The White House has issued a series of updated fact sheets bragging about how much money the infrastructure bill will spend in each state (see table below). The fact sheets are based on formulas in the bill that account for a little more than three-fourths of the “new” spending in the bill, with the other 22 percent coming from grant programs. The “new” spending, in turn, accounts for $550 billion, while the other $650 billion is a reauthorization of existing spending programs.
It’s hard to look at these numbers without getting the impression that most of the money will be wasted. For example, every state gets a minimum of $100 million to expand broadband access to its residents. Residents of the District of Columbia currently have access to 38 different broadband providers, with 11 of them providing service to residences. Yet DC, like the states, will get the $100 million minimum. What’s the point? (For that matter, everyone in the country has access to at least two satellite providers, but the bill pretends that anything short of a land-line provider is inadequate.)
The excuse for the infrastructure bill is that America’s infrastructure is crumbling, and that may be true for city streets and city- and county-owned bridges. But the tens of billions of dollars going for highways will almost all go to the states, whose infrastructure is in good shape and improving every year. Continue reading →
_at_Exit_57A_(Interstate_95_South,_Richmond)_along_the_edge_of_North_Springfield_and_Springfield_in_Fairfax_County,_Virginia.jpg){kind=link}