway construction project of this magnitude with the usual stoic resolve that Missourians are known to possess. Whatever difficulties these closures may bring, the St. Louis community will face and overcome with patience and fortitude.
In other news:
-
Curious what tests Rudy Giuliani got at Barnes-Jewish Hospital?
-
Gov. Matt Blunt names new directors of the revenue and labor departments.
-
Bookmark it: St. Louis fares well on another city rankings list.
-
Claire McCaskill is still unhappy about Mizzou not playing in the Orange Bowl.
Nick, after all these years, at my advance age, I refuse to start looking at reality.
and finally on the issue of publicity and whether my involvement was a publicity stunt:
Let’s talk about what’s a publicity stunt and what’s not, and what is meant by a publicity stunt.
A publicity stunt is something insincere or just done for publicity.
And my correct term is “publicity strategy”.
And I’ve done some.
Best example is when I run around the perimeter of a district I intend to run for, as when I ran a marathon through all 28 wards in fall or 2004 to kick off 2005 mayor’s race.
Of course it’s a publicity strategy fool. Would I do that if I knew no one was watching?
Maybe that should be the test?
The marathon shows some interesting qualities in a candidate: vigor, ability to put themselves out there in their district, know where the district is, willing to work hard, etc.
Would I have done it if I were sure no one would cover it? almost certainly not.
Did I do it anyhow even after it was clear that it wasnt being covered? Yes.
First I try to keep my commitments, and second I trained for it and did it partly for the joyous exalting challenge of it. And I did well even if I had to walk the last 8 miles of the 26 or so.
if you have to ask it’s probably not a publicity stunt.
So would I have sued modot even if I knew media woudlnt cover it?
).
I dont mean that in any disrespectful way to either of them. Oh no, not me.
You bet your ass (that’s a legal term).
I was involved in the issue for almost a year, months before I decided to run for Congress.
Plus, I’m always running for something; so everything I do is a publicity strategy, and nothing I do can ever be because I believe in it.
I only do things I believe in!
this was a worthy challenge and an important issue;
it cost me $1000 dollars and a couple weeks of my life, and the risk of embarrassment;
but I did well and I’m proudl
modot was afraid of losing it and they should be.
Ask anyone who was in court, I believe, I beat them like an old rug.
The judge could have given it to me if he wanted to. I gave him the law and the facts.
I like to think he wanted to give it to me and just couldnt pull the trigger.
It would have been a brave decision, and I said all along, in my mind that would have made him a bigger hero than Joe or I. Joe was even a bigger hero than I. But I was ok. Very ok.
And I’m a humble guy, and I have a lot to be humble about as friends and others remind me of regularly.
Would it have helped my political career if I had won? of course! as it should have.
DId it help my career such as it is, even tho I didnt win, of course! as it should have.
but it wasnt the publicity; it’s what’s the publicity about!
Standing up for people in those parts of their life that they cant stand up for themselves well.
That’s what good public servants, and aspiring ones, do.
1000 politicians in the area and hardly a one stood up, and just with speeches if you dont count Muschany (and I dont count him much
Do I deserve credit for standing up? Of course!
Was it a publicity stunt? Of course not.
And not one reporter asked that, to their credit, except one new guy. I think some fool, I mean aspiring Mike Bush wanna-be, from Channel 5.