Forum on Competing Infrastructure Plans

On Monday, April 26, the Antiplanner will join the Reason Foundation’s Bob Poole and Cato Institute’s Chris Edwards in a forum discussing infrastructure plans now before Congress. The forum will start at noon, Eastern Time, and last one hour. To register, click here.

Biden’s Infrastructure Plan and Alternatives from Cato Institute on Vimeo.

Yesterday, just in time for the forum, Republicans introduced their own infrastructure plan. This plan would spend almost 40 percent more money on transportation than Biden’s, but the funds are distributed differently. Except for broadband and water, the plan leaves out all of the non-transportation-related things that are in Biden’s plan, allowing for its total cost to be only about a quarter of Biden’s.
To start with, order viagra from canada the person must go for prostate cancer examination. One of the major causes for male infertility is a reduced sperm count and this herb provides a cure for all kinds levitra prescription thought about this of infertility. An example of canadian viagra no prescription a non-essential amino acid and its common use is Arginine, which is used to prevent heart disease. Not a long time before, one could hear people whispering into each others ear about how a married couple runs all over the city trying to escape the clutches of the killers. canadian viagra generic

In 2019, more than 85 percent of U.S. passenger travel took place on roads (not including urban transit), while 12 percent was in the air, less than 1 percent was by transit, and a tenth of a percent was on Amtrak. Yet Biden’s plan allocates only 38 percent of its transportation funding to highways while 28 percent would go to transit and 26 percent to Amtrak. The Republican plan partly corrects this but still overfunds transit and Amtrak. (Some of the rail money in the Republican plan would go to the Federal Railroad Administration.)

During the forum, Poole will focus on highways and Edwards will focus on other parts of the plan that, he believes, ought to be funded privately and not with government subsidies. I’ll discuss transit and Amtrak and show why even government transportation funding should be paid for out of user fees, not tax dollars or deficit spending. I hope you will join us.

Bookmark the permalink.

About The Antiplanner

The Antiplanner is a forester and economist with more than fifty years of experience critiquing government land-use and transportation plans.

2 Responses to Forum on Competing Infrastructure Plans

  1. LazyReader says:

    Better Strategy: GET THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT OUT of the transportation infrastructure game.
    This isn’t about transit, it’s about retention of public sector jobs and maintaining a tax gobbling bureaucracy.

    The kinds of problems members of the public face when dealing with out-of-control government agencies that have nearly unlimited power to tax you (from various sources, including sales, retail, etc) and face little public oversight. Once again another reason the Federal government needs to get OUT of the transportation game is shear incompetence; Transit agencies: WE WANT HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS OF DOLLARS to refurbish infrastructure we allowed to decay.

  2. Henry Porter says:

    The Biden plan not an infrastructure plan; it’s a jobs plan. It has “waste” and “cronyism” written all over it. If it was an infrastructure plan, it would produce functional and useful infrastructure.

    I would hope the Republican plan would see the light of day but I’m not hopeful. They couldn’t pull it off when they had control. What would make us believe they can pull it off now?

Leave a Reply