Photo: U.S. Dept. of Transportation
Can the United States succeed in upgrading its infrastructure, which the American Society of Civil Engineers has long rated as in a dangerous “D+” condition?
According to the White House, “Nothing more visibly reveals the failure of Washington than the crumbling roads, bridges, and infrastructure that dot America’s landscape. Instead of putting people to work, fragmented and unpredictable federal approval processes drag on for years and sometimes decades. It’s time to lighten the federal touch, provide clear rules of the road for new technologies, and empower communities to modernize this archaic system.”
Despite the general agreement on both sides of the political aisle that America’s infrastructure has urgently required attention for some time, nothing of consequence has been accomplished. Prior discussions have not concentrated on contentious roadblocks—such as lengthy environmental impact statements—that exacerbate any projects that seek to bring the nation’s road, bridges, airports and rail lines into the 21st century. The White House cites Boston’s Anderson Bridge as an example:
“The Anderson Memorial Bridge between Boston and Cambridge… took 11 months to build … in 1912. When it came time to repair it nearly 100 years later, the project dragged on for close to 5 years—and at a significant cost overrun. So with all the advantages of modern technology, why did it take more than 5 times as long to repair the structure today as it did to create it outright more than a century ago? Unsurprisingly, the reason has little to do with engineering or technical demands. Rather, the Anderson Bridge project was a victim of a bloated, tangled patchwork of regulatory oversight, including a historical commission, environmental agencies, and state transportation bureaucrats, among others.”
Clearly, there was not a great deal of optimism about President Trump’s pledge to finally address the issue. A careful examination of the White House’s just-released “Legislative Outline for Rebuilding Infrastructure in America,” however, indicates that this latest attempt might actually produce solid results. Rather a mere recitation of the problem and a wishful description of goals, it actually provides a roadmap with viable solutions on how to overcome the obstacles and produce results.
With a national debt already exceeding $20 trillion , it is clear that there is no possibility that Washington could raise the necessary funding on its own. The White House plan addresses alternative funding mechanisms.
According to the White House, “The President’s target of $1 trillion in infrastructure investment will be funded through a combination of new Federal funding, incentivized non-Federal funding, and newly prioritized and expedited projects. While this Administration proposes additional funding for infrastructure, we will structure that funding to incentivize additional non-Federal funding, reduce the cost associated with accepting Federal dollars, and ensure Federal funds are leveraged such that the end result is at least $1 trillion in total infrastructure spending. 3 While we will continue to work with the Congress, States, tribes, localities, and other infrastructure stakeholders to finalize the suite of Federal programs that will support this effort, the 2018 Budget includes $200 billion in outlays related to the infrastructure initiative.”
Try this great juice recipe a couple of hours after they are taken. generic for cialis Which states and cities will be involved? The Southern United States -California, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Missouri (the meth capital of the http://appalachianmagazine.com/page/90/ 5mg generic cialis United States) and large cities like Chicago and New York. For example, on the last day of campaigning buy viagra online Visit This Link in the hotly contested 2010 Massachusetts Governors race, incumbent Deval Patrick and his Republican challenger Charlie Baker barnstormed both urban and rural areas. Damaging over here buy cheap cialis chemicals current in pesticides are generally detrimental to smaller animals this kind of as birds.
An official outline of the plan provides the following:
$200 billion in Federal funding to spur at least $1.5 trillion in investments. Federal infrastructure spending will promote State, local, and private investments and maximize the value of every taxpayer dollar. Of this $200 billion, $100 billion will create an Incentives Program that will promote accountability by making Federal funding conditional on projects meeting agreed upon milestones.
A $50 billion investment in infrastructure for Rural America. The bulk of the dollars in the Rural Infrastructure Program will be allocated to State governors, giving States the flexibility to prioritize their communities’ needs.
Empowerment of State and local authorities. The President’s plan would return decision-making authority to the State and local level, including by expanding processes that allow environmental review and permitting decisions to be delegated to States.
Elimination of barriers that prevent efficient development and management of infrastructure projects. For example, more flexibility will be provided to transportation projects that have minimal Federal funding but are currently required to seek Federal review and approval.
Streamlined permitting to simplify the approval process. Working with Congress to establish a “one agency, one decision” structure for environmental reviews will shorten approval processes while protecting natural resources.
Investment in America’s most important asset: its people. The President’s plan would reform Federal education and workforce development programs to better prepare Americans to perform the in-demand jobs of today and the future.
The Report concludes on Monday.