urbanSTL

dredger wrote: ↑

Apr 30, 2021

^ & ^^ thanks.   As I try to understand monetary policy better I get back to what seems like a pretty good option in life sometimes and that is do nothing approach when comes down to a good ol cost vs benefits, or pro vs con, so on.   Sometimes using the only tool you have available in the tool box is not really a great outcome.   Loss track a long time ago on how many screws I have stripped in my life trying to use a flathead and I need a phillips screwdriver.   

Congress greatly restricted the powers of the Fed after the Great Recession, especially the Fed's ability to lend to private companies during emergencies. 

The latest and greatest on infrastructure for its worth between the two parties.   Like the fact that GOP at least starting to recognize that infrastructure is more then just adding highway lanes in rural areas.   They seem to have added more behind water and transit/rail and even a bone for electric vehicles.  However, some of it is current appropriations such as next 5 year transportation legislative is rolled into proposal.   At same time the divide on what is infrastructure and how to pay for it is fundamentally huge.  

So two thoughts, 1) Biden drops a few more of his expanded infrastructure items and GOP bumps up numbers on their proposal for an agreed upon $1.1-$1.2 trillion deal & DEMs do a different policy/tax bill via budget reconciliation or 2) Dems put up their arms up and go for the bigger expanded infrastructure bill on their own via budge reconciliation

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/27/biden-i ... offer.html

thoughts?  Personally I would like to see an agreed upon infrastructure bill in $1.1-1.2 trillion funding the list layed out as below from cnbc article whether it uses some of the previous covid funds/fees and then Dems go along for a separate jobs act/workers bill clawing back some of the tax giveaways later this year.  Let mid terms decide direction.  I honestly think it would be a better move for Dems in mid terms as you get a clear distinction on policy.  

• $506 billion for roads, bridges and major infrastructure projects, including $4 billion for electric vehicles
• $98 billion for public transit
• $72 billion for water systems
• $65 billion for broadband
• $56 billion for airports
• $46 billion for passenger and freight rail systems
• $22 billion for ports and waterways
• $22 billion for water storage
• $21 billion for safety efforts
• $20 billion for infrastructure financing

  

^Keeping the funding issue aside, a $1.1-1.2b infrastructure bill seems like a win. Especially if the 10+% allocation to public transportation is kept. 

^^I could live with that. Get a compromise passed first. Claw back the fund and add the healthcare stuff later in reconciliation. I'd love to see Biden get the Rs up just a little on some of their investments. (Expanded passenger rail would be phenomenal and the freight rail infrastructure could desperately use a little help, for instance. And 46B to 75B is a noticeable difference.)

The piece of legislation that seems to be happening quietly on the side and gaining steam and some support across the aisle is China Competiviness Bill or formally known as US Innovation and Competition Act with some serious R&D funding and US based semiconductor chip manufacturing.   Even more NASA funding (I think in part to drive/fund multiple privately developed landing systems).   This $200 billion bill and at least a $1.2 trillion infrastructure bill would finally put serious gdp investment that hasn't been seen in decades.    Of course, as I write their was a snag in Senate this afternoon so not sure latest and greatest

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/sweepi ... 021-05-27/



David Johnson, president and CEO of the Central Indiana Corporate Partnership, said it could be a game changer for places such as Indianapolis, where there's talent and energy but tech industries haven't been able to scale up.

"It's a no-brainer that that program would be great because there just hasn't been a great deal of governmental participation in the building of the tech sectors of the economy that we have here," he said.

He reckons there would be at least 20 or more cities that could have a shot — places such as Indianapolis, St. Louis and Nashville, Tenn.
"For those cities not to be in the mix means that America is not playing with all the talent that it's got," he said.

I asked on Twitter who is working on making sure that STL gets one of those slots, there is $110,000,000,000 in the bill to established innovation districts

Looks like a bigger group of Senators, 20 or 21 or so, inching towards an Infrastructure plan as being reported on a FOX biz news flash.  Believe something pop up on Post Dispatch as well.  Not quite a trillion under the $1.2-1.3 trillion but within 5 years which is typical now for the transportation bill.  

https://www.foxbusiness.com/politics/9- ... te-support

Twenty senators joined together Wednesday in bipartisan support for a $950 billion infrastructure bill that would be paid out over a five-year period. 

The plan agreed to Wednesday would include $580 billion in new spending above a $394 billion baseline. Biden asked for about $600 billion in new money.

^For a network that covers business, Fox Business is surprisingly mathematically challenged. 

Good to see that it looks like this is going to get done. The new spending in the bill apparently includes $66b on passenger and freight rail and $48b on public transit. I'm not sure what the "baseline" allocations were to those buckets, but hat works out to 11.4%  and 8.3% allocations of new spending to passenger/freight and transit respectively. That seems okay, but I wouldn't have minded if those two were flipped. 

^ Yep, not necessarily my first choice of biz news 

Maybe a better source/summaries on where respective houses and committees stand & pass is link to ENR article.   I think their is some true momentum to at least give Amtrak and passenger/transit some love.  

 https://www.enr.com/articles/51933-sena ... -rail-bill

Committee Chair Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) said the bill “makes a big down payment—$78 billion—on rebuilding and revamping our nation’s critical transportation infrastructure, a key to our economic future and creating more jobs.”
The panel’s top GOP member, Roger Wicker of Mississippi, said, “This legislation stands as a major example of how bipartisanship is still alive and well in the Senate.”
Rail would receive the largest share of the bill’s funding, $36 billion. Of that sum, Amtrak would get $25 billion, for the railroad’s Northeast Corridor and other routes around the country, as well as for rail service funded jointly by Amtrak and states.
Rail safety programs would receive $7.5 billion, including a new $500-million a year program to remove dangerous grade crossings
Multimodal and freight infrastructure would get $28 billion, including $7.5 billion for the U.S. Dept. of Transportation’s RAISE discretionary grant program. It also would authorize the popular program for the first time in its 12-year history.

Why does it cost so much to build things in America?
https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america

chris fuller wrote: ↑

Jun 29, 2021

Why does it cost so much to build things in America?
https://www.vox.com/22534714/rail-roads-infrastructure-costs-america

Short answer: Because Americans are litigious a**holes and the American state is a modern day Byzantium.

^ I would also throw in the fact that everyone and anyone gets to have their say in the process.   SB articlulated it more directly, but throw in the multiple Fed agencies having to sign off, to state entities and down to the various local agencies and it is hard to believe that some stuff even gets off the drawing board.   Of course, my profession by education, Civil Engineering, is one of multiple fields that have found a way to get paid/cut of the pie on time & basis material even before the shovel is in the ground.   That is my cynical take as working for a contractor/a profession who puts the shovel into the ground at a firm fixed lowest price but still sees and reads through all the permits.  

Change in comments with update on the Infrastructure Bill as House passed it own transportation version.   Doesn't really mean much but Dems and a few Republicans went all in on bringing in earmarks back.   It will be interesting to see if Senate bipartisan group can run with House bill and mash something that can get out of Congress to POTUS - Maybe keep most of House bump ups and add on the broadband for rural areas being sought, and at least some of the utility/energy upgrades being sought.    Probably the one hope is that the House Bill is tied to renewing the Surface Transportation Act.

Reuters with nice write up

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-hou ... 021-07-01/

The bill designates more than 1,470 projects amounting to nearly $5.7 billion in spending, according to the U.S. House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee. Nearly 1,070 projects worth just under $4 billion were sought by Democrats.

Republicans secured 403 projects valued at nearly $1.7 billion.

Thursday's House surface transportation bill contains $343 billion for roads, bridges and safety - including $4 billion for electric vehicle charging infrastructure.
The measure also calls for $109 billion for transit and $95 billion for rail, including tripling funding for the U.S. passenger railroad, Amtrak, to $32 billion, $117 billion for drinking water infrastructure and more than $51 billion for wastewater infrastructure.

It would authorize $4.1 billion for grants to buy electric transit buses, create a $500 million grant program to reduce traffic gridlock in large metropolitan areas and $1 billion to address the shortage of parking for commercial motor vehicles and allow for heavier electric vehicles on U.S. roads and mandate additional safety features in new school buses.



 

City shouldnt be spending money in Forest Park as long as FPF exists. 

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Jul 07, 2021

City shouldnt be spending money in Forest Park as long as FPF exists. 

Yeah I didnt quite understand that.  

^ & ^^ Another way to look at it if not mistaken is the greenhouses are serving/providing greenery for all the park and city needs if not mistaken.  

Obviously more need then can be addressed at one time.    So probably the question comes down, say what is the priority out the 10 park buildings identified?  At end of day it will be subjective and arbitrary so if I was Mayor for a day I would ask each department head to list from highest to lowest priority on the list. So in case of greenhouses have no idea where that might fall among everyone let alone what the Parks Department sees as priority.    Then you still have to look at the entirety, public safety vs. Quality of Life, so forth and son on.   I assume most residents would put public safety number one on their list.  So I can easily see Police & Fire Department asks being favored over Parks & Streets.   

However, I'm not even a Mayor for a second so it will be interesting to see how Mayor Jones runs with it, if infrastructure spending makes up a fair size piece of the pie..    But another thought, should city leadership revive a bond ballot initiative say investing x dollars on as match for y covid rescue dollars setaside for investing in the city infrastructure now that the economy seems to be getting back on its feet?  I think the bond has been entertained in the past but could never get on the ballot because aldermen couldn't decide on what it should go towards.    Say a $200 million infrastructure bond on the ballot with corresponding amount of Covid funds setaside.

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Jul 07, 2021

City shouldnt be spending money in Forest Park as long as FPF exists. 

Why not? 

Looks like Schumer going to try and force some action on Infrastructure one way or another with possible test vote on bipartisan $1.2 trillion plan.   In meantime, he is finally putting pressure on his own party to hash out detail on $3.5 million trillion plan..   Haven't found a whole lot on what Dems version of $3.5 trillion entails or even basic framework of the pots of money go to where.    I don't think it is a bad move considering the endless negotiation from parties that supposedly want infrastructure because in general gets wide voter support for the minimal bipartisan plan.   Politically speaking in my opinion, the Dems need to decide if they want to go safe or go all in on bolder approach & campaign on accomplishments.   

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/15/us/s ... cture.html

Senator Chuck Schumer, Democrat of New York and the majority leader, announced on Thursday that he would force a test vote as early as Wednesday on the still-unfinished bipartisan infrastructure deal, ratcheting up pressure for Republicans and Democrats to seal their agreement.

In floor remarks Thursday morning, Mr. Schumer said he was also instructing Democrats to reach agreement by Wednesday on the details of a $3.5 trillion budget blueprint the Budget Committee is putting together. That blueprint will unlock use of the fast-track reconciliation process, which would allow Democrats to pass an expansive economic package without Republican votes.

Looks like transit did take a hit, now around $39b. While, for instance passenger and freight rail stayed at $66b. 

Now down around 7.1% of the new spending going to transit I believe. 

Entire bill summary in the link
Voting happening now to clear a procedural hurdle


GOP voting for it so far
blunt
burr
capito
cassidy
collins
crapo
graham
mcconnell
murkowski
portman
risch
romney
tillis
young
grassley


No word yet on Turd Hawley

So whats in the infrastructure deal?
The $1 trillion package is far smaller than the $2.3 trillion plan that President Biden had originally proposed and would provide about $550 billion in new federal money for public transit, roads, bridges, water and other physical projects over the next five years, according to a White House fact sheet. That money would be cobbled together through a range of measures, including “repurposing” stimulus funds already approved by Congress, selling public spectrum and recouping federal unemployment funds from states that ended more generous pandemic benefits early.
Although Mr. Biden conceded that “neither side got everything they wanted,” he said the deal would create new union jobs and make significant investments in public transit.
“This deal signals to the world that our democracy can function, deliver and do big things,” Mr. Biden said in a statement. “As we did with the transcontinental railroad and the interstate highway, we will once again transform America and propel us into the future.”
Lawmakers have yet to release legislative text of the bill, and although the Senate voted to advance it in an initial vote on Wednesday evening, it still faces several hurdles. But if enacted, the package would mark a significant step toward repairing the nation’s crumbling infrastructure and preparing it for the 21st century.
Here is a look at the bipartisan group’s agreement for the final package.
Funding for roads and bridges
The package provides $110 billion in new funding for roads, bridges and other major projects. The funds would be used to repair and rebuild with a “focus on climate change mitigation,” according to the White House.
That funding would only begin to chip away at some of the nation’s pressing infrastructure needs, transportation experts say. The most recent estimate by the American Society of Civil Engineers found that the nation’s roads and bridges have a $786 billion backlog of needed repairs.
Highway and pedestrian safety programs would receive $11 billion under the deal. Traffic deaths, which have increased during the pandemic, have taken a particular toll on people of color, according to a recent analysis from the Governors Highway Safety Association. Traffic fatalities among Black people jumped 23 percent in 2020 from the year before, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. In comparison, traffic fatalities among white people increased 4 percent during the same time period.
The deal also includes funding dedicated to “reconnecting communities” by removing freeways or other past infrastructure projects that ran through Black neighborhoods and other communities of color. Although Mr. Biden originally proposed investing $20 billion in the new program, the latest deal includes only $1 billion.

Investments in public transit
Public buses, subways and trains would receive $39 billion in new funding, which would be used to repair aging infrastructure and modernize and expand transit service across the country.
While the amount of new funding for public transit was scaled back from a June proposal, which included $49 billion, the Biden administration said it would be the largest federal investment in public transit in history.
Yet the funds might not be enough to fully modernize the country’s public transit system. According to a report from the American Society of Civil Engineers, there is a $176 billion backlog for transit investments.
Big investments in rail and freight lines
The deal would inject $66 billion in rail to address Amtrak’s maintenance backlog, along with upgrading the high-traffic Northeast corridor from Washington to Boston (a route frequented by East Coast lawmakers). It would also expand rail service outside the Northeast and mid-Atlantic.
Mr. Biden frequently points to his connection to Amtrak, which began in the 1970s, when he would travel home from Washington to Delaware every night to care for his two sons while serving in the Senate. The new funding would be the largest investment in passenger rail since Amtrak was created 50 years ago, according to the administration, and would come as the agency tries to significantly expand its service nationwide by 2035.
Clean water initiatives
The package would invest $55 billion in clean drinking water, which would be enough to replace all of the nation’s lead pipes and service lines. While Congress banned lead water pipes three decades ago, more than 10 million older ones remain, resulting in unsafe lead levels in cities and towns across the country.
Beefing up electric vehicles
To address the effects of climate change, the deal would invest $7.5 billion in building out the nation’s network of electric vehicle charging stations, which could help entice more drivers to switch to such cars by getting rid of so-called charger deserts. The package would also expand America’s fleet of electric school buses by investing $2.5 billion in zero-emission buses.
Funding the investments
How to pay for the spending has been one of the most contentious areas, with Republicans opposed to Mr. Biden’s plan to raise taxes and empower the I.R.S. to help pay for the package. Instead, the bipartisan group has agreed on a series of so-called pay-fors that largely repurpose already-approved funds, rely on accounting changes to raise funds and, in some cases, assume the projects will ultimately pay for themselves.
The biggest funding source is $205 billion that the group says will come from “repurposing of certain Covid relief dollars.” The government has approved trillions in pandemic stimulus funds, and much, but not all, of it has been allocated. The proposal does not specify which money will be repurposed, but Republicans have pushed for the Treasury Department to take back funds from the $350 billion that Democrats approved in March to help states, local governments and tribes deal with pandemic-related costs.
Another $53 billion is assumed to come from states that ended more generous federal unemployment benefits early and return that money to the Treasury Department. An additional $28 billion is pegged to requiring more robust reporting around cryptocurrencies, and $56 billion is presumed to come from economic growth “resulting from a 33 percent return on investment in these long-term infrastructure projects.”

chris fuller wrote: ↑

Jul 29, 2021

So whats in the infrastructure deal?
The $1 trillion package is far smaller than the $2.3 trillion plan that President Biden had originally proposed and would provide about $550 billion in new federal money for public transit, roads, bridges, water and other physical projects over the next five years, according to a White House fact sheet. That money would be cobbled together through a range of measures, including “repurposing” stimulus funds already approved by Congress, selling public spectrum and recouping federal unemployment funds from states that ended more generous pandemic benefits early.
Although Mr. Biden conceded that “neither side got everything they wanted,” he said the deal would create new union jobs and make significant investments in public transit.
“This deal signals to the world that our democracy can function, deliver and do big things,” Mr. Biden said in a statement. “As we did with the transcontinental railroad and the interstate highway, we will once again transform America and propel us into the future.”
Lawmakers have yet to release legislative text of the bill, and although the Senate voted to advance it in an initial vote on Wednesday evening, it still faces several hurdles. But if enacted, the package would mark a significant step toward repairing the nation’s crumbling infrastructure and preparing it for the 21st century.
Here is a look at the bipartisan group’s agreement for the final package.
Funding for roads and bridges
The package provides $110 billion in new funding for roads, bridges and other major projects. The funds would be used to repair and rebuild with a “focus on climate change mitigation,” according to the White House.
That funding would only begin to chip away at some of the nation’s pressing infrastructure needs, transportation experts say. The most recent estimate by the American Society of Civil Engineers found that the nation’s roads and bridges have a $786 billion backlog of needed repairs.
Highway and pedestrian safety programs would receive $11 billion under the deal. Traffic deaths, which have increased during the pandemic, have taken a particular toll on people of color, according to a recent analysis from the Governors Highway Safety Association. Traffic fatalities among Black people jumped 23 percent in 2020 from the year before, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. In comparison, traffic fatalities among white people increased 4 percent during the same time period.
The deal also includes funding dedicated to “reconnecting communities” by removing freeways or other past infrastructure projects that ran through Black neighborhoods and other communities of color. Although Mr. Biden originally proposed investing $20 billion in the new program, the latest deal includes only $1 billion.

Investments in public transit
Public buses, subways and trains would receive $39 billion in new funding, which would be used to repair aging infrastructure and modernize and expand transit service across the country.
While the amount of new funding for public transit was scaled back from a June proposal, which included $49 billion, the Biden administration said it would be the largest federal investment in public transit in history.
Yet the funds might not be enough to fully modernize the country’s public transit system. According to a report from the American Society of Civil Engineers, there is a $176 billion backlog for transit investments.
Big investments in rail and freight lines
The deal would inject $66 billion in rail to address Amtrak’s maintenance backlog, along with upgrading the high-traffic Northeast corridor from Washington to Boston (a route frequented by East Coast lawmakers). It would also expand rail service outside the Northeast and mid-Atlantic.
Mr. Biden frequently points to his connection to Amtrak, which began in the 1970s, when he would travel home from Washington to Delaware every night to care for his two sons while serving in the Senate. The new funding would be the largest investment in passenger rail since Amtrak was created 50 years ago, according to the administration, and would come as the agency tries to significantly expand its service nationwide by 2035.
Clean water initiatives
The package would invest $55 billion in clean drinking water, which would be enough to replace all of the nation’s lead pipes and service lines. While Congress banned lead water pipes three decades ago, more than 10 million older ones remain, resulting in unsafe lead levels in cities and towns across the country.
Beefing up electric vehicles
To address the effects of climate change, the deal would invest $7.5 billion in building out the nation’s network of electric vehicle charging stations, which could help entice more drivers to switch to such cars by getting rid of so-called charger deserts. The package would also expand America’s fleet of electric school buses by investing $2.5 billion in zero-emission buses.
Funding the investments
How to pay for the spending has been one of the most contentious areas, with Republicans opposed to Mr. Biden’s plan to raise taxes and empower the I.R.S. to help pay for the package. Instead, the bipartisan group has agreed on a series of so-called pay-fors that largely repurpose already-approved funds, rely on accounting changes to raise funds and, in some cases, assume the projects will ultimately pay for themselves.
The biggest funding source is $205 billion that the group says will come from “repurposing of certain Covid relief dollars.” The government has approved trillions in pandemic stimulus funds, and much, but not all, of it has been allocated. The proposal does not specify which money will be repurposed, but Republicans have pushed for the Treasury Department to take back funds from the $350 billion that Democrats approved in March to help states, local governments and tribes deal with pandemic-related costs.
Another $53 billion is assumed to come from states that ended more generous federal unemployment benefits early and return that money to the Treasury Department. An additional $28 billion is pegged to requiring more robust reporting around cryptocurrencies, and $56 billion is presumed to come from economic growth “resulting from a 33 percent return on investment in these long-term infrastructure projects.”

^That's a New York Times article, which is available here: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/07/28/business/economy/infrastructure-deal-takeaways.html