Generic – No New Infrastructure

The public does not want to spend on new infrastructure --- prefers improvement of old ones.

Spending money on public transportation or other transportation options won’t prevent us from repairing and maintaining our existing roads and bridges. In fact, our roads and bridges aren’t in poor shape because we don’t spend enough on roads overall — it’s because we’ve neglected to maintain our existing roadways and instead spent taxpayer dollars on more new roads and highways, whether or not these were the best investments of our transportation dollars Regardless of where we’ve spent money in the past or “what we used to do,” people are ready for something different. Rather than asking Americans if we should “take” money from roads, what happens when you ask Americans a more basic questions: “Where should we spend our transportation money?” Earlier this year, Transportation for America and the National Association of Realtors did just that in our own poll. (Background on the poll here and here). The bottom line? An overwhelming majority of Americans believe restoring existing roads and bridges and expanding transportation options should take precedence over road-building alone. Given that the U.S. population will increase by one-hundred million people by 2050, which of the following transportation approaches do you prefer to accommodate this growth? Build and improve rail systems, such as commuter rail, light rail, and subways Build new highways and freeways Not sure 75% 20% 5%

Generic – Spending

Transportation infrastructure triggers hot button election issues like the economy and spending.

Quinter, 6/13/2012 (Joshua – Principal Lawyer at Kaplin Stewart, Will A Permanent Federal Highway Appropriations Bill Ever Get Passed, p. http://www.pennsylvaniaconstructionlawyer.com/2012/06/will-a-permanent-federal-highway-appropriations-bill-ever-get-passed.shtml)

Given that it is an election year, the rhetoric will likely increase. Action by Congress to pass the highway transportation bill - particularly since it appropriates money in an election year where the economy and government spending will be a hot button issue -seems very unlikely. The introduction of a 10th stopgap measure in to the conversation in recent weeks has done nothing to allay the fears of those still holding out hope for a long term deal. With a Congressional recess quickly approaching and election season hitting full swing shortly thereafter, those in the construction industry should not expect much more than an effort to "kick the can down the road" before the June 30th deadline.

Generic – Transportation Spending

Despite support for transportation infrastructure, attempts to fund programs cause public backlash.

McBee Strategic Insight, 2/3/2012 (Washington Research: The McBee 2012 Preview – Transportation Infrastructure Investment: “The Responsibility of Governing,” p. 4-6)

Whether those are just political talking points or a real desire to legislate remains to be seen. Regardless, public opinion largely backs up that view. According to a Rockefeller Foundation survey conducted in February 2011, two out of three voters consider improving the nation's transportation infrastructure to be "extremely" or "very" important, and four out of five believe that boosting federal funding will improve the economy "and create millions of jobs from construction to manufacturing to engineering." Ninety-one percent of those polled agreed that "our generation has a responsibility to the future to invest in America's infrastructure – just as our parents and grandparents did," and 71% said transportation funding ought to be an area of bipartisan compromise. However, when it comes to actually financing increased spending on infrastructure, that consensus quickly melts away. "Voters are far less accepting of proposals that would affect their own wallets," the Rockefeller Foundation survey found. True to form, 71% of voters said it would be "unacceptable" to raise the federal gasoline tax – the main funding source for the HTF – which has been set at 18.4 cents per gallon since 1993.

The public does not want to pay for transportation infrastructure --- opposition to pork barrel spending is stronger than the ambivalent support.

Alden, 6/14/2012 (Edward – Bernard L. Schwartz Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, The First Renewing America Progress Report and Scorecard: The Road to Nowhere, Council on Foreign Relations, p. http://blogs.cfr.org/renewing-america/2012/06/14/the-first-renewing-america-progress-report-and-scorecard-the-road-to-nowhere/)

Two-thirds of Americans say that fully funding transportation infrastructure is either “extremely important” or “very important” to them. Yet solid majorities are opposed to any of the usual ways of funding new roads, including higher gas taxes or new tolls. It would be easy to point a finger at Congress, and we certainly do in the report. Reauthorization of the surface transportation bill, usually known as the highway bill, has always been contentious, but nevertheless it used to win approval routinely. But the last multi-year bill expired in 2009 and has been replaced by a series of short-term extensions that make rational construction planning all but impossible for state and local governments. The bill expires again June 30th, and congressional leaders again look unlikely to reach agreement and are predicting another short-term extension. It will be the 10th; as a Miami Herald editorial put it recently, this marks “a new low in congressional irresponsibility.” But congressional inaction in many ways reflects public ambivalence. Americans want uncluttered highways, efficient airports, and seamless mass transit systems, but they are either reluctant to pay for these things or doubt the ability of governments to deliver. The overdue backlash against pork barrel politics for favored projects, for instance, seems to have hardened into a deeper public cynicism about the ability of government to deliver any needed public works. Even proposals like using a federal seed money to create a National Infrastructure Bank that would funnel private investor (not taxpayer) money into new projects have been unable to get through Congress.

Paying for transportation infrastructure is election suicide. There is no support for funding.

McBee Strategic Insight, 2/3/2012 (Washington Research: The McBee 2012 Preview – Transportation Infrastructure Investment: “The Responsibility of Governing,” p. 1)

Expected passage of a long-term aviation financing bill next week gives ground transportation advocates cause for hope, but that's likely a red-herring. The politics surrounding how to pay for infrastructure financing simply remain too hot to handle in an election year. President Obama has run away from any discussion of increasing the 18.4 cents per gallon federal gasoline tax, while Republicans won't support a tax increase of any kind to pay for new spending, even if some groups are willing to pay additional taxes. Those views are generally consistent with a voting public that wants to spend more on transportation infrastructure – but does not want to foot the bill out of their own wallets.

Generic – Transportation Spending

Voters think federal transportation spending is inefficient and unwise.

The Rockefeller Foundation 2011 (The Rockefeller Foundation Infrastructure Survey, Conducted by Hart Research Associates and Public Opinion Strategies, p. 3)

A large majority of voters see room for improvement in how the government spends money on infrastructure and they endorse a host of reforms in this area. • 64% of voters say that how the government currently spends money on building and maintaining our transportation infrastructure is inefficient and unwise, including one in four (26%) who says it is very inefficient. Just 32% say the government currently spends efficiently and wisely. • Republicans (72% unwise) and independents (67% unwise) are particularly adamant that this is the case, though 56% of Democrats say that current spending is unwise as well.

Polls prove the public thinks the federal government wastes transportation spending.

Reason, 12/20/2011 (77 Percent of Americans Opposing Raising the gas Tax and Favor Tolls, Reason-Rupe Transportation Poll, p. http://reason.com/poll/2011/12/20/77-percent-oppose-raising-gas-tax)

A majority of Americans believe new transportation projects should be paid for with user-fees instead of tax increases, according to a new national Reason-Rupe poll of 1,200 adults on cell phones and land lines. The Reason-Rupe poll finds 77 percent of Americans oppose increasing the federal gas tax, while just 19 percent favor raising the tax, which is currently 18.4 cents a gallon. The public thinks the government wastes the gas tax money it already receives. Sixty-five percent say the government spends transportation funding ineffectively, and just 23 say the money is spent effectively.

The public does not want to pay for transportation infrastructure.

Feigenbaum, 3/30/2012 (Baruch – Transportation Policy Analyst at Reason Foundation, Data Does Not Support Claims that Light Rail Improves Rider Health, Reason Foundation, p. http://reason.org/blog/show/data-does-not-support-claims-that-l)

The report is split into four major sections that detail the Return on Investment, Investing in Infrastructure, Uses (for) Underutilized Resources, Supporting the Middle Class and Americans Want More Transportation Investment. (Note to the authors: Americans might want more transportation investment but they do not want to pay for it. Unless the transportation genie builds a beautiful new highway, finding the funds to build that highway will be challenging.) Report subsections include such fluffy topics as Building a National Community and Creating a More Livable Community. The report also proclaims that “Now Is The Time to Act.” I am waiting for one of these reports that says tomorrow is the time to act. The report also details the role of a merit-based national infrastructure bank. Perhaps the authors can explain a merit-based national infrastructure bank to the President, because he still does not understand the merit part.

Directory: files
files -> Answer True False 2 points Question 2
files -> Integer programming and game theory
files -> 4 Integer Programming
files -> Bpa vehicle Window Repair Scenario #1 task: Procure vehicle window relacement. Objective
files -> Pop Warner History
files -> North Carolina Inclusion Initiative Mapping Where Children with ieps are Being Served Purpose
files -> Fall 2013 Spring 2014 Program Data: Standard 1 Exhibit 4d
files -> Hanban – asia society confucius classrooms network 2010 request for proposal
files -> Northern England’s set-jetting locations

Download 1.8 Mb.

Share with your friends: