I think the way to look at the CRC project is that it was an expensive process that will someday lead to another bridge over the Columbia, probably west of the I-5 bridge. The fact that there were no alternative plans to the CRC shows how arrogant the planners and backers of the project were. As for its failure in the Washington senate: it's well known that Republicans are less enthusiastic about mass transit than Democrats, and the fact that this truth is what ended the CRC shows how fragile the project was.
From what I've read, the planners of the CRC spent between 170-175 million before the project was ended. Much of that on consultants.
I'm glad that the bridge will not go forward, but it's chilling to think of why the Republicans in Washington were/are against it, (and from what I've read, state senate Republicans from Clark Co. played a big part in killing it): they were against the light-rail part of the plan, because mass-transit discourages people from buying and driving cars, and would have encouraged urban Portlanders to come to less urbanized Vancouver. They were against an increase in the gas tax which would have helped pay for the overall transportation budget. And they were against a bridge toll, presumably because that also would have discouraged people from driving.