Politics Americans want new infrastructure — and they're willing to pay for it

19:00  22 october  2021
19:00  22 october  2021 Source:   thehill.com

Biden's electric vehicle plan includes expanding charging stations. Is it enough?

  Biden's electric vehicle plan includes expanding charging stations. Is it enough? The infrastructure bill stalled in the House includes $7.5 billion to expand electric vehicle charging stations. Advocates say it's a good start.As automakers expand their lineup of electric cars, the funding for the charging stations would represent a historically large down payment on Biden's plan to aggressively reduce greenhouse gas levels by 2030. Transportation makes up 29% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, more than any other sector.

How should we pay for infrastructure? That question has been at the heart of U.S. infrastructure policy for decades - and it's among the most divisive of the many divisive issues that led to the dramatic and at times ugly debate over infrastructure legislation.

Americans want new infrastructure — and they're willing to pay for it © Getty Images Americans want new infrastructure — and they're willing to pay for it

The traditional Democratic answer has been, "raise taxes." But higher tax rates are clearly a political nonstarter. The traditional Republican answer has been "anything but taxes," an unhelpful bit of orthodoxy. Moderates on both sides have suggested a combination of taxes, user fees and public-private partnerships (PPPs).

Big changes in White House ideas to pay for $2 trillion plan

  Big changes in White House ideas to pay for $2 trillion plan SCRANTON, Pa. (AP) — In an abrupt change, the White House is floating new plans to pay for parts of President Joe Biden’s $2 trillion social services and climate change package, shelving a proposed big increase in corporate tax rates though also adding a new billionaires' tax on the investment gains of the very richest Americans. The reversal Wednesday came as Biden returned to his hometown of Scranton, Pennsylvania, to highlight the middle class values he says are at the heart of the package that Democrats are racing to finish. Biden faces resistance from key holdouts, including Sen. Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz.

Fortunately, the American people have a view; and their answer is practical and not dogmatic. They believe that those who use infrastructure should pay for it but believe equally that the federal and state governments, through taxes, should also fund our infrastructure.

I recently conducted a survey of 1,000 Americans through the Development Research Institute at New York University to examine Americans' attitudes and opinions about key infrastructure issues. Sixty-eight percent reported they were willing to pay more in exchange for safer and more reliable infrastructure.

According to the survey:

  • Americans are equally willing to pay for better infrastructure through user fees and "use taxes" (such as gasoline taxes) (45 percent), and an increase in federal and state taxes (47 percent);
  • The 45 percent who reported they favored use taxes for safer and/or more reliable infrastructure said they would be willing to pay more for infrastructure projects that benefitted them;
  • Residents of states such as Florida, Texas and California, would rather pay for better infrastructure through user fees and higher gasoline taxes than increases in federal or state taxes;
  • But there is a generational divide; Generation Z is more willing to pay for infrastructure through user fees and higher gasoline taxes (54 percent) than Generation X (44 percent);
  • Those living in urban areas are more willing to pay for infrastructure through user fees and the private sector (51 percent) than rural areas (43 percent) and;
  • There was surprising bipartisan consensus: A significant number of Republicans were willing to pay federal and state taxes (41 percent) or use taxes (41 percent) for safer or more reliable infrastructure - almost the same level as the total across all party affiliations (47 percent and 45 percent).

Independent research produces similar results. In the 2021 annual survey by the Mineta Transportation Institute of San Jose State University, 71 percent of Americans favored increasing the federal gasoline tax by 10 cents if the revenue would be dedicated to maintenance. Roughly half supported mileage fees, either on all travel or just commercial travel, with 62 percent adding that fees should be reduced for low-income drivers.

Democrats squabble, scramble to meet self-imposed deadline. Why this week is vital for Biden.

  Democrats squabble, scramble to meet self-imposed deadline. Why this week is vital for Biden. Democrats still differ over what to strip out of Biden's budget bill, which is likely to be much smaller than the initial $3.5 trillion Biden pitched.House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., earlier this month, set a new deadline of Oct. 31 for the House to pass a $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill and achieve consensus on a bigger budget bill that includes a number of liberal policies like subsidizing child care and fighting climate change.   .

In an ideal world, there is nothing wrong with using general tax revenue to fund infrastructure. Public funding is a legitimate way to pay for the public good. But in a toxic, polarized political environment - where Texas drivers will not want to pay for New York roads - across-the-board taxation as the sole source of funding is not a viable option. This year's infrastructure debates bear that out - the bipartisan infrastructure framework had no provisions for a tax rate increase. Under our current, real-world conditions, user fees and use taxes offer a viable alternative - though ultimately, private investment will be necessary if we are to meet our long-term infrastructure needs.

Political resistance to taxation has had a long-term negative impact. U.S. infrastructure funding started to fall in 1970, and we currently spend less than 1 percent of GDP on infrastructure - in contrast to China's 8 percent. The consequence is neglect and decay - the power failures, floods, poor roads and tainted water that disrupt everyday life, undermine economic growth and productivity, and in the most extreme cases, such as Hurricane Ida and its aftermath, threaten public safety.

Infrastructure bill represents significant opportunity to support public power

  Infrastructure bill represents significant opportunity to support public power Cities and towns own most public power utilities, but many are owned by counties, public utility districts, and even states. With that perspective in mind, public power utilities are closely watching several provisions in the bill's latest version.The bill includes significant investments in energy infrastructure, such as electric vehicle charging infrastructure, the transmission and distribution systems that make up our electric grids, cybersecurity, and federal research, development, and deployment of cutting-edge energy technology.

The consequences of this underinvestment cannot be minimized. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) estimates that we are currently spending $2.59 trillion less than is needed just to bring existing infrastructure into an adequate state of repair - without starting any new projects. According to the ASCE, if the gap is not addressed, the cost will be $3.9 trillion in U.S. GDP by 2039.

Political resistance to infrastructure spending also leads to a too-short funding cycle and a dangerous near-term focus. Infrastructure should be planned, funded and managed on a decades-long time horizon. But appropriations cycles don't work that way. And concerns about inflation hamper long-term investment. During downturns, administrations are eager to fund infrastructure to stimulate the economy. But as the economy improves and interest rates rise, inflation fears set in and funding is cut. Important projects lose out. Opponents of the 2021 infrastructure bills specifically cited inflation concerns.

The people know better - they recognize that infrastructure is essential. In my survey, most Americans, members of both parties, responded that infrastructure was our most important national priority, more than COVID-19, tax rates, the national debt or racial inequality. It's not surprising, then, that they are willing to dig into their own pockets to repair the damage and build new, modern infrastructure.

Far-left Democrats make Nancy Pelosi delay infrastructure bill again

  Far-left Democrats make Nancy Pelosi delay infrastructure bill again House Speaker Nancy Pelosi again backed off from bringing up the $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill on the House floor in the face of far-left opposition to voting on the legislation before an agreement is reached on a separate social spending bill. © Provided by Washington Examiner “As you know by now, the House will postpone the vote on the BIF [bipartisan infrastructure framework],” Pelosi told colleagues in a letter Thursday night. “The good news is that most Members who were not prepared for a yes vote today have expressed their commitment to support the BIF.

With these sentiments in mind, Congress should revise its position on the gasoline tax as well as on user fees. As the survey results demonstrate, we should rely on taxes but also on user fees, PPPs and privatizations to fund our long-term needs for infrastructures. Some have argued that use taxes and user fees can be regressive. We need more serious research to analyze how regressive user fees are, by state and by sector. Today, technology can help target groups that could benefit from tax credits or user-fee exemptions. Sixty-four percent of those surveyed believe that technology could be critical to improving the delivery of infrastructure.

Americans understand what's at stake - and political leaders should take note. But it will ultimately require all available funding mechanisms, public and private, to address our current crisis and give us the 21st century infrastructure we need.

Sadek Wahba is a senior fellow at the Development Research Institute of New York University. He is also chairman and managing partner of I Squared Capital, an independent global infrastructure investment company. The views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect those of the organizations mentioned above.

Americans Split on Whether Infrastructure, Social Spending Legislation Will Help or Hurt Economy .
The ABC News/Ipsos survey found that 32 percent of Americans think that the social spending package and the bipartisan infrastructure legislation will hurt them if they were enacted. Above, Biden delivers remarks about his proposed ‘Build Back Better’ social spending bill in the East Room of the White House on October 28 in Washington, DC. The ABC News/ Ipsos poll released on Sunday showed that Americans were equally split, 34 percent to 34 percent, about whether these bills will hurt or help the economy. Only 6 percent think the bills would have no impact on the U.S. economy.

usr: 1
This is interesting!