Impasse on Infrastructure

Without substantial investments in infrastructure, the US is headed for some serious problems, “including ever-longer commutes, an inadequate energy grid, difficulties getting commercial products to market, breakdowns in essential communications and the loss of industries, investments and jobs to competitors overseas,” according to New York Times columnist Bob Herbert. This is obvious to anyone who has been paying attention, no matter his or her political affiliation. In 2009, the nation’s critical infrastructure systems received a “D” in the American Society of Civil Engineers’ Report Card for America’s Infrastructure.

However, there is little agreement on how to generate enough funding for infrastructure projects. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman John Mica is working on a $300 billion highway bill that would keep funding at current levels for the next six years, while Senator Barbara Boxer, Chair of the Environment and Public Works Committee, is proposing a two-year, $109 billion transportation bill. These proposals, however, are largely contingent on the federal gas tax. With increasing fleet fuel efficiency and driving on the decline, the current 18.5 per gallon gas tax will not cover the costs of overhauling our infrastructure, and raising the gas tax, even by a few cents, will undoubtedly face opposition in Congress.

Congressman Aaron Schock is now promoting a six-year highway bill that would supplement revenue from the federal gas tax with money from new oil and gas leases.

This is a novel approach, and it has some merit. It deserves more consideration than it is likely to get from the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Notwithstanding, there is a bigger problem here: the Highway Bill process is broken, and we are stuck in a Congressional traffic jam. What we need to get us moving again is a national infrastructure bank. Originally introduced in Congress in 2007 by Senators Hagel and Dodd, such an infrastructure bank is now supported by Senators Kerry and Hutchinson. An infrastructure bank would consider all types of infrastructure, not solely highways and mass transit. Highways are in need of repair, but bridges, dams, wastewater facilities, and the electricity grid need revamping, too. The bank would rank projects based on their importance to country (rather than local constituents) in order to prioritize funding. Finally, the bank would begin to move towards an actual capital budget that is depreciated over the long-term to ensure that projects receive funding over their entire lifespan.

In short, a cheap and quick fix will not work. Our decrepit infrastructure is a national security liability that must be addressed over the long-term. President Eisenhower recognized the importance of modernizing national infrastructure nearly 60 years ago, paving the way for one of the greatest public works projects. “A network of modern roads is as necessary to defense as it is to our national economy and personal safety,” after all.

Share on Facebook

Tweet