$3.6 trillion needed for infrastructure by 2020

Actually, it would help if the Democrats didn't divert the funds...
Congress Undermines America s Infrastructure by Looting the HighwayTrust Fund
A Funding "Crisis"?

The soon-to-be-empty trust fund is a direct consequence of recent congressional overspending in excess of the fuel tax revenues that replenish the fund as well as decades of congressional mandates allowing non-highway interests access to the highway trust fund. In FY 2008, these mandates are estimated to have diverted approximately 38 percent of trust fund spending to projects and programs of little value to the motorist's mobility needs.

Despite the fund's depletion, some in Congress are advocating that the next highway reauthorization bill (scheduled for October 2009) should include a very substantial increase in federal transportation spending. Leaders of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure want total spending raised from the current $286 billion to nearly a half a trillion dollars. Achieving this rate of spending would likely require a doubling of the federal fuel tax from its current level of 18.3 cents per gallon.

Those seeking more transportation spending justify the tax increase as the necessary cost of resolving the nation's infrastructure "crisis." But as this author noted in a recent piece in the Wilson Quarterly, the so-called crisis seems limited exclusively to the infrastructure managed by Congress, and legislative mismanagement-not the level of funding-is a large part of the problem.[2]

Raid on the Funds

Among the many reasons these congressional tax-and-spend schemes will fail to relieve worsening traffic congestion and road deterioration is that less than two-thirds of current federal surface transportation spending is devoted to the general purpose roads that the typical motorist or truck driver (who finances the fund) use in the ordinary course of travel. The other third goes to a growing collection of costly diversions that have little to do with the mobility needs of the average motorist or to the economically essential movement of freight.

In the last highway reauthorization bill (P.L. 109-59), the largest diversion from the authorized $52 billion in total spending from the highway trust fund (including $1.8 billion in general revenues) for FY 2008 is the $9.7 billion in direct spending for transit programs (trolleys, buses, commuter rail, etc.). Transit riders are also the greatest beneficiary of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program, which absorbs $1.7 billion from the trust fund. Although transit riders account for only 1.6 percent of surface travel passengers, they receive a subsidy from the motorists amounting to approximately 20 percent of trust fund spending.

Other fund diversions include the Enhancement program ($647 million), the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) ($470 million), Recreational Trails ($80 million), and a transfer of $925 million to the Department of Interior for roads in national parks and forests. Altogether these leakages will absorb more than 26 percent of fund spending in 2008.

The next largest series of diversions are the four major earmarked programs: High Priority Projects, Projects of Regional and National Significance, Transportation Projects (Section 1934 of P.L. 109-59), and the National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program. All are authorized to spend $4.5 billion, bringing the diversion share to 35 percent.

About $155 million will be spent on scenic byways, ferry boats, magnetic levitation and tax evasion deterrence, while $408 million will be spent on administrative overhead. More than $570 million will be spent on another twelve mandated programs, including bicycles, racial profiling, historic covered bridges, community preservation, innovative finance, and Safe Routes to Schools (which also supports bicycles). Bringing up the rear are the federally mandated Metropolitan Planning Organizations-whose focus is increasingly directed to land use planning, transit and economic development-which receive $302 million.

Motorists Ripped Off

Altogether, these diversions absorb an estimated $19.6 billion in trust fund spending, or about 38 percent of the total spent from the trust fund. As a consequence, motorists will receive only about 62 percent of what they have paid into the fund for general purpose roads and safety programs. Redeploying these diverted funds back to roads used by the motorists and truckers who fund the system would yield the equivalent of a 50 percent increase in new spending for road improvements and capacity increases.

Conversely, to achieve the same goal by increasing taxes would require a tax increase of $1.67 for each dollar to be spent on roads, since the extra $0.67 would be required by the existing diversions, which traditionally share equally in any funding increase. Thus, in order to return the lost $19.6 billion to roads, fuel taxes would have to be increased by $32.7 billion. These wasted funds are a key reason why the nation's roads are in such bad shape and why congestion is getting worse.

Even More Diversions

Although the sensible policy response would be to pare back the number and cost of the existing diversions, some in Congress have already introduced legislation that would add even more diversions to the depleted trust fund. In 2008, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced S.3360 to give Amtrak access to the highway trust fund to purchase new railcars. Bill co-sponsor Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.) claims that the legislation would divert $400 million each year in motorist-paid gas taxes to Amtrak, which serves only one half of 1 percent of intercity passenger travel.

Another potential major diversion could come from Representative Jim Oberstar's (D-Minn.) H.R. 3246 (the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act of 2007), which would authorize federal funding for five new regional commissions that would be similar to the ARC, which has access to the highway trust fund. Although the bill in its current form does not give these new commissions such access, it is likely that its final version would include that privilege in order to create regional parity and because the Delta Regional Authority, which will be reconstituted as a "commission" under H.R. 3246, already has access to the trust fund (Section 1308).
 
Actually, it would help if the Democrats didn't divert the funds...
Congress Undermines America s Infrastructure by Looting the HighwayTrust Fund
A Funding "Crisis"?

The soon-to-be-empty trust fund is a direct consequence of recent congressional overspending in excess of the fuel tax revenues that replenish the fund as well as decades of congressional mandates allowing non-highway interests access to the highway trust fund. In FY 2008, these mandates are estimated to have diverted approximately 38 percent of trust fund spending to projects and programs of little value to the motorist's mobility needs.

Despite the fund's depletion, some in Congress are advocating that the next highway reauthorization bill (scheduled for October 2009) should include a very substantial increase in federal transportation spending. Leaders of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure want total spending raised from the current $286 billion to nearly a half a trillion dollars. Achieving this rate of spending would likely require a doubling of the federal fuel tax from its current level of 18.3 cents per gallon.

Those seeking more transportation spending justify the tax increase as the necessary cost of resolving the nation's infrastructure "crisis." But as this author noted in a recent piece in the Wilson Quarterly, the so-called crisis seems limited exclusively to the infrastructure managed by Congress, and legislative mismanagement-not the level of funding-is a large part of the problem.[2]

Raid on the Funds

Among the many reasons these congressional tax-and-spend schemes will fail to relieve worsening traffic congestion and road deterioration is that less than two-thirds of current federal surface transportation spending is devoted to the general purpose roads that the typical motorist or truck driver (who finances the fund) use in the ordinary course of travel. The other third goes to a growing collection of costly diversions that have little to do with the mobility needs of the average motorist or to the economically essential movement of freight.

In the last highway reauthorization bill (P.L. 109-59), the largest diversion from the authorized $52 billion in total spending from the highway trust fund (including $1.8 billion in general revenues) for FY 2008 is the $9.7 billion in direct spending for transit programs (trolleys, buses, commuter rail, etc.). Transit riders are also the greatest beneficiary of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program, which absorbs $1.7 billion from the trust fund. Although transit riders account for only 1.6 percent of surface travel passengers, they receive a subsidy from the motorists amounting to approximately 20 percent of trust fund spending.

Other fund diversions include the Enhancement program ($647 million), the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) ($470 million), Recreational Trails ($80 million), and a transfer of $925 million to the Department of Interior for roads in national parks and forests. Altogether these leakages will absorb more than 26 percent of fund spending in 2008.

The next largest series of diversions are the four major earmarked programs: High Priority Projects, Projects of Regional and National Significance, Transportation Projects (Section 1934 of P.L. 109-59), and the National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program. All are authorized to spend $4.5 billion, bringing the diversion share to 35 percent.

About $155 million will be spent on scenic byways, ferry boats, magnetic levitation and tax evasion deterrence, while $408 million will be spent on administrative overhead. More than $570 million will be spent on another twelve mandated programs, including bicycles, racial profiling, historic covered bridges, community preservation, innovative finance, and Safe Routes to Schools (which also supports bicycles). Bringing up the rear are the federally mandated Metropolitan Planning Organizations-whose focus is increasingly directed to land use planning, transit and economic development-which receive $302 million.

Motorists Ripped Off

Altogether, these diversions absorb an estimated $19.6 billion in trust fund spending, or about 38 percent of the total spent from the trust fund. As a consequence, motorists will receive only about 62 percent of what they have paid into the fund for general purpose roads and safety programs. Redeploying these diverted funds back to roads used by the motorists and truckers who fund the system would yield the equivalent of a 50 percent increase in new spending for road improvements and capacity increases.

Conversely, to achieve the same goal by increasing taxes would require a tax increase of $1.67 for each dollar to be spent on roads, since the extra $0.67 would be required by the existing diversions, which traditionally share equally in any funding increase. Thus, in order to return the lost $19.6 billion to roads, fuel taxes would have to be increased by $32.7 billion. These wasted funds are a key reason why the nation's roads are in such bad shape and why congestion is getting worse.

Even More Diversions

Although the sensible policy response would be to pare back the number and cost of the existing diversions, some in Congress have already introduced legislation that would add even more diversions to the depleted trust fund. In 2008, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced S.3360 to give Amtrak access to the highway trust fund to purchase new railcars. Bill co-sponsor Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.) claims that the legislation would divert $400 million each year in motorist-paid gas taxes to Amtrak, which serves only one half of 1 percent of intercity passenger travel.

Another potential major diversion could come from Representative Jim Oberstar's (D-Minn.) H.R. 3246 (the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act of 2007), which would authorize federal funding for five new regional commissions that would be similar to the ARC, which has access to the highway trust fund. Although the bill in its current form does not give these new commissions such access, it is likely that its final version would include that privilege in order to create regional parity and because the Delta Regional Authority, which will be reconstituted as a "commission" under H.R. 3246, already has access to the trust fund (Section 1308).
At the same time, the country is in dire need of an upgrade. Multiple bridges have collapsed and some roads were even converted to gravel because there weren’t funds to upkeep pavement. About 8,000 bridges are at risk of collapse but still carry 29 million drivers each day. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) gives us a D+ rating on roads, bridges, waterways, electrical grids, and other systems. It also says the nation would need to spend $3.6 trillion by 2020 to get things back to a functioning level.

Beyond helping to keep Americans safe, investment in infrastructure brings dividends for the national economy. Standard & Poors has estimated that spending $1.3 billion in a year would create 29,000 jobs, add $2 billion to economic growth, and reduce the deficit by $200 million. That’s all in the short term; in the long term, infrastructure upgrades keep paying off long after the projects themselves end. Without that kind of investment, however, the country risks losing out on nearly $1 trillion in business sales, 3.5 million jobs, and more than $3.1 trillion in GDP by 2020, according to an estimate by the ASCE.

Republicans have blocked efforts to inject money into these projects, however. They blocked Obama’s $60 billion infrastructure proposal in 2011 and haven’t taken him up on the latest one. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) also recently stood firm against raising the gas tax, which sends money to the Highway Trust Fund.

It's the cons that have raided Social Security out of $3 trillion.
 
....and the cons are cutting infrastructure spending. By doing so, they are destroying the economy.

With Republican Obstruction A Last Resort For Fixing Our Roads And Bridges ThinkProgress
1. Have any proof of the claim we need that spending? Thinkprogress is like asking Al Sharpton if he's been oppressed. The answer is they don't know and don't care, they're in it for the money.

2. Do you have that FULL accounting of all the money we've spent in the past 10 years yet?
 
Hangover

Gee, it's kind of bad that the Democrats raided the Highway Trust Fund, isn't it?

And to think that taking ISIS out will cost more since Obama pulled our troops out of Iraq and gave them all of that top-of-the-line equipment, along with a lot more areas to operate from, thanks to his Arab Spring.

Evidently the Democrats need to learn a little fiscal responsibility.
 
Actually, it would help if the Democrats didn't divert the funds...
Congress Undermines America s Infrastructure by Looting the HighwayTrust Fund
A Funding "Crisis"?

The soon-to-be-empty trust fund is a direct consequence of recent congressional overspending in excess of the fuel tax revenues that replenish the fund as well as decades of congressional mandates allowing non-highway interests access to the highway trust fund. In FY 2008, these mandates are estimated to have diverted approximately 38 percent of trust fund spending to projects and programs of little value to the motorist's mobility needs.

Despite the fund's depletion, some in Congress are advocating that the next highway reauthorization bill (scheduled for October 2009) should include a very substantial increase in federal transportation spending. Leaders of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure want total spending raised from the current $286 billion to nearly a half a trillion dollars. Achieving this rate of spending would likely require a doubling of the federal fuel tax from its current level of 18.3 cents per gallon.

Those seeking more transportation spending justify the tax increase as the necessary cost of resolving the nation's infrastructure "crisis." But as this author noted in a recent piece in the Wilson Quarterly, the so-called crisis seems limited exclusively to the infrastructure managed by Congress, and legislative mismanagement-not the level of funding-is a large part of the problem.[2]

Raid on the Funds

Among the many reasons these congressional tax-and-spend schemes will fail to relieve worsening traffic congestion and road deterioration is that less than two-thirds of current federal surface transportation spending is devoted to the general purpose roads that the typical motorist or truck driver (who finances the fund) use in the ordinary course of travel. The other third goes to a growing collection of costly diversions that have little to do with the mobility needs of the average motorist or to the economically essential movement of freight.

In the last highway reauthorization bill (P.L. 109-59), the largest diversion from the authorized $52 billion in total spending from the highway trust fund (including $1.8 billion in general revenues) for FY 2008 is the $9.7 billion in direct spending for transit programs (trolleys, buses, commuter rail, etc.). Transit riders are also the greatest beneficiary of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program, which absorbs $1.7 billion from the trust fund. Although transit riders account for only 1.6 percent of surface travel passengers, they receive a subsidy from the motorists amounting to approximately 20 percent of trust fund spending.

Other fund diversions include the Enhancement program ($647 million), the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) ($470 million), Recreational Trails ($80 million), and a transfer of $925 million to the Department of Interior for roads in national parks and forests. Altogether these leakages will absorb more than 26 percent of fund spending in 2008.

The next largest series of diversions are the four major earmarked programs: High Priority Projects, Projects of Regional and National Significance, Transportation Projects (Section 1934 of P.L. 109-59), and the National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program. All are authorized to spend $4.5 billion, bringing the diversion share to 35 percent.

About $155 million will be spent on scenic byways, ferry boats, magnetic levitation and tax evasion deterrence, while $408 million will be spent on administrative overhead. More than $570 million will be spent on another twelve mandated programs, including bicycles, racial profiling, historic covered bridges, community preservation, innovative finance, and Safe Routes to Schools (which also supports bicycles). Bringing up the rear are the federally mandated Metropolitan Planning Organizations-whose focus is increasingly directed to land use planning, transit and economic development-which receive $302 million.

Motorists Ripped Off

Altogether, these diversions absorb an estimated $19.6 billion in trust fund spending, or about 38 percent of the total spent from the trust fund. As a consequence, motorists will receive only about 62 percent of what they have paid into the fund for general purpose roads and safety programs. Redeploying these diverted funds back to roads used by the motorists and truckers who fund the system would yield the equivalent of a 50 percent increase in new spending for road improvements and capacity increases.

Conversely, to achieve the same goal by increasing taxes would require a tax increase of $1.67 for each dollar to be spent on roads, since the extra $0.67 would be required by the existing diversions, which traditionally share equally in any funding increase. Thus, in order to return the lost $19.6 billion to roads, fuel taxes would have to be increased by $32.7 billion. These wasted funds are a key reason why the nation's roads are in such bad shape and why congestion is getting worse.

Even More Diversions

Although the sensible policy response would be to pare back the number and cost of the existing diversions, some in Congress have already introduced legislation that would add even more diversions to the depleted trust fund. In 2008, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced S.3360 to give Amtrak access to the highway trust fund to purchase new railcars. Bill co-sponsor Senator Tom Carper (D-Del.) claims that the legislation would divert $400 million each year in motorist-paid gas taxes to Amtrak, which serves only one half of 1 percent of intercity passenger travel.

Another potential major diversion could come from Representative Jim Oberstar's (D-Minn.) H.R. 3246 (the Regional Economic and Infrastructure Development Act of 2007), which would authorize federal funding for five new regional commissions that would be similar to the ARC, which has access to the highway trust fund. Although the bill in its current form does not give these new commissions such access, it is likely that its final version would include that privilege in order to create regional parity and because the Delta Regional Authority, which will be reconstituted as a "commission" under H.R. 3246, already has access to the trust fund (Section 1308).
At the same time, the country is in dire need of an upgrade. Multiple bridges have collapsed and some roads were even converted to gravel because there weren’t funds to upkeep pavement. About 8,000 bridges are at risk of collapse but still carry 29 million drivers each day. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) gives us a D+ rating on roads, bridges, waterways, electrical grids, and other systems. It also says the nation would need to spend $3.6 trillion by 2020 to get things back to a functioning level.

Beyond helping to keep Americans safe, investment in infrastructure brings dividends for the national economy. Standard & Poors has estimated that spending $1.3 billion in a year would create 29,000 jobs, add $2 billion to economic growth, and reduce the deficit by $200 million. That’s all in the short term; in the long term, infrastructure upgrades keep paying off long after the projects themselves end. Without that kind of investment, however, the country risks losing out on nearly $1 trillion in business sales, 3.5 million jobs, and more than $3.1 trillion in GDP by 2020, according to an estimate by the ASCE.

Republicans have blocked efforts to inject money into these projects, however. They blocked Obama’s $60 billion infrastructure proposal in 2011 and haven’t taken him up on the latest one. House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) also recently stood firm against raising the gas tax, which sends money to the Highway Trust Fund.

It's the cons that have raided Social Security out of $3 trillion.

Far left propaganda alert!
 
Need is Prog Speak for "I want all of your money so gimme gimme gimme".
 
If only Obama's stimulus "shovel ready" projects had been shovel ready. Blown money and now they want to blow some more
 
(a) Infrastructure spending is a bottomless pit. No matter how much is spent, you will find advocates of one thing or another who will tell you that their particular pet infrastructure enhancement didn't get done, and we are all worse off for it. My particular infrastructure thing is mass transit (including buses). The only thing tempering my enthusiasm is that virtually every mass transit agency and authority in the country is run by corrupt government employee unions, which makes them, functionally speaking, beyond serious redemption.

(b) Claiming that infrastructure spending "creates jobs," is a fatuous fiction. Spending money we don't have to do things we don't need is like putting an expensive vacation on a credit card. If you miss my point, "It's fucking stupid!" The money spent on the infrastructure projects actually comes out of taxpayers' (and ratepayers') pockets, thus depriving those taxpayers of money that they would have spent on something else. Net result: nothing.

(c) As a general proposition, we have all of the roads, tunnels, and bridges that we need. Building anything new in this regard is a total waste of taxpayer money.

(d) In rare instances, an infrastructure project can promote economic activity. A new bridge between two thriving communities, eliminating what was previously an intolerable drive, can open up business to both communities that would not otherwise have had. Maybe.

(e) The Feds fucked up when they pegged the federal gas tax as a fixed amount per gallon. It should have been a percentage of something. Fix that and there will be adequate funding to do anything we need to do, infrastructure wise. And stop spending transportation money for other stuff.
 

Forum List

Back
Top