Tea Partiers once again descended by the busload on Washington D.C., to rail against government spending. Although the protest clearly was aimed at the health insurance reform bill sitting on the Senate floor, the conversation invariably revolved around the deficit, congressional overspending and the general inefficiency of everything the government does.
Transportation infrastructure rarely came up during Tuesday's rally, but the stagnant economy and transportation-heavy American Recovery and Reinvestment Act raised nearly the same level of ire among Tea Partiers as the bill they were there to protest. Whether the Tea Party Movement represents a coherent political movement is open to debate. But it clearly taps a vast wellspring of fiscal conservatism and suspicion of government that could have implications for our crumbling infrastructure. We're already seeing this in fights over transportation money the federal government has promised to the states.
Increasingly, infrastructure investment and mass transportation are framed by the liberal-conservative divide, turning relatively straightforward municipal issues into cultural and ideological battles. With our transportation infrastructure literally falling apart -- the American Society of Civil Engineers puts the repair bill at $2.2 trillion -- the United States faces an interesting dilemma.
A thriving economy is desperately needed to increase wealth, decrease unemployment and wean people off federal entitlement programs fiscal conservatives hate. A dependable and indirect method of stimulating the economy is driving down the cost and energy required to move goods and services by investing in our roads, railways, bridges and other infrastructure. That by definition requires massive amounts of public money.
There was nothing remotely close to a representative survey conducted at Tuesday's Tea Party, but my casual questioning of some in the crowd suggested that resistance to infrastructure investment hinges on concerns that it would result in a net loss. There also are feelings that mass transit is a risky financial bet based on false assumptions (i.e. global warming). And, of course, faith in the government as a planner, builder or owner-operator of such projects is low.
Such feelings have grave implications for a country that simply must invest heavily in infrastructure. Illinois is a telling example of this looming political battle. Chicago is the planned central hub of a high-speed rail network that would link several cities. The plan already has been allotted hundreds of millions of dollars in state and federal money. Yet Republican gubernatorial candidates are lining up to oppose devoting state funds to the project, largely on fiscal grounds.
These developments do not bode well for Rep. James Oberstar's proposed federal transportation bill, which devotes $100 billion for building and expanding mass transit. Another $50 billion is allocated for high-speed rail, dwarfing the $8 billion included in the stimulus package. It's an incredibly progressive plan. Such measures are likely to be unpopular with voters for whom restraining government outlays is a primary goal.
Tea Partiers aside, growing dissatisfaction with President Obama and the fact the opposition party typically does well in midterm elections mean we'll see less political support for anything beyond a cursory overhaul of existing infrastructure. Don't expect much progress on expensive new fronts like high-speed rail. That Obertsar's bill has gotten this far relatively uncontested is almost certainly due to conservatives' laser-like focus on healthcare reform. And liberals may be willing to sacrifice ambitious goals in favor of more salient issues that spread benefits more widely -- high-speed rail may have support in those areas slated to get it, but every legislator loves bringing home money for roads.
As is often the case in national legislation, the compromises necessary to pass Oberstar's bill may disappoint liberal and conservative alike. It is in such circumstances that polar extremists find the most ammunition, and no supporter of Oberstar's bill can afford to discount the Tea Partiers who so vocally represent one extreme.
*Photo of the new eastern span of the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge under construction: Flickr / royterp. *
See Also:
