Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Stellar

(5,644 posts)
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 02:33 PM Jan 2017

Eight Democratic senators propose 10-year trillion-dollar infrastructure plan

Daily Kos

America’s infrastructure suffers from decades of reckless neglect, what bureaucrats and policymakers conceal behind the euphemism of “deferred maintenance.” Decrepit describes the consequences. Myopic describes the attitude. This affects many realms—our public schools, our public health system, our electrical transmission grid and, despite how deeply we Americans treasure personal mobility, our transportation system.

Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and seven of his colleagues are proposing a $1 trillion infrastructure plan today. As The New York Times reports, they are daring Pr*sident Trump to make good on his promises of infrastructure projects. Patrick Sisson writes:

“From our largest cities to our smallest towns, communities across the country are struggling to meet the challenges of aging infrastructure,” Senator Schumer said in a prepared statement. “Our urban and rural communities have their own unique set of infrastructure priorities, and this proposal would provide funding to address those needed upgrades that go beyond the traditional road and bridge repair.”

The seven other senior Senate Democrats are Bill Nelson (Florida), Bernie Sanders and Patrick J. Leahy (Vermont), Ron Wyden (Oregon), Sherrod Brown (Ohio), Maria Cantwell (Washington), and Thomas R. Carper (Delaware).

Schumer and a few other Democrats in addition to those seven have said they would work with Trump on infrastructure if he is willing to cooperate. Good friggin’ luck on that.

As part of his campaign for the White House, Trump proposed his own trillion-dollar infrastructure proposal. But his plan would have merely provided $140 billion in tax credits to construction companies, and those credits would supposedly pay for themselves from new economic activity associated with the infrastructure upgrades. The idea is that the credits would leverage the rest of the trillion dollars from private investment. But that’s something that historically just hasn't worked because there’s not enough profit in it for private investors.

Schumer said earlier this month that tax credits “won't get the job done.”

Unlike Trump’s blueprint, the Democratic plan would direct the money to specific areas of concern.

Their plan includes $20 billion for broadband installations, $75 billion for schools, $110 billion for decaying water and sewer systems, $180 billion for expanded mass transit lines, $70 billion for upgraded ports and airports, $100 billion to improve the electrical grid, $10 billion for veterans hospitals, $210 billion for roads and bridges, $200 billion for unspecified “vital infrastructure projects” and $10 billion for an infrastructure bank.

One of the big gains, of course, would be jobs. Every billion dollars in spending produces 13,000 jobs, according to this report.

In 2013, the American Society of Civil Engineers issued a report card on U.S. infrastructure, giving the nation overall a D+ and concluding that $3.6 trillion would be needed to bring infrastructure up to snuff by 2020.

A $100 billion a year spent on infrastructure may seem like a lot, and, of course, given the make-up of Congress is no doubt a rotten bridge too far.

But the U.S. has a basic Pentagon budget of $580 billion this year. Surely we ought to be spending an equal amount on renovated and innovated infrastructure since it’s a crucial element of national security and crucial to a thriving existence in the modern age. Yet short-sighted politicians have treated it as if it doesn’t really matter, insubstantially patched up or simply left to fall apart.

That's been as much the case with transportation as elsewhere.

Fixes matter. Decaying bridges can't be ignored. But too much of our attention in transportation is devoted to repairing, and not enough to rethinking. Important improvements are being made. For example, light rail, a system prevalent in many cities in the days before the internal combustion engine reshaped our lives, is making a comeback a few urban miles at a time. But this is a small effort, piecemeal and underfunded. Vehicle drive-trains are being revamped, but ever so slowly.

Meanwhile, our major modes of transportation poison us, burn two-thirds of the oil we drill at home and import from abroad, make us less secure because of the geopolitics involved in maintaining access to much of that oil, gobble up a scarce resource essential for making other products, extract large hunks of household income, and contribute a third of the CO2 we’re loading into the atmosphere.

And as the Democratic infrastructure proposal notes, transportation is just one arena that needs serious attention. As Terry O’Sullivan, General President of the Laborers’ International Union of North America has said:

“This is the 21st century, but our transportation systems are stuck in the 20th. One of four bridges in the U.S. is structurally deficient or obsolete, more than half the miles we drive on federal highways are on roads in less than good condition and our transit systems are stretched beyond capacity. This is a recipe for falling behind, not competing in the global economy. We can put men and women back to work building America, get our economy on track and leave behind real assets for taxpayers and future generations.”


11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

asiliveandbreathe

(8,203 posts)
1. Military spending first folk's..need to steal me sum' oil..
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 02:43 PM
Jan 2017

we will finally see where the rubber meets the road...

We have been trying to get an Infrastructure Bill passed since the beginning of President Obamas presidency....you really think..oh, never mind - yes, I have become cynical - trust no one - until you prove I can...

Nice words, nice effort..I am behind them 110%..

msongs

(67,459 posts)
2. betterto go on offense than sit back and react all the time. details dont matter, just do it as this
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 03:00 PM
Jan 2017

plan is going nowhere anyway (most likely). start slinging more proposals. new ones every day. helps set the media agenda too

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
3. A better and more -- da Horror! -- aggressive proposal. A dillema...
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 03:29 PM
Jan 2017

Democrats, here in DU and elsewhere, will likely receive a Positive reception from ------ tRump. If that occurs, then the breast-beating of not dealing with or cooperating with tRump will in short order be hung out to dry.

It would be so EZ for tRump to "split" or "fragmemt" opposition from ANY source with an FDR-type spending program.

Too bad Schumer & Nelson (or Obama) didn't float this Sanders objective a year earlier. A little late, now.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
4. Last year would have worked how? Obama tried to get infrastructure plans passed.
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 03:32 PM
Jan 2017

Seriously this spin is giving cover to the GOP - and it's getting really old.

 

Eleanors38

(18,318 posts)
5. Sorry, but it is the truth. From Obama's beginning, he never sought to lead the people...
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 04:13 PM
Jan 2017

like an FDR or LBJ might have to get a building program going. Similarly, he did not seek much popular support for the ACA due to the grinding behind the scenes negotiating which left the public out of the loop; hence, no basis for building popular support. His style was built on bring disparate factions together for negotiations. The GOP does NOT negotiate.

Please. This is not "spin," but some of that Fact we all complain is in short supply. Watch some PBS for some rather good analysis of Obama's style, from Chi-town days on.

But I do note certain factions here keep "spinning" the primaries into 2017.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
7. He had five months out of eight years. Was completely obstructed in an
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 04:47 PM
Jan 2017

Unprecedented manner but go ahead and blame him. This is the kind of nonsense that gave us Trump.

Response to bettyellen (Reply #7)

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
10. "8 years of nothing happening" biggest RW talking point out there
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 06:11 PM
Jan 2017

Millions will die because of the ACA repeal and you repeat the RE framing that this is nothing. What crap.

Stellar

(5,644 posts)
6. Obama did all that he could to get infrastructure through, but
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 04:15 PM
Jan 2017

Republi0ns were not having it. They said NO to everything that Obama was proposing, now I see some Dens are agreeing with Republic0nsWTH! Maybe. I'm just too mean.

 

bettyellen

(47,209 posts)
8. Not too mean. Some carry water for the GOP by ignoring the obstruction that went on...:
Tue Jan 24, 2017, 04:48 PM
Jan 2017

Last edited Tue Jan 24, 2017, 09:29 PM - Edit history (1)

And they're part of the reason people are ignorant about Congress and stay home. It's more they're all the same bullshit. Sad.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Eight Democratic senators...