I was not surprised to find the following sentence in TIME‘s (Minneapolis bridge collapse-inspired) story about America’s crumbling infrastructure:
It’s true that state and federal politicians have for too long put off raising taxes to deal with these problems.
What about the alternative: Reprioritizing existing government spending to free up money for essential infrastructure? Wouldn’t that also do the trick?
What did offer a pleasant surprise was the following quote:
“Cities and states have been sinking millions of dollars into convention centers, stadiums–anything that shines,” says Christopher Swope, an editor at Governing magazine, who covers transportation. “At the same time, they’re neglecting the stuff that’s not so sexy. You don’t have a groundbreaking when you do repair work on an old bridge.”
Writer Amanda Ripley surprised me again in the next paragraph, which discusses a recent study of transportation in the United Kingdom from the former head of British Airways:
He evaluated all kinds of projects–from fancy high-speed trains to simple bike paths–and calculated the return on investment per pound spent. What he found was surprising. “Small can be beautiful,” his report concluded. Large projects like new rail lines tended to be less beneficial for the money than modest ones, like widening an old road. The British government is now funding more projects on the basis of this more rational notion of overall value.
Wow, maybe a rational approach will become the new thing in transportation.
