American infrastructure is failing period

Biden is currently pushing 2 + Trillion dollar spending bill to fix an issue that has been effecting America for a long time, failing infrastructure. based on Army reports currently only one sector of American infrastructure rates above C. American drinking water is being contaminated above federal level in dozen of states not just Flint.

now Biden plan goes on to address other issues Senior Medicare expansion, Job training, and investment in Green technology.

but let sideline that for now and forces on the 1.2 + Trillion that is forced on direct building and maintaining infrastructure. This should be bipartisan issue this work need to be done. America is already seeing the failure of these delay the Texas power grind wasn’t winterized, Floods, Sick Children, etc.

1 Like

Both Obama and Trump tried for infrastructure plans both got bulldozed by the opposition. Not sure how this will be any different.

1 Like

They simply don’t want to spend the money, the issue is the longer America wait the worse it will get and the more money it will cost.

Obama should have done this instead of the ACA.

8 Likes

Yes he should have and the last guy should have done it before trying to build a wall and Biden should have done it before his covid bill, what will the next president do instead???

When EVER I hear a politician tell me that the money is for “infrastructure”, they’re lying. It’s the one subject that works for everyone and that almost no one would have an objection to…so they use it as their basis to get approved what they truly want. I don’t know what’s all in this bill but…historically based…it isn’t about infrastructure.

This Senator was the first to reveal that more money is being spent on electrical charging stations, than for roads. That isn’t “infrastructure”. That’s pushing an electric car agenda.

https://www.wgowam.com/news/sen-blunt-decries-infrastructure-bills-lopsided-focus-on-electric-vehicles/

3 Likes

It is an infrastructure for electric vehicles.

What is wrong with building that out?

1 Like

First…“we” don’t have the money. Second…“we” don’t currently own anywhere near that number of electric vehicles that would place this front and center as a priority. That’s why I said, it’s “pushing an electric car agenda”.

In the old days it was said, placing the cart before the horse…get it? :sunglasses:

3 Likes

Why should tax payers fund them? I don’t recall gas stations being built by government taxes.

3 Likes

This is why making political foes enemies is such a bad idea.

Make the deal more project specific. I am all for replacing lead water lines.

1 Like

This isn’t the old days. In order to give people the choice of purchasing an electric vehicle, there has to be charging stations to support them. It’s an investment in the future.

1 Like

Which also takes funding…gas tax… away from infrastructure.

1 Like

You just made the choice then.

Think it might be a good idea to standardize the chargers first. And private business should be building them, not government.

2 Likes

Then place a tax on the purchase of the car to pay for it. Then the individual receiving the benefit, is paying for it.

3 Likes

The other thing I’d say is…plainly state this instead of using the one word of “infrastructure”. Why is it that this isn’t mentioned at ALL? Not saying it…is lying and that’s true in the old days, today and tomorrow.

1 Like

They did. $174 billion of the infrastructure bill is earmarked for support of electric vehicles.

1 Like

This is from a FoxNews.com story headlined “ Biden’s $2T spending plan, billed as infrastructure bill, spends less than half on infrastructure”

Less than 6% of the proposal goes to roads and bridges, critics say

From the article…

***”Indeed, the White House summary of the American Jobs Plan says it will spend “$115 billion to modernize the bridges, highways, roads, and main streets that are in most critical need of repair” out of more than $2 trillion in the plan. That is slightly under 6%.

But what counts and does not count as infrastructure can be tricky to define, according to Cato Institute Director of Tax Policy Studies Chris Edwards.

Fast Facts: Biden $2T spending plan

$400 billion for home-based care for elderly and disabled

$35 billion for climate change-related R&D

$50 billion for “research infrastructure” at the National Science Foundation

$50 billion for new Commerce Department office “dedicated to monitoring domestic industrial capacity”

$213 billion for home sustainability and public housing

“The first thing to know is there is no hard definition of infrastructure. Economists have no hard definition of infrastructure,” Edwards said in an interview with Fox News. ***

Other items that don’t really seem like “infrastructure”… “Fox News also excluded $213 billion in Biden’s plan that’s directed at home sustainability and public housing; at least $35 billion aimed at R&D related to climate change; $50 billion to create a new office at the Department of Commerce to “dedicated to monitoring domestic industrial capacity and funding investments to support production of critical goods;” $30 billion to prepare for future pandemics; $45 billion for the federal government to buy clean energy goods; $14 billion “to bring together industry, academia, and government to advance technologies and capabilities critical to future competitiveness;” and several other provisions.”

I guess this is going to end up being an argument about the definition of “infrastructure”. There appears to be plenty of Green New Deal for example.

My reaction…surprise surprise another Biden lie. He campaigned as a moderate and here we go again, on the heels of a Covid bill that had very little to do with Covid here comes an infrastructure bill that has damn little to do with infrastructure. Maybe he learned from his old boss “Shovel Ready Jobs Weren’t All That Shovel Ready” Barack.

https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fpolitics%2Fbiden-spending-plan-billed-as-infrastructure-bill-spends-non-infrastructure&data=04|01||b6b32a9ba78f4c100adb08d8f823ff1e|84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa|1|0|637532180768682978|Unknown|TWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D|1000&sdata=%2BmwYYSHynYrsV9mUQSK%2FVDl8bBdIArMReARzMyM%2BmbE%3D&reserved=0

5 Likes

Is that more than for roads, highways and bridges…which is what the word “infrastructure” has historically meant or is this being stated after being called out? Seriously…can you honestly answer that?

Funny it was okay when trump was diverting funds to build his wall.

Now all of a sudden, fiscal conservatism is back in vogue.

Sorry that dog don’t hunt,

Allan

1 Like