THE U. S. HAS ONE OF THE WORST INFRASTRUCTURES OF THE MODERN WORLD

 

…This was the last president that paid serious attention to the nation’s infrastructure

 

President Biden is planning to pay for the new bill by raising taxes on the wealthy

 

The Republicans are coming up with some strange attacks on the giant infrastructure bill from the Democrats.  They are coming up with their normal accusations such as “It would be disastrous to raise taxes on corporations!.”   However, this most frequent one is not only weak; it also shows how disconnected the debate in Washington can sometimes get.  And it is always avoiding those things that actually affect people’s lives.

But what is the most unfortunate, is that the news media is giving them a big hand.

Just this last weekend, in the Sunday shows, you would have seen the same wrong theme replayed over and over about the Dems infrastructure bill.

“Only about 5% of the [Dems] bills funding goes to infrastructure,” Margaret Brennan of CBS News on “Face the Nation” stated to Cecilia Rouse, chair of the White House’s Council of Economic Advisers. “Can you honestly call this a focus on building roads and bridges?”

“We’re already having a debate of, ‘Hey, bridges, roads: That’s infrastructure. Elder care is not,’” said NBC News, Chuck Todd, said to Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. “Define infrastructure in your view.”

“Only about 5% of this bill goes for traditional roads and bridges,” said ABC’s George Stephanopoulos to Pete Buttigieg. “So why not focus on that traditional core infrastructure?”

“Those may well be worthy projects,” said Fox News, Chris Wallace to Brian Deese, director of the National Economic Council after noting that the bill spends money on housing and care for seniors, “but they’re not infrastructure.”

First, to be clear, “The only 5% for real infrastructure talking point is utterly bogus”. It defines infrastructure as only roads and bridges, while they leave out railroads, water and sewer systems, the electrical grid, broadband, and housing, and any number of other things that you probably think of when you hear that word.

That idea, that only roads and bridges are infrastructure is like saying, “You said your house needed work, but the floors and walls seem fine”.  But what needs fixing is the leaking pipes and the failing roof and the electrical system that continually shorts out?” 

The more important question is: “Why in the world would it possibly matter what definition of “infrastructure” we use?”

Imagine it’s a few years from now. This bill has passed and as a result, the crumbling bridge in your town has been replaced and the roads have been resurfaced.  So, no more banging your car over all those potholes. In addition, there’s a new senior center in town with all kinds of facilities and services, operated by a skilled staff making a living wage.

Do you think your neighbors will say, “I like the bridge and the roads, but the senior center? Sure, my mother-in-law loves her fitness class there, and they helped her solve that Medicare problem she had, but it just doesn’t seem like ‘infrastructure’ to me.”

Of course not, because that’s not what people care about. They want to know that government did worthwhile things with their tax dollars, whatever category you might put each line-item into.

Now it’s true, that the Democrats have indeed thought broadly about what to put in this bill, including things that are not installed by burly men in hardhats, but that they believe are also important. Republicans may find some of those things, like building housing, or improving care for the elderly and disabled, or promoting electric vehicles, to not be worthwhile.

But if that’s what Republicans think, they should explain why we shouldn’t actually build more housing, and why we shouldn’t fund care for the elderly, and why we shouldn’t promote electric vehicles. Just saying “That doesn’t sound like ‘infrastructure’ to me” is not an argument. “This isn’t the Merriam-Webster dictionary editorial board…..it’s the U.S. government”.

So, instead of asking “Is this really infrastructure?”  We should ask: “Is this a good thing we want and need?”

You can apply that standard to both road repairs and increased spending on elder care. Then ask, “Is this something important and worthwhile? Will funding it in the way that is proposed accomplish the goals we set out? Will it improve life for Americans?”

If the answer to those questions is yes, then we should probably do it.

There may be provisions in the proposal that don’t meet that test.  But let’s hear the GOP explain why they think we shouldn’t invest in elder care or electric vehicle charging stations.  (BTW: The major auto manufacturers are saying that in ten years, ~50% of their cars will be electric.)  Maybe the Republicans arguments are so persuasive that we’ll say, “You know what, they’re right.  The Democrats should take that out of the bill.” That’s highly doubtful, but I guess it’s possible.

That’s how the policy debate is supposed to work.  We should argue about which problems need addressing, then we argue about which solutions to deploy.  If it all works out, the legislation that gets passed reflects the outcome of that deliberation.  The end result is that the unworthy ideas get removed, and the worthy ideas becoming the law. But this arguing about the definition of words such as “infrastructure” gets us precisely nowhere.

Yet because the GOP keeps repeating these talking points, and many journalists feel that to be “tough” they have to use them to frame their questioning of the Democrats. The end result is that the average American misses what’s really important.

Of all the countries in the world, the United States for years was at the top of the list for having the best infrastructure.  That meant the best and most modern airports, bridges, roads, schools and good paying , blue-collar jobs and affordable healthcare.  Today, the U.S. infrastructure is rated at being in 89^th place in the world for its infrastructure

It will take a giant bill such as the one the current president and the Democrats are proposing to bring the country back into the top 10.  (As an example, Japan has had a high speed rail system for over 50 years.  Many nations also have high speed trains, not the U.S.)

You may recall that during the Trump administration, there were many weeks where the president would declare they were “Infrastructure Week”, they never were.  This nation is still living on the infrastructure efforts of the Republican President, Dwight David Eisenhower.  That was the last president that seriously considered the nation’s “infrastructure” as being an important component for the benefit of all Americans.

It’s time to once again take that approach, and it’s time for the wealthy of this nation to pay their fair share for fixing what has been needing attention for decades.

Copyright G. Ater 2021