The trump infrastructure plan will pay a small portion of the investment.
A year later than the first commitment of time, but the President finally trump at today’s White House announced his long-awaited infrastructure plan, flanked by the governor, the mayor and other state and local leaders. Trump said, his plan “will be the country’s roads, Bridges, ports, tunnels, and the status of the water supply system is called the” terrible “, will stimulate the history of the United States the largest and most bold investment in infrastructure, the framework will create an unprecedented $1.7 trillion to $1.5 of investment in infrastructure in the United States. ”
But the word “have” and “cost” is not the same, because the government’s plan to trump offer only a small part of the distribution of the grand goal, that is $200 billion for 10 years, most of the rest of the money transferred to the state and regional local government burden.
This runs counter to the way that federal transport and infrastructure projects used to allocate funds.
Chicago transport Dorval, President Carter had held a senior post at the federal transit administration and the U.S. department of transportation, he said in the building of the new transport project, “you want to get from the federal government in the history of about 50% of the transportation project. ”
But, due to the expansion of CTA hope its one of the busiest train lines, and the red line fast transportation services extended to about 5.3 miles from Chicago’s south side of the community, the lack of transportation, cost an estimated $2 billion, carter could almost empty in Washington.
This is because if congress approves trump’s infrastructure plan, then the transition project this historic 50-50 funds will be abandoned, most projects will require state and CTA local agencies to come up with at least 80% of the income, in order to get up to 20% of the game.
“The former transport minister and the former republicans may fail to raise money” may not work. R – Ill. Ray LaHood told us on NPR’s morning edition on Monday. “This may not work because states and local governments have no money,” lahood said.
“The lack of federal investment is nothing new,” said Steve Benjamin, the mayor of Columbia, south Carolina, who spoke at the White House today.
“I want to see in the water and sewer infrastructure, roads and Bridges, as well as schools and hospitals from the federal government to invest more important and strong, and any small things are disappointing.”
But Benjamin says he is looking on the bright side, at least the investment infrastructure talks are now beginning, and he wants congress to strengthen federal involvement. He is also encouraged by efforts to streamline the federal environmental review and licensing process, and the President says his plan will be reduced from five to ten years to just two years.
“It’s important to build roads and Bridges,” Benjamin said. “but it’s also important to give people the opportunity to make a living, to support their families, to support their families. So cutting these programs is not a starter for us.
Due to the highway, railway, port, airport and water supply and drainage system of the inferior status, the American society of civil engineers to give the country’s nearly D + rating, this is another encouraging finally propose detailed infrastructure organization. ASCE city civil engineer and project manager Kristina Swallow said: “I’m glad to know that the leadership of our country to realize, we have been lack of infrastructure for decades, and it hurt our family in the economy. ”
But she was also disappointed by the scale of the President’s proposed investment.
Swallow says: “$200 billion is a good starting point to talk, but it is not enough,” he points out that the country needs $2 trillion higher than the current budget investment, to make the country’s infrastructure into decent. “If we really want to meet the needs of our community, we will find a way to find additional funding.”
Swallow and others point out that cities, counties and states have increased their own infrastructure funding because of the lack of adequate federal funding. More than 30 states have raised gasoline or other taxes in the last 30 years to meet infrastructure needs.
Swallows also worry about what Mr Trump’s proposals lack – a plan to ensure future spending will build more sustainable infrastructure to combat climate change.
“We don’t have enough money to build it twice,” said the Swallow, “therefore, when we build infrastructure, we must have a long-term view, we must look at what we handle today, but we could see tomorrow. ”
Many Democrats in congress have fired Mr Trump’s infrastructure plans.
Senator Tom karp, the top democrat on the senate public works committee, said trump’s “infrastructure plan is unrealistic, inadequate and irresponsible.”
Oregon lawmakers in the house transportation and infrastructure committee democrat Peter defazio said the President’s plan “embarrassing to small”, and “moving (fiscal) burden to cash-strapped state and local governments.”
DeFazio also criticized the trump planned to cut “from the existing transportation and infrastructure projects received more than $168 billion, to pay for Wall Street and in the way of foreign investors charge”, and fear that “it can make the base environment, clean water and clean air protection to speed up the program as a cover. ”
Republicans may not be willing to take a burden on infrastructure funds to state and local taxpayers’ plans, but some of the republican party members are reluctant to raise the federal income, especially gasoline taxes, the tax rate did not increase in 25 years, there has been no raise enough money for the existing traffic project.
But some members of congress may be willing to accept the trump administration’s plan if it is really a complement to the current infrastructure funding plan, as White House aides say.
“This is an interesting dynamic additional funds, they are trying to support more state, local and private investment in infrastructure” of different ways to change behavior, transportation and the appropriations committee before the republican former staff Mike Friedberg says, now is Washington transportation and infrastructure issues of lobbyists and advisers.
He said the government is working together to move away from Washington’s rules about which programs are funded and how the funds are funded.
“We need to think of different things, which is a good try,” friedberg said.
But he acknowledged that if the current funding gap for the highway trust fund was not resolved, the plan would not bring new money.
“What did you see the appetite to solve the problem of structure,” said Fred berg, “and the President, he is not an idea about this problem, but to the infrastructure to do its job.”
As to whether infrastructure plan arrived on Capitol hill is dead, as some people have suggested, Fried said: “it isn’t dead (but) it has a steep hills to climb.”