Thread: Rudman, Rohatyn: Infrastructure Spending Key

Rudman, Rohatyn: Infrastructure Spending Key

Friday, March 28, 2008 11:01 a.m. EDT

Financier Felix Rohatyn and former Senator Warren Rudman are urging the establishment of a national bank to fix the country’s aging infrastructure — roads, bridges, schools, water pipelines, ports, air control systems, dams and railroads.
They figure the spending on infrastructure should be $1.6 trillion over the next five years.

Rohatyn is credited with saving New York City from bankruptcy in the 1970s, and Rudman made himself famous as the co-author of a budget deficit reduction bill in 1985. The $1.6 trillion figure comes from the American Society of Civil Engineers.

With the economy apparently entering a steep recession, the timing is perfect to "improve the country’s crumbling infrastructure,â€

congressional interference

Yeah. We can't have the people's representatives involved while we steal the public works paid for, and built on the land of, the American citizens on behalf of private business.

This call for infrastructure rebuilding has been a centerpiece of the liberal agenda and I know we are going to hear a lot more about it. Don't get me wrong: I am not saying that there are no needs. Heaven knows much of our highway, utility and transport systems need improvement especially if we are to remain economically competitive. Unions also push this idea---and they gain a lot of new members from constuction projects. Unions also introduce illegal aliens to various benefits of the US system. So that is one of the big downsides.

In my city we have been engaged in a lengthy dialogue about some projects that require extensive federal funding. Some of those projects seem to be really exhorbitant , unneeded or unwanted by many of the people. Most typically, the liberal organizations and government bodies back the projects; citizen groups, businesses and community activists frequently oppose them. But I do know that if we embark on a huge program of construction projects there will be a big demand for labor--and so far unions and "fair contracting" groups have been going to bat for the illegal aliens. Government projects will come under fair contracting laws so expect a lot of monetary settlements going to IA employees--it's already been happening.

Besides, much of the argument extends beyong a "mere" 1.5 trillion. There is a call, visibly backed by the SEIU union, that calls for 11-12 trillion investment over the next fifty years. Do we even know what the economic patterns will demand fifty years from now? That is really to hard to predict. Railroad improvement is a fairly safe bet--and most of that can be done by private investment.

So look out for the Trojan Horse of massive public works investment. You will see Obama or Hillary talking about it a lot.

They support the National Infrastructure Bank Act authored by Senators Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) and Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.). The bill was introduced last year, the same day that a bridge collapsed in Minneapolis, killing 13 and injuring hundreds.

This has become a popular argument. Once again I do agree that we need to improve structures that are dangerous. However, construction is also a dangerous and/or deadly industry. According to Bof L statistics there are 1200 construction fatalities yearly in the US. Transportation and utility construction account for 200 per year. So a big program will also involve construction deaths. I don't know how this works out as a ratio, in todays economy i.e. 200 deaths per x billions of projects?