Paul Krugman Deliberately Misleads, Again

In today's editorial, Paul Krugman lashes out at NJ Governor Chris Christie for cancelling a 8.7 billion dollar tunnel project.  The project sounds like a good idea, and much of the money is coming from the Feds, (only three billion from NJ) so, if you just read his editorial, the project does sound completely rational.  What is this irrational, "destructive", and "incredibly foolish" Christie up to anyway?


A trivial Google search (I typed in "christie tunnel hudson river") reveals something that Krugman somehow fails to mention: The project is facing potential cost overruns of up to 5 Billion Dollars, all of which would be paid by the State of NJ.  The very first hit is entitled "NJ governor kills Hudson River tunnel due to costs".  Am I to believe that Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman didn't know that?  Or is it more likely that he deliberately intended to mislead his readers?


Another article states that the project may still move forward.

Christie and U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood will meet today “to discuss a path forward on the ARC tunnel project"

Presumably, Christie will seek a deal where the Feds will help pay for some of the overruns.  Suddenly, Christie is the one who seems eminently rational, not the misleading Krugman.