The United States federal government should close the United States Department of Transportation
Download 1.4 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- More evidence -- the process of the aff guarantees underfunding and inadequate upkeep -- private actors have more access to capital which ensures better solvency.
Exts – CP Solves (Funding)Government funding guarantees continued infrastructure deterioration due to ballooning deficits and competing priorities -- only the private sector ensures sustainable support.Gilroy and Kenny 12- Gilroy is the director of government reform and Harris Kenny is a policy analyst at Reason Foundation (Leonard and Harris, “States and Cities Going Private With Infrastructure Investment”, Reason Foundation, 5/17, http://www.realclearmarkets.com/articles/2012/05/17/states_and_cities_going_private_with_infrastructure_investment_99671.html)//EL As public debts grow, cities and states simultaneously face pressing needs to repair and modernize critical infrastructure assets that can't wait if citizens hope to keep goods and services moving in the economy. For example, many interstate highways, which are owned and maintained by states, are reaching the end of their useful lives and will cost tens of billions of dollars to reconstruct. Yet, projected federal and state fuel tax revenues will come nowhere close to covering the bills. When factoring in similarly large investment needs in water, aviation, schools and other public infrastructure facilities, it becomes abundantly clear that new infrastructure financing models and sources of capital will be the only viable option to support and sustain growth. Enter the private sector, where investors are demonstrating a willingness and capability to partner with governments to modernize and expand infrastructure, according to Reason Foundation's recent Annual Privatization Report 2011. The report finds that the amount of capital available in private infrastructure equity investment funds reached a new all-time high last year. And since 2006, the 30 largest global infrastructure investment funds have raised a total of $183.1 billion dedicated to financing infrastructure projects; the bulk coming from U.S., Australian and Canadian inventors. In fact, eight major privately financed transportation projects were under construction in the U.S. in 2011 totaling over $13 billion. For a preview of the future, just look to Puerto Rico, where innovative infrastructure financing has been a priority of Governor Luis Fortuño's administration. Prior to his tenure, massive budget deficits and weak credit ratings left the territory with a limited ability to finance infrastructure. In fact, public infrastructure investment (as a share of GDP) had been on a steep decline in Puerto Rico since 2000. Put simply, if Puerto Rico was going to maintain-much less expand and modernize-its infrastructure, it was going to need outside help. Policymakers proactively adopted a 2009 law authorizing government agencies to partner with private firms for the design, construction, financing, maintenance and/or operation of public facilities across a wide spectrum that includes transportation, ports, schools and other asset classes. The law also established a Public Private Partnership Authority (PPPA), a new unit of the Government Development Bank, to conduct due diligence on these infrastructure partnerships and take worthy projects to market in competitive procurements. So far it's been a smashing success. Last fall the PPPA finalized its first major highway deal, closing on a 40-year, $1.5 billion lease of two toll highways to a private concessionaire now responsible for operating the facilities and making major capital investments in pavement, signage, lighting and other safety enhancements. Lawmakers are also poised to privatize operations of San Juan's Luis Muñoz Marin International Airport this summer. Two weeks ago PPPA officials selected two consortia eligible to compete for a $1 billion, 50-year lease expected next month. The deal pays off $900 million in public debt, and results in a virtual reconstruction of the entire airport, pursuant to officials' goal of turning the airport into the preeminent gateway to the Caribbean. PPPA is also in the middle of a new K-12 school modernization program whereby officials are contracting with private developers to design, build and maintain a package of approximately 100 schools in 78 municipalities across the territory. This effort will address a severe need to upgrade aging, deteriorating schools and tackle chronic deferred maintenance. Puerto Rico isn't alone though. For example, Chicago Mayor and former Obama chief of staff Rahm Emanuel stood with former President Bill Clinton last month to propose an ambitious $7.2 billion infrastructure program that will rely heavily on public-private partnerships and private financing for a broad spectrum of projects including roads, water, transit and more. To implement this program, city policymakers recently created a new Chicago Infrastructure Trust, a nonprofit infrastructure bank that can package deals and blend public and private financing to advance projects. Early pledges of up to $1 billion in private capital from several financial institutions, including Citibank, Macquarie and JPMorgan suggest the model may be viable. Elsewhere, both Texas and Connecticut enacted broad-ranging laws to authorize private sector financing for state and local assets in 2011. In New York, The Yonkers Public Schools recently hired a team of financial, legal and technical consultants to evaluate the potential to tap private financing to help deliver a $2 billion K-12 school modernization program. Like Puerto Rico, Yonkers has a number of aging facilities over 70 years old that need reconstruction, yet lacks the ability to undertake large-scale renovation through traditional taxes and bonds given current fiscal and financial constraints. Ultimately, policymakers are beginning to realize that the status quo of financing infrastructure through taxes and municipal debt is broken. Fortunately the private sector is poised and ready to invest in infrastructure, with hundreds of billions of dollars in privately sourced capital sitting on the sidelines looking for worthy public infrastructure projects in which to invest. While governments continue to struggle even with the basics of balancing budgets, much less long-term crises like entitlement spending and underfunded public pensions, the question is not if, but when, will more policymakers like Fortuño and Emanuel step up and embrace the private sector? Infrastructure represents the arteries and capillaries of our economy, and if we let those deteriorate, the heart itself will soon follow. The political process of the aff guarantees it’ll be underfunded and won’t be able to sustain infrastructure -- only privatization solves.Rodrigue 09- Ph.D. in Transport Geography from the Université de Montréal( Jean-Paul, “The Geography of Transport Systems”, Chapter 7, Hofstra University, http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch7en/appl7en/ch7a2en.html)//EL The geography of transpot systems1. Private Participation in Transport Infrastructure Transportation infrastructure, like several infrastructure classes, has a significant level of public involvement ranging from direct ownership and management to a regulatory framework that defines operational standards. This is notably the outcome of a tradition where transportation, particularly roads, was seen as a public good not to be subject to market forces and be free of access. A similar trend applied to port and airport infrastructures that were placed under the management of public authorities. Although rail freight has essentially been a private endeavor in the United States, it was significantly regulated by the Interstate Commerce Commission in terms of fares and level of service. In many jurisdictions the government roles involve well defined responsibilities that are not expected to change. Rail terminals are mostly managed by private rail operators while the warehousing / distribution industry is almost completely private. Like many civil engineering sectors, the private sector can be involved in transportation project delivery, which can include design and construction, project management such as maintenance and operations and project financing, namely raising capital. Contemporary transportation infrastructure financing is facing the following challenges: Transport finance initiatives are generally not sufficient for maintaining and improving the performance of transport systems. This was a major driver behind privatization and deregulation in the passenger and freight transport industries worldwide. Transport finance initiatives should be designed to promote productivity gains. This underlines that many investment projects are politically instead of commercially driven. Transport finance initiatives differ in their probable impacts on transport system performance. This underlines the difficulty of establishing multiplying effects linked with specific infrastructure investment projects. More evidence -- the process of the aff guarantees underfunding and inadequate upkeep -- private actors have more access to capital which ensures better solvency. Mansour and Nadji 6- Chief Economist and Strategist at RREEF and Director at RREEF( Asieh and Hope, “US Infrastructure Privatization and Public Policy Issues ”, RREEF,September, http://www.irei.com/uploads/marketresearch/69/marketResearchFile/Infr_Priv_Pub_Policy_Issues.pdf)//EL Two significant trends are driving the movement towards privatization. First, governments at all levels are strained for financial resources. Privatization is a means for providing needed and popular infrastructure without further straining the public budget. Second, the private markets are capital rich, seeking to invest increasing quantities of capital at attractive risk-adjusted yields. Investment in privatized infrastructure can offer attractive opportunities. The federal government traditionally has heavily funded much of the infrastructure currently targeted for privatization. During the past few decades, efforts to reign in the federal budget have resulted in declining resources for roads, bridges, airports, seaports, and water systems. These budget reductions have impacted both capital and maintenance costs. As a result, these burdens have shifted to state and municipal budgets. Increasing revenue at the state and local levels, however, is politically very difficult. Thus, privatization is viewed as a mechanism for providing infrastructure without negatively impacting a state or municipal government’s fiscal position. Over the past decade, it has been the regional governments in the US that faced severe fiscal pressures that have predominantly privatized. This issue impacts both capital costs of developing new infrastructure and maintenance costs for older infrastructure. Infrastructure investment needs in the US fall into two basic categories. The first involves growth areas, including booming new suburbs and areas of regional growth, such as the southern and western portions of the nation. The needs in these areas are for capital to develop infrastructure to support this growth. With federal funds more limited, states and municipalities need to be more creative in financing these needs. Privatization of the new infrastructure is an obvious solution. The second category involves curing deferred maintenance of older infrastructure. Older communities, particularly in the Northeast and Midwest, are served by old infrastructure. Typically, these regions suffered from under-investment in the maintenance of this infrastructure. With slow economic growth, little fiscal capacity exists to fund what is often substantial deferred maintenance. Once again, privatization offers a potential solution. The private sector can provide desperately needed capital for investing in the crumbling infrastructure across the US. There has been severe underinvestment in US infrastructure over the past decade. The supply of infrastructure assets has failed to meet growing demand as exemplified by an aging infrastructure, expanding demand for services with a growing Real Estate Research 3 population, and state/local government deficits that have not only restrained needed expenditures, but also had to accommodate competing priorities, such as health care. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) has released its most recent Report Card for America’s infrastructure, grading the top infrastructure categories. The summary results are reported in Exhibit 1 below. The grade point average has deteriorated to a “D” overall with an estimated $1.6 trillion needed in further investments to bring conditions to acceptable levels. Therefore the question of why privatize is that for many state and municipal governments, it may be the only way to provide or maintain needed infrastructure for their local constituents. Infrastructure investments, whether private or public, are a necessary input to expand the productive capacity of an area. Capital investment in infrastructure, private as well as public, goes hand in hand with economic activity. Empirical studies have shown that infrastructure has substantial payoffs, and currently in the US, public infrastructure is undersupplied and higher levels are warranted. Benefits of Privatization Several factors appear to be driving the current trend toward privatization of infrastructure: • A perception or belief that private enterprise can develop and/or operate critical facilities more cheaply and efficiently than public agencies. • Provide a source of capital to fund needed infrastructure that would otherwise need to be funded through tax revenue or public financing. • In the case of an outright sale, provide cash to bolster public finances or to be used for other public needs. • To provide the revenue to maintain the infrastructure over time. • Remove critically needed facilities from on-going political meddling, which can often impede the efficient and economical provision of services. Of the above-mentioned factors, the ability to provide infrastructure without sizeable public funding and the ability to generate cash through a sale of an asset are the most appealing to government officials and politicians. Because voters are highly resistant to increased taxes and higher public debt at all levels of government, opportunities to shift costs from the public to the private sector are appealing. Canada has been at the forefront of this movement toward privatization in North America, with infrastructure becoming a mainstream asset class that attracts investor capital. Longduration infrastructure investments are especially appealing to pension funds, which have long-dated liabilities. 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 1.4 Mb. Share with your friends:
|