Oberstar (D-Minn.) Proposes $45 Billion for Infrastructure in Stimulus Bill

[babylonsister]

Oberstar Proposes $45 Billion for Infrastructure in Stimulus Bill


The government would invest $45 billion in infrastructure projects under a tentative proposal that House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James L. Oberstar has compiled as part of Democrats’ new economic recovery legislation.

Oberstar, D-Minn., said his staff as well as Ways and Means Committee aides would be staying in Washington next week to continue their work on the bill.

President-elect Obama has called on Congress to have a stimulus measure — one heavy on infrastructure investment — ready for him to sign into law on Inauguration Day.

Oberstar’s proposal includes $18.25 billion for highways and bridges, $6.5 billion for transit, $2 billion for rail and $9 billion for environmental infrastructure.

He said Wednesday the list is a work in progress. “We will expand upon that,” he said.

more...

http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=5&docID=cqmidday-000002996683

[jwirr]

1. That is my rep. I wish someone else would look at city water and

sewer needs and local energy projects.

[HereSince1628]

2. The nation needs to attend to infrastructure, but it won't help the economy very quickly

Even if the projects have plans approved and ready to go,the weather and logistics of obtaining the needed materials will put things off until summer or later.

There is no point in buying steel from Brazil or China or concrete from Mexico if the idea is a stimulus for the US economy.

[elleng]

3. Don't you think it would depend on the particular plans,

how quickly they can go?

So we shouldn't buy steel or concrete? What are you saying about that?

[HereSince1628]

7. What I am saying is it takes a LONG lead time to get these projects

into gear.

Certainly, there are some projects that are planned and approved and waiting $$$$ to make them happen. But most munincipalities haven't even got beyond the dreaming stage. Engineering, environmental impact analysis, followed by review and approval all take time, maybe a year and a half.

I hope you do realize that a huge iniative in infrastructure is going to outstrip the capacity of the US to meet material demand.
Why spend billions to stimulate the economies of Brazil, China or Mexico if the goal is stimulating the US economy?

I'm all for the infrastructure investment. I just don't think it is going to keep a worker at a closed GM plant in food or heating fuel through spring.

[elleng]

8. I recognize the difficulties involved in getting projects

off the ground; I've also read that there are LOTS wherein the municipalities are ready to go, and I hope that can happen quickly.

NO, NOT a closed GM plant. Maybe some roads and bridges.

[HereSince1628]

9. Here is the deal...stimulating the economy is something that is seeded and then grows

It will literally take a year plus or minus a fefw months, to get these projects seeded. It will be longer until enough people are buying cars to have most other sectors of the economy begin to benefit from the stimulus.

The infrastructure spending is fine. It isn't the solution for those out of work and about to be out of work. It certainly will have little to do with keeping them housed and fed in the mean time.

The IMMEDIATE NEED IS NOT LEGISLATION FOR INFRASTRUCTURE. The immediate need is authorization of spending that will make SURVIVAL possible for a million and a half people who are unemployed and another million or so family members of those people.

[elleng]

10. Such as?

'The immediate need is authorization of spending that will make SURVIVAL possible for a million and a half people who are unemployed and another million or so family members of those people'

[HereSince1628]

11. extensions of unemployment and food stamps, moritorium on foreclosures, moritoria

on heating and electricity shut offs--interest payments to lenders with frozen foreclosures and interest payments on overdue heat and electricity bills to power companies, acute-care coverage for the unemployed and their families.

etc.

[babylonsister]

5. It will help by employing people. nt

[HereSince1628]

6. Yes, after 9-10 months it might get started

I'm not opposed to it.

What everyone should know is that there is a LONG lead time for getting these projects going. If you can go 6 months without eating this is fine. The IMMEDIATE problems to be addressed need to be getting a couple of million unemployed people and soon to be homeless people through the winter without having them starve or freeze to death.

[Fovea]

4. No. No. No.

One Trillion infrastructure.
One trillion healthcare.
One trillion education.

OR one and ahalf trillion for HHS total, and three trillion infr.

Over three years.

Cut Military budget by two thirds over the same period.