Our federal expenditures on infrastructure came up in a thread about the auto industry. During the campaign, Obama kept saying we need to pay attention to our infrastructure, indicating that past administrations have been neglecting our highways, etc.
Here's a Congressional Budget Office report, "Trends in Public Spending on Infrastructure," for you analytical types.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/89xx/doc8958 ... vestor.pdf
It's a 2008 report. All the numbers are in 2006 dollars. Analyzing charts is definitely not my forte, but it's clear that real spending has definitely increased.
Has it increased enough? Is it a real concern, or just another political red herring?
US Federal Spending on Infrastructure
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
US Federal Spending on Infrastructure
Sorry, that's only the charts. Here's the report.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/85xx/doc8517 ... ucture.pdf
eta:
Page 20 (28 in the PDF file) shows that spending under the Bush Admin has dropped to 1950's levels as a percentage of GDP. Isn't that when all those highways got built in the first place? That's not enough for maintenance?? Granted, to answer that question we need to separate highway spending from all the other infrastructure.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/85xx/doc8517 ... ucture.pdf
eta:
Page 20 (28 in the PDF file) shows that spending under the Bush Admin has dropped to 1950's levels as a percentage of GDP. Isn't that when all those highways got built in the first place? That's not enough for maintenance?? Granted, to answer that question we need to separate highway spending from all the other infrastructure.
-
wildhorses
- Posts: 648
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:08 pm
US Federal Spending on Infrastructure
Accountable;1060302 wrote: Sorry, that's only the charts. Here's the report.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/85xx/doc8517 ... ucture.pdf
eta:
Page 20 (28 in the PDF file) shows that spending under the Bush Admin has dropped to 1950's levels as a percentage of GDP. Isn't that when all those highways got built in the first place? That's not enough for maintenance?? Granted, to answer that question we need to separate highway spending from all the other infrastructure.
I thought it was in the 40's that all or most of the highways were built. Not that they did not build in the 50's.....just not as much. I would have to look it up as I have not done reading on this for some time so I am not sure if my memory serves me right. Also....government stats.....are they really reliable? They usually fix the numbers to serve whatever their agenda is at the time. I will try to google and see when the main infrastructure was built. bbl.
http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/85xx/doc8517 ... ucture.pdf
eta:
Page 20 (28 in the PDF file) shows that spending under the Bush Admin has dropped to 1950's levels as a percentage of GDP. Isn't that when all those highways got built in the first place? That's not enough for maintenance?? Granted, to answer that question we need to separate highway spending from all the other infrastructure.
I thought it was in the 40's that all or most of the highways were built. Not that they did not build in the 50's.....just not as much. I would have to look it up as I have not done reading on this for some time so I am not sure if my memory serves me right. Also....government stats.....are they really reliable? They usually fix the numbers to serve whatever their agenda is at the time. I will try to google and see when the main infrastructure was built. bbl.
-
wildhorses
- Posts: 648
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:08 pm
US Federal Spending on Infrastructure
It looks like the infrastructure was actually built in the 30's and then upgraded in the 50's.
U. S Highways: From US 1 to (US 830)
This web site is intended to be a historical resource, dedicated to the preservation and celebration of the US numbered highway system. The American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO), working in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture's Bureau of Public Roads, laid out the US highway system along primary intercity roads of the day. Preliminary planning of routes to be included began in 1924. A list of proposed route numbers was ready in late 1925. The final list of US highways was agreed upon on November 11, 1926. In the early years, auto-tourists followed the US routes like they had the Auto-Trails.
During the Great Depression, the U.S. and state governments put men to work improving and extending the nation's roads and highways. The US highway system carried the bulk of intercity vehicular traffic and people migrating west to California. These highways helped the US win the Second World War, allowing great flexibility in ferrying men and materials across the nation, supplementing the nation's fixed rail system. After the war, highways swelled with cars mass produced in factories tooled up to supply wartime needs. Roads built in the 1930's were inadequate for the faster and wider cars of the 1950's. Roads were widened, straightened, and divided. It was not enough. AASHO declared the US numbered highway system "outmoved" in August 1947. With Germany's Autobahns as an example of the highways Americans wanted, President Eisenhower signed a bill creating the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways on June 29, 1956. "Future Interstate" shields cropped up like weeds as the new superhighways were built along or on top of US routes. The plan was for both numbering systems to co-exist, maintaining established travel routes.
California started the process of relegating US highways to a lesser place in modern life on July 1, 1964 with the decommissioning or truncation of most of its US routes. Another milestone (or was that a millstone?) was the completion of the McLean, TX bypass on I-40 / Route 66 in 1984. Others have cited the removal of the last traffic light on I-90 in Wallace, Idaho on September 15, 1991 as the Interstate System's completion because the original 1956 plan super slabs were now in place. In my opinion, the decertifying of the famed Route 66 on June 27, 1985 was the death notice. Now someone could go from Chicago to Los Angeles without seeing landmarks like the Blue Swallow Motel (Tucumcari, NM), Roy's Cafe (Amboy, CA), or Lucille's Service Station (Hydro, OK). US 66 was replaced by five Interstate numbers in addition to numerous state routes: I-55, I-44, I-40, I-15, and I-10. No single official highway number currently carries traffic between Chicago, IL and Los Angeles, CA, despite the fact that a single highway number linking those two cities had been a priority since US route planning began in 1925. The bureaucrats believe that a single number connection between two cities is no longer important. Now, over a decade after its de-certification, US 66 is back as "Historic" Route 66. Business blooms where it had once withered in the Interstate's shadow, like Henry's Rabbit Ranch (Staunton, IL). People still want to travel that single number, that storied old highway and see what became of the great American road trip. Maybe those bean counters in the highway departments were wrong
U. S Highways: From US 1 to (US 830)
This web site is intended to be a historical resource, dedicated to the preservation and celebration of the US numbered highway system. The American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO), working in conjunction with the Department of Agriculture's Bureau of Public Roads, laid out the US highway system along primary intercity roads of the day. Preliminary planning of routes to be included began in 1924. A list of proposed route numbers was ready in late 1925. The final list of US highways was agreed upon on November 11, 1926. In the early years, auto-tourists followed the US routes like they had the Auto-Trails.
During the Great Depression, the U.S. and state governments put men to work improving and extending the nation's roads and highways. The US highway system carried the bulk of intercity vehicular traffic and people migrating west to California. These highways helped the US win the Second World War, allowing great flexibility in ferrying men and materials across the nation, supplementing the nation's fixed rail system. After the war, highways swelled with cars mass produced in factories tooled up to supply wartime needs. Roads built in the 1930's were inadequate for the faster and wider cars of the 1950's. Roads were widened, straightened, and divided. It was not enough. AASHO declared the US numbered highway system "outmoved" in August 1947. With Germany's Autobahns as an example of the highways Americans wanted, President Eisenhower signed a bill creating the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways on June 29, 1956. "Future Interstate" shields cropped up like weeds as the new superhighways were built along or on top of US routes. The plan was for both numbering systems to co-exist, maintaining established travel routes.
California started the process of relegating US highways to a lesser place in modern life on July 1, 1964 with the decommissioning or truncation of most of its US routes. Another milestone (or was that a millstone?) was the completion of the McLean, TX bypass on I-40 / Route 66 in 1984. Others have cited the removal of the last traffic light on I-90 in Wallace, Idaho on September 15, 1991 as the Interstate System's completion because the original 1956 plan super slabs were now in place. In my opinion, the decertifying of the famed Route 66 on June 27, 1985 was the death notice. Now someone could go from Chicago to Los Angeles without seeing landmarks like the Blue Swallow Motel (Tucumcari, NM), Roy's Cafe (Amboy, CA), or Lucille's Service Station (Hydro, OK). US 66 was replaced by five Interstate numbers in addition to numerous state routes: I-55, I-44, I-40, I-15, and I-10. No single official highway number currently carries traffic between Chicago, IL and Los Angeles, CA, despite the fact that a single highway number linking those two cities had been a priority since US route planning began in 1925. The bureaucrats believe that a single number connection between two cities is no longer important. Now, over a decade after its de-certification, US 66 is back as "Historic" Route 66. Business blooms where it had once withered in the Interstate's shadow, like Henry's Rabbit Ranch (Staunton, IL). People still want to travel that single number, that storied old highway and see what became of the great American road trip. Maybe those bean counters in the highway departments were wrong
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
US Federal Spending on Infrastructure
wildhorses;1061469 wrote: I thought it was in the 40's that all or most of the highways were built. Not that they did not build in the 50's.....just not as much. I would have to look it up as I have not done reading on this for some time so I am not sure if my memory serves me right. Also....government stats.....are they really reliable? They usually fix the numbers to serve whatever their agenda is at the time. I will try to google and see when the main infrastructure was built. bbl.
That was a cool article. Thanks. Showed me how little I know. Rt 66 and the interstates that killed it stands as a monument to unintended consequences.
As for the stats, you can rely on the numbers themselves. The problem is the way they're presented. The truth is hidden in plain sight. If I had time, I'd break out highway spending from all the rest. That would give me the answer I'm looking for, I think.
That was a cool article. Thanks. Showed me how little I know. Rt 66 and the interstates that killed it stands as a monument to unintended consequences.
As for the stats, you can rely on the numbers themselves. The problem is the way they're presented. The truth is hidden in plain sight. If I had time, I'd break out highway spending from all the rest. That would give me the answer I'm looking for, I think.
-
Accountable
- Posts: 24818
- Joined: Mon May 30, 2005 8:33 am
US Federal Spending on Infrastructure
Scrat;1061731 wrote: You also have to wonder what we are getting for what we are paying.
Tacoma Washinton put in a little tram a few years back, it's on a track a mile long. The whole project, tracks road bed street work ect and 2 trains cost over 4 million dollars. It hardly runs and will never turn a profit.
The new tram line in Seattle (S.L.U.T - Seattle Light Urban Transit) cost far far more for about the same thing.
The transit system we just approved will be in excess of 18 billion over the next 10 years and believe me, it will be obsolete when it is finished. We need it, we have no choice but to build it
What kind of cynic came up with THAT acronym?? :wah:
Any idea how much of that money is federal vs state?
Tacoma Washinton put in a little tram a few years back, it's on a track a mile long. The whole project, tracks road bed street work ect and 2 trains cost over 4 million dollars. It hardly runs and will never turn a profit.
The new tram line in Seattle (S.L.U.T - Seattle Light Urban Transit) cost far far more for about the same thing.
The transit system we just approved will be in excess of 18 billion over the next 10 years and believe me, it will be obsolete when it is finished. We need it, we have no choice but to build it
What kind of cynic came up with THAT acronym?? :wah:
Any idea how much of that money is federal vs state?
-
wildhorses
- Posts: 648
- Joined: Sun Oct 12, 2008 7:08 pm
US Federal Spending on Infrastructure
Accountable;1061719 wrote: That was a cool article. Thanks. Showed me how little I know. Rt 66 and the interstates that killed it stands as a monument to unintended consequences.
As for the stats, you can rely on the numbers themselves. The problem is the way they're presented. The truth is hidden in plain sight. If I had time, I'd break out highway spending from all the rest. That would give me the answer I'm looking for, I think.
Yes it would. Maybe the overall figure is the same because there was a lot of road upgrading done in the 50's but not much other infrastructure work. It could be now that there is only road maintenance but more infrastructure work of other types. So that the overall figure is deceiving....in terms of road work alone. I am actually in some discussions on other boards with regard to infrastructure work. If I happen to come across information for a comparison on road work alone, then I will make sure to post it here.
As for the stats, you can rely on the numbers themselves. The problem is the way they're presented. The truth is hidden in plain sight. If I had time, I'd break out highway spending from all the rest. That would give me the answer I'm looking for, I think.
Yes it would. Maybe the overall figure is the same because there was a lot of road upgrading done in the 50's but not much other infrastructure work. It could be now that there is only road maintenance but more infrastructure work of other types. So that the overall figure is deceiving....in terms of road work alone. I am actually in some discussions on other boards with regard to infrastructure work. If I happen to come across information for a comparison on road work alone, then I will make sure to post it here.