Rather than pass the Senate-approved $1.2-trillion infrastructure bill, the House of Representatives decided to punt, instead extending existing surface transportation programs until December 3. At issue was not the infrastructure bill, which most people thought would pass, but the $3.5-trillion social-spending bill, which seemed much less likely to pass.
Progressives in the House demanded that both bill be voted on at the same time, effectively holding the infrastructure bill hostage in order to promote passage of the social-spending bill.
While the infrastructure bill is dubious enough, it has the advantage that roughly half the spending in the bill is one-time only, while the other half is merely an extension of spending that is already happening. The social-spending bill, however, proposes to create several major new entitlement programs, such as free child care, medicare expansion, and housing programs. The $3.5-trillion cost is only the estimated cost for the first ten years of the programs, but like Obamacare and other entitlements, they are likely to go on for many years beyond that.
Worse, most of the entitlements are not means-tested. As the Wall Street Journal observes, they would be entitlements for the affluent.
The failure of the House to pass the infrastructure bill now reduces the chances that it will ever pass. We are long past the first 100 days of Biden’s term, and a combination of inflation, SNAFU’s in the Afghanistan withdrawal, supply-chain issues, and debates over vaccine mandates has brought his approval ratings down to around 42 percent.
All eyes inside the beltway are on the Virginia gubernatorial race, which will be decided tomorrow. The latest polls show the Republican, Glenn Youngkin, tied with the Democrat, Terry McAuliffe; one even shows Youngkin winning 53 percent of the vote. McAuliffe has the most name familiarity since had been governor before, but wasn’t allowed to serve two consecutive terms. Virginia has only had one Republican governor in the last two decades, so if Youngkin wins, it will be seen as a ratification of the Republican agenda over Biden’s.
If that happens, then all bets are off regarding an infrastructure bill. Democrats already had to make severe compromises to Biden’s proposed $2.5 trillion bill, including reducing the amount of funding for public transit (outside of normal spending) from $85 billion to $39 billion. If Youngkin wins on Tuesday, Republicans are probably going to demand even more be trimmed from the bill.
Wouldn’t be the first time Dems stole election. Be wary Virginia….
And Republicans never say no to Pork either.
Virginia Republicans should adopt a State sufficient infrastructure plan this may cost more on the local level, but in the long run pissing off your constituents.
Being Honest is more profound than Empty Promises. Voters have had so much smoke blown up their asses, they can taste it on their tongue.
Google “Trolley Trucks”. A trolleybus also has advantages compared to other means of electric public transport. Contrary to a train or a tram, a trolleybus does not need a rail infrastructure. This not only results in huge cost and time savings, it also saves a large amount of energy in construction. Granted trolleybuses cant go everywhere but with no need for rail and city grid streets they can accomodate a vast multitude of sites and locations. Quito, Ecuador has a trolleybus system, During peak hours, there is a bus every 50 to 90 seconds (because of the high frequency, there are no schedules). El Trole as it’s called transports 262,000 passengers each day. By choosing the cheaper trolleybus over tram or metro, Quito could develop a much larger network in a shorter time. The capital investment of the 19 kilometre line was less than 60 million dollar – hardly sufficient to build 4 kilometres of tram line, or about 1 kilometre of metro line. Lower investment costs also mean lower ticket fares, and thus more passengers.
On a larger scale A dedicated highway lane with a 100 mph bus running on overhead line can accommodate the same passenger volumes of a train and be built in a much shorter timeframe. As the vehicles age; newer more efficient buses can be bought for little expense.
Anyone in the political spectrum who thinks that heavy infrastructure spending has the same effect on the economy needs to look at Japan, which has been using infrastructure spending as an economic stimulus for over quarter century, with no visible results. The Antiplanner remarks JApanese National railways was a profitable venture, before adopting HSR across the nation. Having gone over 300 billion in debt. He forgets or fails to mention; Japan Highway corporation went 269 billion in todays dollars in debt. The national government took it upon themselves to dictate a term of arguing localities to start spending money they didn’t have on infrastructure they didn’t need.
”
If that happens, then all bets are off regarding an infrastructure bill. Democrats already had to make severe compromises to Biden’s proposed $2.5 trillion bill, including reducing the amount of funding for public transit (outside of normal spending) from $85 billion to $39 billion. If Youngkin wins on Tuesday, Republicans are probably going to demand even more be trimmed from the bill.
” ~anti-planner
It’s an infrastructure bailout, nothing more. Highways don’t need an infrastructure bailout What they need is a payment system that keeps the money in house so Federal government cant fuk with it or play with it like they always do….
Phasing out the federal gas tax is more prevalent issue.
Federal gas tax is 18.3 cents and 24 cents (diesel) Federal fuel taxes raised $36.4 billion in Fiscal Year 2016, with $26.1 billion raised from gasoline taxes and $10.3 billion raised from taxes on diesel and special motor fuels. To my knowledge the tax was last raised in 1993 and is not indexed to inflation. So we’re paying for infrastructure on a finance rate, using money based on a dollar value from nearly 30 years ago.
Global gas taxes by nation (Tax: USD per gallon)
Australia: $1.17
Canada: 0.74
Denmark: 2.63
Germany: 2.79
Italy: 3.11
Sweden: 2.73
UK: 2.82
USA: 0.56
Federal contribution state and local government was about 96 billion; where as spending on highways AND ROADS total was 187 billion, meaning states only spend less than half. Allow states to raise their gas taxes and cut federal gas tax a penny for each state raise. And as added measure raise it 2 cents for every 1 cent federal deduction. This would only increase gas taxes. Average US total above is 56 cents, meaning states make an average of 38 cents. Even after cutting federal gas tax in Half, with a 2 cent per capita raise; you could have a 30% increase in revenue at cost of no more than a added dime per gallon to consumer.
Unlike transit, highway funding discrepancies can be addressed by a mere slight fee increase,