'We’re building this damn bridge,' Gov. Ferguson says as Interstate Bridge cost soars 140% 70%

By Erik Neumann24%

3/18/2026, 10:32:04 AM

BS Summary: This article contains 15 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Authority, Representativeness Heuristic, and Framing Effect, with Bandwagon as the most egregious example at 11.5% saturation with 78 hits. Analysis detected 366 faulty-reasoning hits from 678 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 62.4% and a BS Rank of 70% (6,772 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 69.10% of the article peer group.

Costs for an Interstate Bridge project between Washington and Oregon states have soared by 140%, adding billions to the project's estimates. 
The cost of the project to replace the Interstate Bridge between Washington and Oregon is going up again. 
According to new official estimates released Tuesday morning, the price will increase approximately 140% from a 2022 estimate of $6 billion to a new target of $14.4 billion. 
While dramatic, the new cost of the decades long megaproject is not surprising. 
A combination of project delays, rising materials and labor costs, and tariffs led to predictions and warnings from project administrators that the price would increase significantly. 
Other large infrastructure projects around the U.S. have faced similar price jumps in recent years. 
Washington Gov. 
Bob Ferguson joined with local lawmakers, labor leaders and transit officials on Tuesday morning to say he and Oregon Gov. 
Tina Kotek are committed to moving forward with the core elements of the bridge with the funding that’s available. 
“I’m here today with key project partners to make it clear that we are all committed to moving forward with a core set of projects to replace our bridge with a modern fixed-span structure including light rail,” Ferguson said. 
Those core projects include replacing the two existing bridge spans, connecting them to Interstate 5 and extending light rail from North Portland to downtown Vancouver. 
That series of projects will cost $7.65 billion, Ferguson said, adding that the IBR currently has $5.5 billion available in state and federal funding and is pursuing another $1 billion from the Federal Transit Administration. 
The remaining parts of the full five-mile corridor will be completed in phases as funding becomes available, he said. 
Construction on the overall project, including the bridge and corresponding interchange overhauls in both Oregon and Washington, could last up to 15 years, according to officials. 
The new cost estimate actually ranges from $13.5 billion to $15.2 billion. 
The previous estimate ranged from $5 billion to $7.5 billion. 
The Interstate Bridge Replacement Program, or IBR for short, grew out of the previous proposal known as the Columbia River Crossing, which fell apart in 2013. 
The biggest concern about the current 109-year-old structure is that it would not be able to withstand a major earthquake. 
The bridge’s narrow size creates a bottleneck on I-5, delaying traffic and sometimes stopping it altogether when the bridge lift is raised to allow ships to pass below on the Columbia River. 
It also lacks dedicated lanes for mass transit and provides limited space for bicycles and pedestrians. 
“This is the most important infrastructure project the state is going to do in the next several years,” said Washington state Rep. 
Jake Fey, D-Tacoma, co-chair of the state’s Joint Transportation Committee. 
In recent years, the IBR has blown passed deadlines, even as officials have notched sizable grants from state and federal partners. 
So far both Washington and Oregon have pledged $1 billion each for the project. 
In the past, IBR staff have pointed out that other bridge projects across the country have faced similar cost increases in the past decade. 
In one nearby example, the estimated cost of the Hood River-White Salmon Bridge increased 119% between 2022 and 2024. 
Transportation planners have tried to reduce the price of the IBR in recent months. 
In January, the U.S. 
Coast Guard approved a continuous fixed-span design for the bridge. 
That approval will lower the cost by as much as $1.7 billion, compared to the alternative of a bridge with a lift to accommodate vessels passing underneath on the Columbia river. 
Part of that agreement included a settlement where the IBR will pay four marine companies that operate farther east on the river $140 million to mitigate potential business impacts with a lower bridge. 
The program is planning to find a contractor in 2027 when they will finalize the bridge design. 
Construction is expected to begin in 2028. 
“I’m not interested in looking backwards, OK?” 
Ferguson said. 
“We’re building this damn bridge. 
That’s happening.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 3.3%KUOW: 2.6%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 3.8%KUOW: 1.3%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 3.7%KUOW: 3.4%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 5.8%Erik Neumann: 2.8%KUOW: 1.2%Representativeness Heuristic5.8%This article: 1.9%Erik Neumann: 0.6%KUOW: 0.7%Hindsight Bias1.9%This article: 4.0%Erik Neumann: 1.7%KUOW: 1.4%Overconfidence Bias4.0%This article: 4.6%Erik Neumann: 7.5%KUOW: 7.4%Framing Effect4.6%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.5%KUOW: 1.0%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.7%KUOW: 1.0%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 2.7%Erik Neumann: 0.4%KUOW: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect2.7%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 7.0%KUOW: 3.8%Optimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 2.2%KUOW: 1.8%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 8.6%KUOW: 8.0%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.1%KUOW: 2.0%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.9%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.9%KUOW: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 2.7%KUOW: 2.0%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.5%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 1.2%KUOW: 2.7%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.4%KUOW: 1.1%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.5%KUOW: 0.4%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.5%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.3%Straw Man0.0%This article: 9.0%Erik Neumann: 6.6%KUOW: 4.3%Appeal to Authority9.0%This article: 0.3%Erik Neumann: 1.8%KUOW: 1.4%False Dilemma0.3%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.2%KUOW: 0.9%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.2%KUOW: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 2.8%Erik Neumann: 3.0%KUOW: 4.1%Hasty Generalization2.8%This article: 1.0%Erik Neumann: 0.4%KUOW: 0.3%Red Herring1.0%This article: 11.5%Erik Neumann: 2.8%KUOW: 0.8%Bandwagon11.5%This article: 4.6%Erik Neumann: 6.7%KUOW: 6.1%Appeal to Emotion4.6%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.2%KUOW: 0.8%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.6%KUOW: 2.2%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 1.6%KUOW: 0.3%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 2.8%Erik Neumann: 1.4%KUOW: 3.3%Anecdotal2.8%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 1.6%KUOW: 1.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.1%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.4%KUOW: 0.2%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 1.0%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.9%Erik Neumann: 1.7%KUOW: 0.8%Quote-first Misdirection0.9%This article: 1.9%Erik Neumann: 2.8%KUOW: 3.2%Biased Writer Voice1.9%This article: 0.3%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 1.5%Indoctrination0.3%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.8%KUOW: 1.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Erik Neumann: 0.0%KUOW: 1.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

678 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.