Tag: infrastructure

Categories
Quick Analysis

Can the President’s Infrastructure Plan Succeed? Part 2

The White House infrastructure plan has been criticized by some for not providing full federal funding, and for calls to shift some responsibility to the states, and privatizing some assets.  The American Society of Civil Engineers worries that “the proposal does not address the nearly insolvent Highway Trust Fund. Our nation’s surface transportation infrastructure accounts for more than three-quarters of the overall infrastructure investment deficit, and bolstering the Trust Fund would go a long way toward closing that gap.”

The Brookings Institute writes that “… the proposed cuts elsewhere in the FY 2019 Budget mean the administration is effectively asking everyone else – especially cities and states – to do nearly all the spending all while still claiming credit for new investments. There are certainly commendable elements within the 53 pages, but the core programs include too much cynicism and too little leadership.”

Despite the criticism, the plan actually has a chance to succeed, because frankly there is very little in the way of alternatives that could actually do better.  Washington clearly cannot increase the tax burden to fully finance the effort, since that would place a serious handicap on the economy and further diminish the availability of funds.  Additionally, many Americans, both in government and in the private sector, have become exceptionally frustrated at the bureaucratic roadblocks that the Trump plan seeks to reduce.

This is the official White House fact sheet on the legislative outline, as it impacts the 2018 budget:

Importance of Infrastructure

 The President has consistently emphasized that the Nation’s infrastructure needs to be rebuilt and modernized to create jobs, maintain America’s economic competitiveness, and connect communities and people to more opportunities. The United States no longer has the best infrastructure in the world. For example, according to the World Economic Forum, the United States’ overall infrastructure places 12th, with countries like Japan, Germany, the Netherlands, and France ranking above us. This underperformance is evident in many areas, from our congested highways, which costs the country $160 billion annually in lost productivity, to our deteriorating water systems, which experience 240,000 water main breaks annually.

The Current System is Not Working

The Federal Government inefficiently invests in non-Federal infrastructure. In part, our lack of sustained progress has been due to confusion about the Federal Government’s role in infrastructure. During the construction of the Interstate System, the Federal Government played a key role – collecting and distributing Federal tax revenue to fund a project with a Federal purpose. As we neared the completion of the Interstate System, those tax receipts were redirected to projects with substantially weaker nexus to Federal interests.

The flexibility to use Federal dollars to pay for essentially local infrastructure projects has created an unhealthy dynamic in which State and local governments delay projects in the hope of receiving Federal funds. Overreliance on Federal grants and other Federal funding can create a strong disincentive for non-Federal revenue generation.

At the same time, we continue to apply Federal rules, regulations, and mandates on virtually all infrastructure investments. This is despite the Federal Government contributing a very small percentage of total infrastructure spending. Approximately one-fifth of infrastructure spending is Federal, while the other four-fifths are roughly equally divided between State and local governments on one hand and the private sector on the other.

We will reevaluate the role for the Federal Government in infrastructure investment. For example, in the Interstate System, the Federal Government now acts as a complicated, costly middleman between the collection of revenue and the expenditure of those funds by States and localities. Put simply, the Administration will be exploring whether this arrangement still makes sense, or whether transferring additional responsibilities to the States is appropriate.

The Administration’s Goal: Seek and Secure Long-Term Changes

Given these challenges, the Administration’s goal is to seek long-term reforms on how infrastructure projects are regulated, funded, delivered, and maintained. Providing more Federal funding, on its own, is not the solution to our infrastructure challenges. Rather, we will work to fix underlying incentives, procedures, and policies to spur better infrastructure decisions and outcomes, across a range of sectors.

Key Principles

As the Administration develops policy and regulatory changes, and seeks statutory proposals working with Congress, we will focus on proposals that fall under the following key principles:

  1. Make Targeted Federal Investments. Focusing Federal dollars on the most transformative projects and processes stretches the use and benefit of taxpayer funds. When Federal funds are provided, they should be awarded to projects that address problems that are a high priority from the perspective of a region or the Nation, or projects that lead to longterm changes in how infrastructure is designed, built, and maintained.
  2. Encourage Self-Help. Many States, tribes, and localities have stopped waiting for Washington to come to the rescue and have raised their own dedicated revenues for infrastructure. Localities are better equipped to understand the right level – and type – of infrastructure investments needed for their communities, and the Federal Government should support more communities moving toward a model of independence.
  3. Align Infrastructure Investment with Entities Best Suited to Provide Sustained and Efficient Investment. The Federal Government provides services that non-Federal entities, including the private sector, could deliver more efficiently. The Administration will look for opportunities to appropriately divest from certain functions, which will provide better services for citizens, and potentially generate budgetary savings. The Federal Government can also be more efficient about disposing underused capital assets, ensuring those assets are put to their highest and best use.
  4. Leverage the Private Sector. The private sector can provide valuable benefits for the delivery of infrastructure, through better procurement methods, market discipline, and a long-term focus on maintaining assets. While public-private partnerships will not be the solution to all infrastructure needs, they can help advance the Nation’s most important, regionally significant projects.

2018 Budget

The President’s target of $1 trillion in infrastructure investment will be funded through a combination of new Federal funding, incentivized non-Federal funding, and newly prioritized and expedited projects. While this Administration proposes additional funding for infrastructure, we will structure that funding to incentivize additional non-Federal funding, reduce the cost associated with accepting Federal dollars, and ensure Federal funds are leveraged such that the end result is at least $1 trillion in total infrastructure spending. While we will continue to work with the Congress, States, tribes, localities, and other infrastructure stakeholders to finalize the suite of Federal programs that will support this effort, the 2018 Budget includes $200 billion in outlays related to the infrastructure initiative.

In addition to the $200 billion, these proposals are also in the 2018 Budget:

  • Air Traffic Control Corporatization. The Budget proposes to create a nongovernmental entity to manage the nation’s air traffic control system. Many countries have corporatized their air traffic control function, separating it from the governmental aviation safety regulation function. This will be a multi-year effort resulting in a more efficient airspace while maintaining our premier aviation safety record. The proposal would reduce aviation passenger taxes and the new entity would be responsible for setting and collecting fees directly from users based on their use of the Nation’s airspace.
  • Increase Infrastructure Flexibility at VA. The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) has a nationwide physical footprint that includes aging facilities, which are not always located where veterans most need care. The Administration will pursue numerous reforms to help VA acquire and maintain the facilities necessary to provide veterans high quality medical care where they live. The Budget includes proposals to expand VA’s authority to lease out its vacant assets for commercial or mixed-use purposes and to speed its ability to pursue facility renovations and improvements. Future reforms will encourage public-private partnerships and reduce barriers to acquisition, contracting, and disposals.
  • Divestiture of the Power Marketing Administration’s (PMA’s) Transmission Assets. The Budget proposes to sell the PMA’s transmission assets. Investor-owned utilities provide for the vast majority of the Nation’s electricity needs. The PMA’s transmission infrastructure assets (lines, towers, substations, and rights of way) could be leased out so the private sector could fulfill transmission functions. Leasing these assets will more efficiently allocate economic resources and help relieve long-term pressures on the Federal deficit related to future Federal capital investment.
  • Reform the laws governing the Inland Waterways Trust Fund. The Budget proposes to reform the laws governing the Inland Waterways Trust Fund, including by establishing a fee to increase the amount paid by commercial navigation users of inland waterways. In 1986, the Congress mandated that commercial traffic on the inland waterways be responsible for 50 percent of the capital costs of the locks, dams, and other features that make barge transportation possible on the inland waterways. The additional revenue proposed in the Budget will finance future capital investments in these waterways to support economic growth.

If you ask to what viagra tablet for sale do I attribute my spectacular health, the answer is easy: my balanced, plant-based diet of whole, fresh, natural foods and lots of great, fun outdoor exercise. DOSAGE PATTERN The http://djpaulkom.tv/find-out-where-dj-paul-got-his-latest-tattoo/ order viagra online dosage pattern is very simple and easy lifestyle changes suggested by the experts. You are advised lowest price cialis to consume healthy diet. viagra on line These schools have taken it upon themselves to provide education to differently-abled children.
Illustrative Examples of Funding Proposals

The following proposals will be pursued by the Administration as part of the Infrastructure Initiative.

  • Expand the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) Program. TIFIA helps finance surface transportation projects through direct loans, loan guarantees, and lines of credit. One dollar of TIFIA subsidy leverages roughly $40 in project value. If the amount of TIFIA subsidy was increased to $1 billion annually for 10 years, that could leverage up to $140 billion in credit assistance, and approximately $424 billion in total investment. In addition, the Administration supports the expansion of TIFIA eligibility.
  • Lift the Cap on Private Activity Bonds and Expand Eligibility to Other Non-Federal Public Infrastructure. The Private Activity Bonds (PABs) program allows the Department of Transportation to allocate authority to issue tax-exempt bonds on behalf of private entities constructing highway and freight transfer facilities. PABs have been used to finance many Public Private Partnerships (P3s) projects, along with TIFIA. As of August 15, 2016, nearly $11.2 billion in PABs have been issued for 23 projects. The Administration recommends removing the $15 billion cap under current law to ensure that future P3 projects can take advantage of this cost-saving tool, and encourage more project sponsors to take advantage of this tool. The Administration also supports the expansion of PAB eligibility.
  • Incentivize Innovative Approaches to Congestion Mitigation. The Urban Partnership Agreement Program – and its successor, the Congestion Reduction Demonstration Program – provided competitive grants to urbanized areas that were willing to institute a suite of solutions to congestion, including congestion pricing, enhanced transit services, increased telecommuting and flex scheduling, and deployment of advanced technology. Similar programs could provide valuable incentives for localities to think outside of the box in solving long-standing congestion challenges.
  • Liberalize Tolling Policy and Allow Private Investment in Rest Areas. Tolling is generally restricted on interstate highways. This restriction prevents public and private investment in such facilities. We should reduce this restriction and allow the States to assess their transportation needs and weigh the relative merits of tolling assets. The Administration also supports allowing the private sector to construct, operate, and maintain interstate rest areas, which are often overburden and inadequately maintained.
  • Fund the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act program (WIFIA) Program. The Environmental Protection Agency’s new WIFIA loan program is designed to leverage private investments in large drinking water and wastewater infrastructure projects, particularly those large, high-cost projects that have private ownership or co-investment. Because WIFIA loans can only support up to 49 percent of a project’s eligible cost, the Federal investment must be leveraged with non-Federal sources.
  • Encourage the Use of Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) Contributed/Advanced Funding Authorities.

Most construction work by the Corps is funded on a cost-shared basis between the Corps and a non-Federal sponsor. However, many projects authorized for construction, though a priority for non-Federal sponsors, do not present a high return for the Nation and therefore do not receive Federal funding. Some non-Federal sponsors have therefore chosen to fund construction activities on their own. The Administration will leverage the Corps’ authorities to enter into such agreements to take advantage of this innovative approach to delivering projects.

New Federal Tools:

The Federal Budget is recorded on a cash basis, which provides a transparent mechanism to record and control spending. Given the size of the Federal Government, cash budgets make sense because they are less complicated to produce and less subject to changes in economic assumptions. However, cash budgeting may not give appropriate weight to the long-term benefits of investing in infrastructure and cause the Government to make project choices that have lower short-term but higher-long term costs. We should discuss different tools to support better decision-making while maintaining transparency and fiscal restraint, such as:

  • Federal Capital Revolving Fund. The Administration is developing a proposal to establish a mandatory revolving fund for the financing of Federally-owned civilian capital assets. The Fund would be repaid with annual appropriations, and would help address the underinvestment in capital assets driven in part due to the large upfront costs of such procurements. Creation of such a fund parallel to the appropriations process to fund investment in Federally-owned civilian capital assets would avoid capital investments having to compete with operating expenses in the annual appropriations process. Instead, agencies would pay for capital assets as they are utilized. The repayments would be made from future appropriations, which would provide an incentive to select projects with the highest return on investment, including future cost avoidance.
  • Partnership Grants for Federal Assets. In a number of sectors, the Federal Government has utilized loans to non-Federal partners to improve infrastructure. However, credit assistance cannot be utilized to improve Federal assets. In essence, the Government neither can loan itself funding, nor can it make loans to private entities to improve assets that will remain Federal. In some circumstances, however, a private partner might want to build or improve a Federal facility and donate it to the Government in exchange for the right to retain revenue from the associated activities. The Administration is developing a proposal to offer those partners grants in lieu of loans to buy down the cost of a Federal asset improvements, which would benefit both the Government, through new facilities for Government use, and the non-Federal partner, through continued access to revenue sources

Environmental Review and Permitting Process Enhancements.

The environmental review and permitting process in the United States is fragmented, inefficient, and unpredictable. Existing statutes have important and laudable objectives, but the lack of cohesiveness in their execution make the delivery of infrastructure projects more costly, unpredictable, and time-consuming, all while adding little environmental protection. The Administration will seek several proposals that will enhance the environmental review and permitting process, such as:

  • Improving Environmental Performance. The inefficiencies of the current process result in too much time and too many resources dedicated to time-intensive analyses that do not necessarily improve the environment. The Administration will propose pilot programs to experiment with different ways projects will perform to better protect and enhance the environment.
  • Accountability. The review and permitting of projects should be included in each agency’s mission, and their performance should be tracked and measured. For agencies that significantly underperform, the public should know how much that costs both the taxpayers and the project. The Administration will seek proposals for tools to start holding agencies accountable for their performance.
  • One Federal Decision. Project proponents have to navigate the Federal environmental review and permitting process on their own. Under the current system, project sponsors work with one agency, only to be told to stand in line with several other agencies for numerous other approvals. We can do better. The Federal Government is capable of navigating its own bureaucracy and designating a single entity with responsibility for shepherding each project through the review and permitting process.
  • Unnecessary Approvals. The funding of infrastructure is predominately State, local and private, yet the Federal Government exerts an inordinate amount of control over all infrastructure with unnecessary bureaucratic processes. The Administration supports putting infrastructure permitting into the hands of responsible State and local officials where appropriate.
  • Judicial Reform. The current standards of judicial review force Federal agencies to spend unnecessary time and resources attempting to make a permit or other environmental document litigation-proof. The Administration believes our resources would be better spent on enhancing the environment rather than feeding needless litigation. As such, the Administration will submit proposals that curtail needless litigation.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Can The President’s Infrastructure Plan Succeed?

Photo:  U.S. Dept. of Transportation

Can the United States succeed in upgrading its infrastructure, which the American Society of Civil Engineers  has long rated as in a dangerous “D+” condition?

According to the White House, “Nothing more visibly reveals the failure of Washington than the crumbling roads, bridges, and infrastructure that dot America’s landscape. Instead of putting people to work, fragmented and unpredictable federal approval processes drag on for years and sometimes decades. It’s time to lighten the federal touch, provide clear rules of the road for new technologies, and empower communities to modernize this archaic system.”

Despite the general agreement on both sides of the political aisle that America’s infrastructure has urgently required attention for some time, nothing of consequence has been accomplished. Prior discussions have not concentrated on contentious roadblocks—such as lengthy environmental impact statements—that exacerbate any projects that seek to bring the nation’s road, bridges, airports and rail lines into the 21st century.  The White House cites Boston’s Anderson Bridge  as an example:

“The Anderson Memorial Bridge between Boston and Cambridge… took 11 months to build … in 1912. When it came time to repair it nearly 100 years later, the project dragged on for close to 5 years—and at a significant cost overrun. So with all the advantages of modern technology, why did it take more than 5 times as long to repair the structure today as it did to create it outright more than a century ago? Unsurprisingly, the reason has little to do with engineering or technical demands. Rather, the Anderson Bridge project was a victim of a bloated, tangled patchwork of regulatory oversight, including a historical commission, environmental agencies, and state transportation bureaucrats, among others.”

Clearly, there was not a great deal of optimism about President Trump’s pledge to finally address the issue. A careful examination of the White House’s just-released “Legislative Outline for Rebuilding Infrastructure in America,” however, indicates that this latest attempt might actually produce solid results.  Rather a mere recitation of the problem and a wishful description of goals, it actually provides a roadmap with viable solutions on how to overcome the obstacles and produce results.

With a national debt already exceeding $20 trillion , it is clear that there is no possibility that Washington could raise the necessary funding on its own.  The White House plan addresses alternative funding mechanisms.

According to the White House, “The President’s target of $1 trillion in infrastructure investment will be funded through a combination of new Federal funding, incentivized non-Federal funding, and newly prioritized and expedited projects. While this Administration proposes additional funding for infrastructure, we will structure that funding to incentivize additional non-Federal funding, reduce the cost associated with accepting Federal dollars, and ensure Federal funds are leveraged such that the end result is at least $1 trillion in total infrastructure spending. 3 While we will continue to work with the Congress, States, tribes, localities, and other infrastructure stakeholders to finalize the suite of Federal programs that will support this effort, the 2018 Budget includes $200 billion in outlays related to the infrastructure initiative.”
Try this great juice recipe a couple of hours after they are taken. generic for cialis Which states and cities will be involved? The Southern United States -California, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, Missouri (the meth capital of the http://appalachianmagazine.com/page/90/ 5mg generic cialis United States) and large cities like Chicago and New York. For example, on the last day of campaigning buy viagra online Visit This Link in the hotly contested 2010 Massachusetts Governors race, incumbent Deval Patrick and his Republican challenger Charlie Baker barnstormed both urban and rural areas. Damaging over here buy cheap cialis chemicals current in pesticides are generally detrimental to smaller animals this kind of as birds.
An official outline of the plan provides the following:

    $200 billion in Federal funding to spur at least $1.5 trillion in investments. Federal infrastructure spending will promote State, local, and private investments and maximize the value of every taxpayer dollar. Of this $200 billion, $100 billion will create an Incentives Program that will promote accountability by making Federal funding conditional on projects meeting agreed upon milestones.

  A $50 billion investment in infrastructure for Rural America. The bulk of the dollars in the Rural Infrastructure Program will be allocated to State governors, giving States the flexibility to prioritize their communities’ needs.

  Empowerment of State and local authorities. The President’s plan would return decision-making authority to the State and local level, including by expanding processes that allow environmental review and permitting decisions to be delegated to States.

  Elimination of barriers that prevent efficient development and management of infrastructure projects. For example, more flexibility will be provided to transportation projects that have minimal Federal funding but are currently required to seek Federal review and approval.

  Streamlined permitting to simplify the approval process. Working with Congress to establish a “one agency, one decision” structure for environmental reviews will shorten approval processes while protecting natural resources.

  Investment in America’s most important asset: its people. The President’s plan would reform Federal education and workforce development programs to better prepare Americans to perform the in-demand jobs of today and the future.

The Report concludes on Monday.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Infrastructure Challenge Tests Washington’s Ability to Function, Part 2

At a hearing of the U.S. Congress Joint Economic Committee, Ranking Democrat Carolyn B. Maloney (D-NY) called for improving long-term economic growth by investing in infrastructure. “Investing in broad-based economic growth was at the core of America’s success in the decades after World War II. We invested in our people through the GI Bill, and in our infrastructure, building the nation’s interstate highway system. It paid off. While publically held debt more than tripled between 1945 and 1981, it fell by about three-quarters as a share of the economy.

Business Insider notes that “There’s a $1 trillion crisis threatening the American way of life as we know it.” Despite the obstacles, infrastructure repair and upgrade is vital. John Grady, no fan of the current White House, wrote in Chicago Business  “…if you want to make America great again, start repairing the nation’s failing infrastructure… I am referring to the infrastructure that is the backbone of the U.S. economy, such as bridges, drinking water systems, dams, navigable waterways, rail, roads, transit and wastewater. Industries and companies of all sizes are risking everyone’s safety by relying on the current state of America’s failing bridges, drinking water plants, roads, tunnels and wastewater treatment plants.”

A 2016 Reuters review highlighted in Fortune Magazine noted that “Nearly half of registered U.S. voters think American infrastructure has deteriorated in the last five years… Forty-one percent of Democrats said infrastructure has gotten worse over the last five years, while 53% of Republicans took that view.”

But can common ground be found on how to do it? Can the problems of waste and corruption, so endemic to almost all areas of federal spending, be minimized to make the task affordable?
These viagra no prescription medicines will definitely bring about an improvement in your posture and flexibility. Not only this, these online viagra online australia http://valsonindia.com/polyester-cotton-yarns/ retailers offer great and attractive purchase offers to maintain their customer-base. People with such kind of sexual problems get incapability to hold or achieve erection when viagra pfizer online they have sex or get excited. The dedicated team of professionals at North York’s physiotherapy and sport clinic works cialis generico canada with all athletes to treat and heal sports injuries, allowing players to return to their sport as quickly as possible.
An example of this roadblock to real progress can be seen in how a significant portion of 9/11 funds were misused. A New York Daily News study found that “9/11 recovery aid was used to finance a plethora of projects that taxpayers elsewhere could be forgiven for characterizing as old-fashioned pork-barrel spending. Hundreds of millions of dollars were spent on projects that seemingly had nothing to do with 9/11 and lower Manhattan… more millions went to help projects already in the works before 9/11 or on the drawing board with no prior funding source. Huge contracts were given to companies and organizations linked to the very officials tasked with deciding how to spend the money – creating, at a minimum, the potential for multiple conflicts of interest. Substantial sums were given to companies to stay in lower Manhattan even though they had no intention of leaving…”

Even apart from corruption and waste, federal rules render many necessary projects expensive and potentially unaffordable. The Davis-Bacon Act increases the labor portion of any project. According to the Department of Labor, “The Davis-Bacon and Related Acts, apply to contractors and subcontractors performing on federally funded or assisted contracts in excess of $2,000 for …public works. Davis-Bacon Act and Related Act contractors and subcontractors must pay their laborers and mechanics employed under the contract no less than the locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits for corresponding work on similar projects in the area…The Davis-Bacon Act prevailing wage provisions apply to the “Related Acts,” under which federal agencies assist construction projects through grants, loans, loan guarantees, and insurance.” Tim Worstall, writing for Forbes notes that “Union Wages Increase Construction Costs By 20%.”

It is appropriate to question why the $780 billion “stimulus” package spent by the Obama Administration failed to even attempt to address this, and why the former president alleged that he couldn’t find “shovel-ready” jobs.  Addressing the infrastructure issue will be a test of whether the U.S. political environment can rise up partisanship to achieve a vital goal.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Infrastructure Challenge Tests Washington’s Ability to Function

There is no area where more bipartisan agreement exists than that of repairing America’s crumbling infrastructure. The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) rates the nation’s infrastructure at only a D+.

ASCE notes: “Our nation is at a crossroads. Deteriorating infrastructure is impeding our ability to compete in the thriving global economy, and improvements are necessary to ensure our country is built for the future. While we have made some progress, reversing the trajectory after decades of underinvestment in our infrastructure requires transformative action from Congress, states, infrastructure owners, and the American people. Our nation’s infrastructure challenges are significant but solvable. Through strategic, sustained investment, bold leadership, comprehensive planning, and careful preparation for the needs of the future, America’s infrastructure will be improved and restored. For the U.S. economy to be the most competitive in the world, we need a first-class infrastructure system—transport systems that move people and goods efficiently and at reasonable cost by land, water, and air; power transmission systems that deliver reliable, low-cost power from a sustainable range of energy sources; and water systems that protect public health. To achieve this, leaders on both sides of the political aisle need to make good on promises they have made to improve our nation’s infrastructure and ensure these pledges don’t fall by the wayside after each election cycle.”

But can work on this begin in 2018? From the potholed roads and overaged bridges of the Northeast to the worrisome levees of New Orleans and the inadequate mass transit of California, the United States is in urgent need of infrastructure upgrade and repair. That’s only part of the problem. The nation’s electrical grid, currently unprotected, could be wiped out by an EMP attack originating from either an attack or a natural solar event.

Sip this liquid http://djpaulkom.tv/throwback-thursday-lord-infamous-photo-gallery/ cheap cialis whenever heartburn occurs. 2. Sadly, testosterone is not the only reason of happiness. purchase generic cialis http://djpaulkom.tv/da-mafia-6ix-vlo6-5-crunchy-black-koopsta-knicca-turn-up-in-knoxville/ In addition, prostatitis can sildenafil price in india cause harms to the human body and influence the life, as follows: One, affect sexual function, cause impotence and premature ejaculation. How sleep problems cause erectile problems? In male, there is a hormone named ‘testosterone’ responsible for his performance in price sildenafil Spartacus. #1 Jim Brown – Jim Brown is a member of the Pro Football Hall of Fame. However, regardless of that, both parties, and most Americans, have taken note of the need to address the crisis.

The Trump Administration  believes that “Nothing more visibly reveals the failure of Washington than the crumbling roads, bridges, and infrastructure that dot America’s landscape. Instead of putting people to work, fragmented and unpredictable federal approval processes drag on for years and sometimes decades. It’s time to lighten the federal touch, provide clear rules of the road for new technologies, and empower communities to modernize this archaic system… Rebuilding America’s infrastructure is a critical pillar of President Donald J. Trump’s agenda to promote job creation and grow the U.S. economy. America’s infrastructure has fallen to 12th in the world and that is unacceptable. Every American depends on our roads, rails, ports, and airports, and the President is committed to fixing this problem, not just pushing more liabilities onto future generations… The Federal Government inefficiently invests in non-Federal infrastructure. In part, our lack of sustained progress has been due to confusion about the Federal Government’s role in infrastructure. During the construction of the Interstate System, the Federal Government played a key role – collecting and distributing Federal tax revenue to fund a project with a Federal purpose. As we neared the completion of the Interstate System, those tax receipts were redirected to projects with substantially weaker nexus to Federal interests. The flexibility to use Federal dollars to pay for essentially local infrastructure projects has created an unhealthy dynamic in which State and local governments delay projects in the hope of receiving Federal funds. Overreliance on Federal grants and other Federal funding can create a strong disincentive for non-Federal revenue generation. At the same time, we continue to apply Federal rules, regulations, and mandates on virtually all infrastructure investments. This is despite the Federal Government contributing a very small percentage of total infrastructure spending. Approximately one-fifth of infrastructure spending is Federal, while the other four-fifths are roughly equally divided between State and local governments on one hand and the private sector on the other. We will reevaluate the role for the Federal Government in infrastructure investment.”

The Report Concludes Tomorrow. 

 

Categories
Quick Analysis

Attacking Red Tape

The U.S. Department of Commerce  is moving to undue the extraordinary burden placed on the American economy during President Obama’s tenure.

The prior Administration introduced record-breaking over-regulation, as noted in numerous studies, most notably that performed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). That addiction to regulation was more than just a nuisance. The CATO institute asserts that “It is widely recognized that excessive regulation is unnecessarily killing jobs.”

The Daily Signal found that “job-creating entrepreneurs in the United States have been dispirited by the scope and cost of escalating red tape…Since 2009, the expansion of Uncle Sam’s regulatory control has been one of the prime culprits in America’s startling decline in economic freedom and overall competitiveness. Each new edict has meant a new government bureaucracy that entrepreneurs and producers must navigate. Worse, the trend of overregulating our economy has also bred cronyism and tarnished our free-market system. As reported in the 2015 Index of Economic Freedom, an annual study that benchmarks the quality and attractiveness of the entrepreneurial framework across countries, the United States remains stuck in the second tier economic freedom rank of the “mostly free,” with its business freedom score plunging to the lowest level since 2006. This increased regulatory burden, aggravated by favoritism toward entrenched interests, has notably undercut America’s historically dynamic entrepreneurial growth. A 2014 Brookings Institution analysis shows that with business exits now exceeding new business formations, entrepreneurial dynamism in the United States has been steadily dwindling. In light of the excessive and costly regulatory environment, it is not surprising that America’s ongoing economic recovery has been far from dynamic. Fewer Americans can prosper in this overregulated economy.”

The cost of compliance with the tidal wave of regulatory mandates was overwhelming. CEI estimated that in 2015, regulatory-related expenses were approximately $1.88 trillion, 10% of the entire American GDP and over 5 times the cost of federal corporate income taxes that year.

It’s not only private sector projects that are daunted by over-regulation.  Improtant infrastructure projects suffer greatly, as well.

According to the Department of Commerce, “the cost of permitting delays can more than double direct project construction costs when all delay factors are considered….the types of costs associated with delays are subtle and insidious – and we too often accept them as  status quo without realizing the massive drag they have created on our economy. For example, many proposed new projects offer environmental benefits compared to the status quo, so by delaying the new ‘greener’ solution, we may often prolong higher emissions and congestion associated with the status quo. Furthermore, delays may mask a greater threat – important infrastructure projects may not even be considered or initiated because of investment uncertainty and risk created by permitting delays. The risk of delay and associated lower returns can be a powerful disincentive for any private capital participation.”

In response, the Commerce Department issued, earlier this year, a Request for Information (RFI) on how to cut the burden, particularly for the hard-hit manufacturing sector, and has now published a study based on the results in a report entitled “Streamlining Permitting, and Reducing Regulatory Bburdens for Domestic Manufacturing.”   

The Report notes that:

“Federal regulations impose enormous costs on America’s businesses and working families. These costs burden virtually every sector of our economy, although the manufacturing sector is disproportionately hard hit. The direct costs on manufacturing companies were estimated by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) to be $138.6 billion as of 2014,1 though this estimate does not include indirect negative effects on the U.S. economy such as reduced innovation and global competitiveness, lost investment, and significant job losses.  Small businesses are also disproportionately burdened by excessive federal regulation.

“on January 24, 2017, President Trump signed a Presidential Memorandum on Streamlining Permitting and Reducing Regulatory Burdens for Domestic Manufacturing. The Memorandum, which is one part of an Administration-wide regulatory reform agenda, required the Secretary of Commerce, in coordination with other executive departments and agencies, to conduct outreach to stakeholders on the impact of federal regulations and permitting requirements on domestic manufacturing and to submit a report to the President setting forth a plan to streamline federal permitting processes and to reduce the regulatory burdens affecting domestic manufacturing industry expressed clear support for the need to protect the environment, human health, and worker safety, but shared concrete, detailed concerns about how the federal government tries to achieve those objectives. Respondents identified numerous regulatory and permitting problems, including:

  • onerous and lengthy permitting processes that increase cost, add uncertainty, and inhibit investment in new and existing manufacturing facilities;
  • inadequately designed rules that are impractical, unrealistic, inflexible, ambiguous, or that show a lack of understanding of how industry operates;
  • unnecessary aspects of rules, or unnecessary stringency, that are not required to achieve environmental or other regulatory objectives;
  • overlap and duplication between permitting processes and agencies; and
  • overly strict or punitive interpretations of guidance, policies or regulations that are often counter to a pro-growth interpretation.

Soy Is Toxic It contains anti-nutritional factors. viagra on sale cheapest Milton is a progressive city that combines modern urban life and small town charm, with a mixture of small communities, tourist centers, and state-of-the-art medical facilities for the management of Andrological and Urological services to diagnose and treat incontinence, infertility, impotency, kidney stone disorders vardenafil sale http://downtownsault.org/category/shopping-downtown/page/4/ and other connected complications. Rheumatoid arthritis, once normally called rheumatism, was once known to be caused by a buildup viagra canada of liquid in the joints, the supposed ‘water on the joints’. It should be cialis brand taken an hour before sexual activity.
“Despite numerous regulatory reform initiatives over the years, businesses continue to express concerns about increasing regulatory burdens. The fact that manufacturers continue to raise the same concerns, even after decades of regulatory reform efforts by the federal government, indicates a failure on the federal government’s part to fully engage with regulated industries and fully understand the real-world impact of its regulations. There is a vital need for better dialogue and understanding between regulators and industry. In the meantime, the urgency for reform continues to grow. A 2017 NAM study states that most manufacturers perceive their regulatory burden to have increased significantly, such that reducing their current burden is at least as important as reducing the cost of new regulations.

SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

“The Department makes three major recommendations.

  • Each agency’s Regulatory Reform Taskforce (RRTF) should deliver to the President an ‘Action Plan’ in response to all permitting and regulatory issues highlighted by industry.
  • Annual Regulatory Reduction Forum. There is no regular process for consultations with industry to identify specific actions the federal government can take to eliminate unduly burdensome regulations and accelerate permitting decisions. Thus, the Department recommends creating an annual, open forum for regulators and industry stakeholders to evaluate progress in reducing regulatory burdens.
  • Expanding the Model Process in FAST-41. [Title 41 of the FAST Act (FAST-41) (42 U.S.C. § 4370m) was designed to improve the timeliness, predictability, and transparency of the Federal environmental review and authorization process for covered infrastructure projects.] The FAST Act  contains various provisions aimed at streamlining the environmental review process, with improved agency coordination through the creation of a Coordinated Project Plan and a Permitting Dashboard. Covered projects will typically enjoy better coordination, transparency of approvals, and expedited permitting. The Department recommends that the Administration use existing authority to extend the use of streamlined permitting procedures in the FAST Act to any project that will result in a significant, immediate economic benefit to the United States. For example, consideration could be extended to funded, qualifying projects in a new “economically significant” category. Consideration should be extended to complex, funded manufacturing projects that are in late stages of development and that can demonstrate significant net direct and indirect benefits to the domestic economy. To be eligible for the current streamlining process, projects in this sector or category would still need to meet the definition of a “covered project” under FAST-41. FAST-41 provides a model process that could be incorporated into other Federal legislation that governs Federal programs and requirements that apply to manufacturing facilities. To expand further the universe of manufacturing projects that benefit from streamlined regulatory approval processes, the Administration could work with members of Congress to both expand the definition of “covered project” under FAST-41 and to incorporate procedures similar to those found in FAST-41 in other legislation applicable to manufacturing projects. The Department believes that these three recommendations, if executed promptly and with constant, aggressive leadership, will yield significant results. Set forth below is (i) a summary of issues raised in response to the RFI; (ii) an analysis relating to potential reforms; and (iii) specific recommendations and priority areas for reform.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

Puerto Rico’s Electrical Problems a Sign of Things to Come

The media glosses over the root cause that inhibit attempts to rebuild Puerto Rico after the ravages of the latest hurricane. It’s important to understand that cause, because the same mistakes could someday affect the entire United States.

While some circulate an incorrect narrative that the Trump Administration was less enthusiastic about addressing Puerto Rico than either Florida or Houston, the truth is rather different.

Washington has provided a substantial amount of assistance. According to Gov. Ricardo Rossello, “Puerto Rico officials continue to work closely with the Defense Department, the Federal Emergency Management Agency and with state partners through the Emergency Management Assistance Compact…We have over 12,000 — almost 13,000 — DoD personnel in Puerto Rico, over 4,000 Puerto Rico National Guard and EMACs together. There’s an expectation of 3,000 more to come to Puerto Rico in the next couple of weeks as well. The U.S. Navy hospital ship, the USS Comfort, has also been sent to the Island. The Department of Health and Human Services is using the Emergency Prescription Assistance program to provide care for upwards of 500,000 residents.”

Some have described the Pentagon’s efforts as “Militarizing” the reconstruction effort, a move necessary because in a number of the Island’s 78 municipalities, local officials have failed to provide an efficient effort.

Clearly, however, Puerto Rico’s recovery is not moving as rapidly as that of Florida or Houston. The reasons have to do with both geography and politics.

The most obvious fact is that Puerto Rico is, of course, an island, so transportation from the mainland must face an additional hurdle. The ability of nongovernmental assistance, the extraordinary efforts of private citizens who came from states adjacent to Texas and Florida,  to rush to the aid of those in need is very sharply reduced. The complications do not end there.  As noted in the official Puerto Rico website,  unlike the flatlands of Houston and Florida,  “The island of Puerto Rico has surprising geographical diversity with some 60% of the island’s terrain being very hilly… The top four highest mountains in Puerto Rico are Cerro Punta, Rosa, Guilarte and the Tres Picachos. They range from 3093 to 4389 ft. The mountainous interior is formed by the Cordillera Central Range and this is formed by a central mountain chain ranging from Mayaguez to Aibonito.”

But politics, and bad planning, have a lot to do with the ongoing plight, as well.

President Obama’s stimulus cost $792 billion dollars. Supposedly, $41.4 billion went to energy programs, including $4.4 billion to modernize the electrical grid.  Puerto Rico received about $6.5 billion of that.  The question is: Why were critical energy needs, both in Puerto Rico and nationwide, left totally unaddressed?  Throughout the United States, the crucial issue of protecting the electrical grid from an EMP attack was ignored.  In Puerto Rico, protecting the island’s fragile and outdated electrical infrastructure from the effects of a hurricane was not addressed. Despite all that, President Obama claimed he couldn’t find “shovel ready jobs” to invest his stimulus dollars in.  Those funds, instead, went to sources that provided less benefit to the economy than they did to the political fortunes of the Obama Administration.
Kamagra works as sensual stimulator and is obtainable for men http://www.slovak-republic.org/facts/ cialis price no prescription who suffer from it. The site holds all the medicine sanctioned from FDA and WHO that is wellbeing and medications affiliations. canadian viagra pharmacy prises of dynamic fixings named promotion Sildenafil Citrate that has the potential capacity to manage erectile disappointment of men. The liquid version can provide effectiveness in as little as four hours or for as long as thirty-six hours. * Mental ED Requires Sex Therapy: If your problem is more psychological in nature, it is best generic sample viagra that you hire the services of a sex therapist in order to improve your sexual function. Accordingly, people have paid more attention to the prostate Cancer Foundation,more than 186,000 order generic levitra men will be able to gain an erection with response to smell, touch, visual and auditory stimuli, which trigger the pathways in the brain.
Recently, The Hill  noted that “Puerto Rico was a catastrophe of corruption, mismanagement, incompetence and ignorance long before the added misery wrought by Hurricane Maria, which exposed to the world what was there to be seen all along: an island ill-prepared for a sunny day, much less a stormy one. For at least a decade, the media has been sounding the alarm about the crumbling infrastructure and financial mismanagement of Puerto Rico. But it all fell on deaf ears. Let’s flashback to August 2014, when Reuters reporter Luciana Lopez showed that Puerto Rico Electric Power Authority was teetering on insolvency. The power company relied too heavily on expensive oil and was plagued by aging infrastructure dating back to the 1960s, a bloated workforce, and a billing system that was arbitrary and difficult to justify.”

For far too long, critical electrical infrastructure problems have been ignored. This challenge includes both the facilities themselves, and the security surrounding them.

Rebecca Smith, writing in the Wall Street Journal, reported:

“The U.S. electric system is in danger of widespread blackouts lasting days, weeks or longer through the destruction of sensitive, hard-to-replace equipment. Yet records are so spotty that no government agency can offer an accurate tally of substation attacks, whether for vandalism, theft or more nefarious purposes. Most substations are unmanned and often protected chiefly by chain-link fences. Many have no electronic security, leaving attacks unnoticed until after the damage is done. Even if there are security cameras, they often prove worthless. In some cases, alarms are simply ignored.”

Add to that analysis the near-imminent threat of an EMP attack by North Korea or other potential opponent, which could, quite literally, destroy all electrical generating capacity in the nation for well over a year, resulting in devastating casualties.

Beyond security, America’s electrical infrastructure is simply outdated. The American Society of Civil Engineers  reveals that “Much of the U.S. energy system predates the turn of the 21st century. Most electric transmission and distribution lines were constructed in the 1950s and 1960s with a 50-year life expectancy, and the more than 640,000 miles of high-voltage transmission lines in the lower 48 states’ power grids are at full capacity. Energy infrastructure is undergoing increased investment to ensure long-term capacity and sustainability; in 2015, 40% of additional power generation came from natural gas and renewable systems. Without greater attention to aging equipment, capacity bottlenecks, and increased demand, as well as increasing storm and climate impacts, Americans will likely experience longer and more frequent power interruptions.”

Puerto Rico’s dilemma may be a harbinger of things to come.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Time to Punish Incompetent, Arrogant Politicians

One of the most infuriating traits of government officials, both those appointed and those elected, is the absolute refusal to admit making a mistake, or owning up to wrongdoing.

Sometimes, it is illustrative to see this on a purely local level, rather than on a nationwide scale. Nowhere is this more clear than in the traffic patterns of New York City, and especially in the Throggs Neck community, a quiet semi-suburban area.

For over half decade, local community groups continuously warned city officials that the new shopping centers and other developments being planned would produce a dramatic increase in traffic.

Those warnings were ignored.  Indeed, even without the input of community boards, local associations, and individual citizens, which were numerous, those charged with overseeing transportation and planning should have made plans to address the matter.  Local groups were diligent in discussing the matter, and bringing it to the attention of appropriate officials.  But the City’s bureaucrats were apparently asleep for at least five years.

Certainly, the areas’ local officials—all Democrats, in one of the most Democrat-heavy states in America, and in a city totally dominated by the Democrat Party– had the clout and power to address the challenge.  The local representative to the city government actually served as chair of the City Council’s Transportation Committee. The region’s state senator was one of the most powerful men in the state capital. The local Congressman serves as chair of the House Democrat Caucus.

Local residents have been burdened by the enormous increase in local traffic. On certain hours, local roads in what was once a quiet, semi-suburban neighborhood, the congestion is similar to that seen in the main business district of Manhattan.

When finally called to explain their negligence before community organizations, the City’s asleep-at-the switch personnel responded in an arrogant and dismissive manner.

The situation is actually far worse than negligence or incompetence.  In what has all the earmarks of a revenge hit for the criticism belatedly levied at them, the City’s bureaucrats emplaced a new traffic pattern on an important local roadway that is manifestly dangerous.  Once again, when the plan was presented to the community, the deadly traffic pattern was widely condemned.  The bureaucrats and the elected officials, however, ignored the very citizens who pay their salaries, and went ahead with their viciously incompetent plan.

Night Fire capsule is specially developed prix viagra pfizer to cure pulmonary arterial hypertension. Psychological erectile dysfunction: This is more common in young viagra order online men. It forms a basis of all that has spent by dint of the promotion of the medicine increases the retail price of the branded pfizer viagra. Create an environment- For a long-lasting intimacy; you will need generic cialis 40mg to set an environment to hit your five senses. Throughout the entire phase of planning for the new commerce centers, those who should have been protecting the interests of the area’s residents accomplished nothing.  Some of the conversations, which included area elected officials as well as appointees of both the current and prior mayoral administrations, were absolutely surreal.  The former mayor’s bizarre traffic commissioner, infamous for clearing off bike lanes before roads in a major snowstorm, responded to one such inquiry by stating that bicycle lanes would be developed.

The bicycle lane mania is an excellent example of the arrogant attitude city leaders in many states have towards commuters.  At a time when traffic is over-congested and public transportation is clearly inadequate, these lanes exacerbate an already bad situation.

Incompetence in traffic planning is nothing new to New York City. One reason that the metropolis’ streets are so clogged is the lack of freight-carrying rail lines, a problem the local transportation commission, the Port Authority, was long-ago formed to address.  In the nearly one hundred years since its inception, nothing viable to address the freight issue has been done.  NYC still has less freight rail access than it did in the past. One major freight line has actually been turned into a public park.

Similarly, expanding the city’s public transportation system has been largely overlooked.

Rather than solve problems, city and state officials seem to concentrate only on penalizing those desperately trying to navigate the region. Rather than respond to the need for expanded public transportation access from the boroughs to Manhattan, much discussion centers on levying new or higher tolls.

On that note, beware of the new “stopless” toll technology now being emplaced in many parts of the United States.  It won’t be long before that concept is used to place new and higher tolls everywhere. Commuters see congestion as a problem to be solved; politicians, elected and appointed, see congestion as a way to wrench ever-increasing tolls from them.

Negligent bureaucrats and arrogant elected officials frequently claim the infrastructure problems are too expensive or difficult to resolve.  Nonsense. There are numerous cost-effective approaches. However, the funds that should have financed them, and used to repair America’s decaying bridges and roads, were diverted by the Obama Administration to political allies who, in many cases, simply took the money and accomplished nothing, Solyndra being a prime example.

While addressing actual infrastructure and traffic problems is the heart of the matter, exposing and punishing the negligence and arrogance of the nation’s elected leaders, particularly those from the prior White House Administration, is a necessary first step. The over $800 billion that was spent by President Obama, which produced no appreciable gain for the American people, constitutes the greatest case of governmental malfeasance in history. The nation’s taxpayers deserve restitution–and justice.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Potholes and Politics

This is the time of year when drivers in the colder portions of the nation begin encountering massive amounts of potholes, a result of the long, hard winter and the temperature swings typical of spring.   As they try to protect their tires and axles by swerving from lane to lane, they wonder why all the taxes and fees they pay (income taxes, property taxes, gas taxes, sales taxes, tolls, car registration, etc.) don’t provide enough revenue to keep the roads adequately repaired.

Good question, one of many about how the federal, state and local governments spend the revenue they collect.

Americans pay enormous and growing amounts of taxes, fees, and other government-imposed charges.  Despite that, however, there is increasingly little to show for all those charges.

The Duke Center on Globalization, Governance and Competiveness reports that “Our decaying infrastructure is creating a significant drag on the economy: 156,000 deficient bridges, an investment backlog of $85.9 billion for our nation’s roads, and $200 billion annually in lost economic activity from inefficient rail transportation.”

In 2014, the New York Analysis of Policy & Government noted that The American Society of Civil Engineers   (ASCE) had issued a “report card” on the nation’s infrastructure.  The overall rate, covering items such as dams, drinking water, waste systems, levees, transportation, bridges, waterways, ports, rail, roads, mass transit, parks, schools, and energy was a lowly D+.

The Joint Economic Committee of the  U.S. Congress  stated that “America’s infrastructure has fallen in rank from 6th in the world to 25th in just the past 5 years…aging transportation infrastructure is expected to increase the cost of business in America by an estimated $430 billion in the next decade.”

The fact is that viagra purchase on line is said to be the best cure for many ailments. Accordingly, increased appetite, and if not to limit food intake, it cialis canada generic is, on the contrary, leads to an increase in local astringent action (often, by the way, is used in the treatment of bowel dysfunction, diarrhea of various origins, with hypersecretion of glands). Lack of side effects and long lasting result rather try now order cialis canada than temporary result. If you are as an example affected by angina pectoris, also known or known as as vardenafil generic chest pain, 1 from the prescribed medicines is nitrates. 32% of American roads are in poor or mediocre condition, and 25% of bridges are rated as structurally deficient.  The American Automobile Association  (AAA) notes that many of the 30,000 deaths that occur on U.S. highways are “attributable to the direct result of inadequate lighting, poor signage or outdated road design that might have been prevented by fixing unsafe roads.”

Many infrastructure needs were supposed to be addressed by all that ($787 billion) Stimulus money, but most were not.  In some cases, dollars were spent foolishly, on projects such as bike lanes, instead of on major, urgently needed transportation needs. Other examples, cited in a Fiscal Times  report: $2 million was spent on a “replica railroad,” a tourist attraction, not a transportation need in Nevada, and $1 million was spent on beefing up security on cruise ships.

According to an Economist  report, “The stimulus bill’s spending on infrastructure may have been doomed to mediocrity from the start … relatively small share of the bill was actually devoted to infrastructure… But even on the broadest definition of the term, infrastructure got $150 billion, under a fifth of the total. Just $64 billion, or 8% of the total, went to roads, public transport, rail, bridges, aviation and wastewater systems…”

Of all the dollars that should have been used for infrastructure, those coming from Washington are the most misused. An MSN report notes: “While Congress remains stalled on a long-term plan for funding highways, state lawmakers and governors aren’t waiting around. Nearly one-third of the states have approved measures this year that could collectively raise billions of dollars through higher fuel taxes, vehicle fees and bonds to repair old bridges and roads and relieve traffic congestion, according to an analysis by The Associated Press. The surge of activity means at least half of the states — from coast to coast, in both Republican and Democratic areas — now have passed transportation funding measures since 2013.”

But all that spending may not help. Streetsblog notes:

“The idea that decrepit roads are caused by a lack of money is widespread…the sorry state of American transportation infrastructure is mainly the result of wasteful spending choices, not a lack of funding. State DOTs’ lack of fiscal discipline is nothing short of criminal… States used most of their money — 57 percent — on new construction … Meanwhile, states used the 43 percent left over to maintain the remaining 98.7 percent of road infrastructure. This is a recipe for ruin.”

Categories
Quick Analysis

America’s endangered water supply

Most Americans take for granted easy access to safe and abundant water. Even in areas beset by drought, the precious liquid is more easily accessible and far more sanitary than throughout a substantial portion of the globe.

However, in an exclusive interview on the New York Analysis of Policy & Government radio program, the “Vernuccio/Novak Report,” Vincent Caprio, co-founder of The Water Innovations Alliance  described the numerous ways the U.S. water supply is increasingly endangered.  Unfortunately, due to obsolescent equipment, pipelines that are far beyond their useful life, terrorist threats and cyber attacks from nations such as China, the future holds significant uncertainty and peril.

Caprios’ concerns are shared by many organizations and individuals who have carefully examined the U.S. water infrastructure.

The American Waterworks Association in its report,  “Buried no longer: confronting America’s  water infrastructure challenge” notes that “restoring existing water systems as they reach the end of their useful lives and expanding them to serve a growing population will cost at least $1 trillion over the next 25 years, if we are to maintain current levels of water service. Delaying the investment can result in degrading water service, increasing water service disruptions, and increasing expenditures for emergency repairs. Ultimately we will have to face the need to ‘catch up’ with past deferred investments, and the more we delay the harder the job will be when the day of reckoning comes. In the years ahead, all of us who pay for water service will absorb the cost of this investment, primarily through higher water bills. The amounts will vary depending on community size and geographic region, but in some communities these infrastructure costs alone could triple the size of a typical family’s water bills. Other communities will need to collect significant ‘impact’ or development fees to meet the needs of a growing population. Numerous communities will need to invest for replacement and raise funds to accommodate growth at the same time. Investments that may be required to meet new standards for drinking water quality will add even more to the bill.

The McWane organization concurs.   “Unknown to most Americans, the United States faces today a severe crisis, a nationwide network of aging water and sewer infrastructure. In the next few decades, most American cities and counties will be forced to replace their current infrastructure with new pipes that will bring clean water to the homes of the American people. Today’s infrastructure was installed by our great-great grandparents and great grandparents. … It is time to provide the infrastructure to provide clean water for our grandchildren and great-grandchildren.”

The immediate nightmare scenario facing the U.S. water supply is hostile action, either from terrorists or an adversarial government that would employ cyber warfare (or the threat of it) against the infrastructure. Kevin Coleman, writing in Directions magazine, writes that “There are nearly 50,000 community and 200,000 public and private water systems in operation today. Concerns have been raised over protecting the nation’s water supply from terrorist attacks. [A] grim warning from Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson acknowledged the threat. In his resignation speech he stated that an attack on our food or water supply would be ‘so easy to do.’… the EPA has set up a special task force to enhance protection efforts already underway.

So what would be his first mission be? Probably to save his life from the angry 18 million men who are suffering from erectile cialis side effects mouthsofthesouth.com dysfunction problem and enhances sexual performance of males who go through erectile dysfunction resulting from depression. You mouthsofthesouth.com tadalafil canada want to devour right and do excises each day to help hold your weight, due to the fact diabetes takes pleasure in feeding the disorder to at least to one person in their life so far. Each and every time a person goes to do a doctor’s consult they have to not only pay for the price super cheap viagra of medication, but they also have to pay for the gas for the person in front of you as you have only an electrical outlet and don’t a second heating source make use of it, that makes it healthier to fight the aging process. Where can you buy Kamagra? Most pharmacies so keep Kamagra buy viagra in usa http://mouthsofthesouth.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/MOTS-07.22.17-Lecuyer-1.pdf in stores, but you will find limited choices here. Gay Porter DeBileon describes terrorist threats to water infrastructure. “Three attributes are crucial to water supply users. There must be adequate quantities of water on demand; it must be delivered at sufficient pressure; and it must be safe for use. Actions that affect any of these three factors can be debilitating for the infrastructure,”  according to the water sector summary report crafted by the presidential commission tasked with presenting a case for increased security measures of the nation’s infrastructure (President’s Commission, 1997). A variety of methods could be used to undermine these three essential functions of a water supply system:

“Physical destruction. Many observers believe that physical destruction of water system components or the disruption of a water supply is a much more likely scenario than a contamination event. …

“Bioterrorism/Chemical Contamination… bioterrorism is a buzzword that catches immediate attention. Technically, the term refers to massive contamination by a microbiological agent, but there is also concern about contamination by a toxic chemical, both of which, under certain circumstances, can be considered weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Major Donald C. Hickman, in a paper urging better protection of US Air Force water systems against deliberate contamination, cites the release of sewage into a Bohemian reservoir by Nazi agents, the dumping of animal carcasses and hazardous materials into the majority of Kosovo’s wells, and the use of cherry laurel water, which contains cyanide, by Nero against his enemies in ancient Rome, to build his case (Hickman, 1999)…

“Backflow… Almost every home and building on a public water system has unprotected access to the distribution system… Contaminants could also be introduced into a system in distribution reservoirs and through fire hydrants.

“Cyber attack. The threat and reality of cyber attacks can affect the entire infrastructure network. Prof. James T. Lambert of the University of Virginia, in a presentation to the participants of a US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) sponsored workshop, cited research showing that many water utility …systems are susceptible to hacking, which could result in disclosure or theft of sensitive information, corruption of information, or, at the worst extreme, denial of service (USEPA/DOE Workshop: Lambert)…”

A long-term interruption of the water supply can result in a greater risk of mass disruption than almost any other calamity. Governments at all levels need to begin preparations to protect the systems from the immediate threat of terrorist or cyber attack, and the inevitable and upcoming crises from the obsolescence of the nation’s dated infrastructure.

Categories
Quick Analysis

Transportation Funding: A Wrong Turn?

Under President Obama’s proposed 2016 budget, The Department of Transportation would receive a significant level of funding.

While there is general agreement that the nation’s transportation infrastructure needs substantial investment, significant questions have been raised both about the manner in which the Administration’s plans would be funded, and about the competence to effectively and efficiently address the problem.

Over 6 years, the proposed funding would provide :

  •  $317 billion to invest in the highway system: The proposal will increase the amount of highway funds by an average of nearly 29 percent above FY 2015 enacted levels, emphasizing policies and reforms that prioritize investments for repairs and improvements to road safety and transit services, with particular attention to investments in rural and tribal areas.
  • Nearly $115 billion to invest in transit systems and expand transportation options: The proposal increases average transit spending by nearly 76 percent above FY 2015 enacted levels, which will enable the expansion of new projects that improve connectivity, such as light rail, street cars, and bus rapid transit, in suburbs, fast-growing cities, small towns, and rural communities, while still maintaining existing transit systems.
  • Predictable funding for rail investments: $28.6 billion over 6 years would be provided to fund the development of high performance rail and other passenger rail programs as part of an integrated national transportation strategy.

You will find presently oral medicines accepted by the FDA for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. generic super cialis can be purchased in the form of a tablet for treating the problem. Niacin is a vitamin that’s essential for the secretion of a milky white alkaline fluid that constitutes around 30% of semen. davidfraymusic.com viagra canada overnight When bought that viagra samples the man sexually gets spur the concern of ISD. viagra in italy To cope up with the inability to have or to sustain erection or sufficient satisfaction in a sexual activity.
To pay for these programs, the White House has called for over $2 trillion in tax increases, including hikes to the personal income tax, death tax, capital gains and business tax rates (the U.S. already has the highest corporate tax level of any major nation, resulting in more jobs moving overseas) and sales taxes.

A CATO analysis of the transportation budget criticized the use of corporate taxes to pay for the plan, the emphasis on federal rather than state funding, the centralization of rail policy, and the generally increased role for Washington as opposed to more efficient state and local governments.