Impressions

Infrastructure and the War

By Tim Holland

It seems to me that we are very good at assessing blame but not very good at accepting responsibility. In the case of basic infrastructure, the circle of blame is pretty wide but I don’t see the war in it.

While the expense of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is an easy target, the truth is the money would never have been spent on fixing roads and bridges. The odds are it would not have been spent at all. In the year 2000 the United States had a budget surplus, which was not achieved by spending on repair and maintenance. After 2000, the plan was to return the surplus to the American taxpayer not to spend it on the nation’s infrastructure. So, the idea that the war is the reason our bridges, water systems, dams, levees, electric systems, pipelines and sewer systems are not being maintained and replaced is counterproductive at best.

So why is everything falling apart? The very first argument that can be made would be related to inadequate funding of the original project. When the decision is made to build a sewer system, the funding (usually in the form of municipal bonds) relates to design, construction and implementation. Sewer systems, bridges, levees, dams all have “useful lives” and require constant repair and maintenance. The initial bond authorizations never seem to address these expenses as part of the original cost of the project. The end result is that we end up paying for mandatory repair and maintenance of infrastructure projects out of a general municipal revenue fund or transportation taxes.

Our next problem seems to be the “let someone else pay for it” rationale. This is usually promoted by challenge candidates for public office – it doesn’t matter what political party is doing the challenging. Get the tourists to pay for using the town’s roads and bridges. Charge the trucking companies for bouncing around with those big trucks (that bring all the food, clothing, furniture and supplies we demand). Demand more federal funds from the government. Above all, “NO NEW TAXES!”

Another suspect is so called “investigative journalism.” Here we have three or four local television news programs rushing around town trying to outdo each other in finding examples of government misuse of taxpayer funds. The amounts they find are relatively insignificant (a few thousand here and there in budgets that run in the hundreds of millions of dollars) but they make it seem as though the government is incapable of properly managing the dollars taxpayer’s are obliged to send them. The end result is a gross distortion of the efficiency of governments and a clear act of throwing fuel on the fire of general distrust of elected officials.

A good many fingers are being pointed at members of Congress and their excessive use of “earmarks” in federal transportation budgets as a major part of the problem. Another easy target. The truth is that “earmarks” despite all the hype about “bridges to nowhere” can and have been extremely useful in getting funds “earmarked” for needed, necessary, local projects that would never have been addressed without the practice. Earmarking funds to subsidize a specific local mass transit system that would take the pressure off the aging roads and bridges, the creation of light rail systems in overcrowded, congested local communities, the directing of funds to create a specific local computerized traffic system are, in many cases the only way those projects would ever be funded at all. Yes, the system is currently being abused but its probably not a bad system, it just needs a little better management.

So what is the answer? Well, you may have figured it out by now: we have seen the enemy and it is us. We are great complainers but we’re not very good at picking the right people to represent us. We end up voting for the lesser of two evils or against a candidate rather than for one. Why is that? The truth is that under the election structure we have, the Primary process may be more important than the final election. However, the candidates that are chosen are done so by an excruciatingly small, percentage of the population. My suggestion: all those regular Republicans who left the party and became independents – get out there and re-register. All those Democrats who feel the Party has gone too Hollywood – get out there and re-register. All those true Independents who have never been part of a political party – pick one and re-register.

A final suggestion: don’t ever vote for a candidate whose campaign slogan is: NO NEW TAXES. That’s a code word for pandering to the electorate just to get elected and it will also assure you that the mundane issue of infrastructure will not be addressed. And if someone campaigns on ending the war so the money can be used elsewhere – run the other way.