Way back in the early 1980s, when my military career was just kicking off, we the “finger-on-the-button” missileer types underwent yet another disaster preparation exercise at my base, F.E. Warren up in Cheyenne, Wyoming.
Such events usually centered around simulated attacks on a missile site, or perhaps a simulated truck bomb at the front gate. Years later, for example, when I was teaching at the AF Academy and working as a part-time military cop, we had a simulated derailing of a train (there are tracks that run through the academy north to south) carrying toxic chemicals. That is the type of simulated disaster we planned and practiced procedures for.
Well, back at my missile base, we were gearing up for whatever the evaluators had in mind for our disaster scenario. We were ready, we thought. Then came the actual input about what the problem was going to be. Nothing blew up, no one attacked the base directly.
Rather, we were told all electricity into the base had been cut off and would remain out for a week.
Now, at first blush, that may not sound like too much. But as we scrambled to assess the effect of the outage, we realized essentially all the means we had to communicate with the ICBM sites were lost (this was way before cellphones and such). All the missile sites and underground command posts would need to rely on their diesel generators for far longer than anyone had ever really planned for. On the whole base, only two manual typewriters were located and orders ended up needing to be handwritten and delivered by courier, a very slow and inefficient way to run a nuclear operation. We hadn’t considered such a basic failure, and ours was a failure of imagination. Happily, it was just an exercise.
I was reminded of those long ago struggles as I read one of my favorite Colorado Politics sections, the Out West Roundup. Yes, my mind is wired a bit differently and I make odd connections. Did you know, for example, Koala bears have fingerprints that are nearly identical to humans? How about the fact ketchup was sold in the 1830s as medicine to treat upset tummies?
Anyway, in this week’s roundup, we learned more about the effects of recent flooding in the Grand Canyon area. First and most tragic, of course, are the deaths of two people and a third person is still missing.
But the effects of the disaster on local infrastructure are going to continue to be felt for months, long after the news cycle has moved on from Arizona. It turns out the single existing dilapidated water pipeline serving the area was washed away. That single water source provided all the water consumed on the South Rim, meaning hundreds of tourists who had reservations for hotels there had to find other accommodations and that isn’t easy in that part of the state. The ripple effects of such a disaster will affect employment, tax revenues and many other vital areas of governance.
And so, I pondered, what are the infrastructure vulnerabilities here in Colorado? There has been a good bit of discussion and debate about constructing a Front Range rail line, and I think that would be a good idea. But I also wondered about how we are doing statewide on more basic things, and do we have areas that are single choke-points for services that could, if damaged, cause massive disruptions here in the Centennial State?
So, I took a look at the 2025 infrastructure report and other sources to see how we are doing.
Not great, as it turns out.
Our roads are iffy, as most drivers will note. With only 34% of roads graded in good condition (the national average is still a rather pathetic 45%) we scored a D+. We also rate near the bottom in traffic, which will come as no surprise to my readers in metro areas, especially Denver.
Our water systems are stressed, with more than 2,000 public water systems relying on pipes and pumps and such more than 50 years old. That issue alone needs about $10 billion to fix. Given the entire state budget runs a touch under $50 billion, it’s easy to see no easy solution exists.
Add to those other issues, such as just maintaining the roads and highways that we have, the effects of wildfires on the increase due to climate change and you can see our infrastructure issues are profound and of immediate importance.
Yet, few, if any, candidates run for office (myself, frankly, included back in 2008) with infrastructure as the core issue of their campaigns. Infrastructure is a big and bulky word that just doesn’t get the attention it deserves. Voters just don’t get excited about a call to fix old bridges and water pipelines. They would rather hear about grander things, and candidates usually oblige.
And that’s a pity.
Candidly, I don’t think my 2008 congressional run would have had a different outcome had I made pothole-and-pipeline repairs the core of my campaign (I focused on economic issues and national security primarily), but it is now more important than ever that those who actually win their elections keep an eye on infrastructure concerns.
The problem, of course, is that most elected officials would like to be reelected and in politics, being seen as, say, the bridge fixer, doesn’t seem to play as well as being all about national defense.
I would like to posit, however, that “conventional wisdom” might just be wrong.
These days, I suspect voters might support a candidate who focuses on the smaller things in life that often turn out to be rather big things in life. Just ask the folks on the South Rim of the Grand Canyon with no water. Would they rather have, say, their governor focus on fixing the pipeline or purging the voter rolls of non-existent fake voters?
The old conventional wisdom was you get elected by having grand visions. I’d argue a candidate can actually have both grand visions and very specific practical ones. Are you going to win a congressional race by making wildfire mitigation your core issue? The old pros would tell you no, but in this new era, I’m not quite so sure as I once was. Running on infrastructure was a bad idea.
It will take a bold choice by a candidate to run on infrastructure, but I think the time may have arrived for a daring and frankly courageous take on what is most important and that is infrastructure.
Hal Bidlack is a retired professor of political science and a retired Air Force lieutenant colonel who taught more than 17 years at the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.
Published in print and online since 1898. Subscriber-only news stories daily, designed for public policy arena professionals, plus the weekly print edition every Saturday.
Welcome to the Denver Gazette
Subscribe to stay up to date with all things Colorado.
Streak: 9 days i
Stories you’ve missed since your last login:
Stories you’ve saved for later:
Recommended stories based on your interests:
