I'd assume that is the same view of mostly all taxpayers.   

I think its quite similar to the principle of subrogation in auto insurance.  Here's one definition:

Subrogation is a term describing the right held by most insurance carriers to legally pursue a third party that caused an insurance loss to an insured. This allows the insurance carrier to recover the amounts of the claim it paid to the insured for the loss.   Click Here  

It appears when the govt pays up front for the bridge loss, it would then later be reimbursed by subrogation by any payments  (for example from a court case against the responsible parties.) 

Perhaps someone familiar with maritime law will clarify further.