86.1 F
College Station
Saturday, July 24, 2021

INVEST in America Act Is a Bad Investment

Local News

College Station Bans Traditional Pet Shops

At Thursday's meeting, the College Station city council passed an ordinance that prohibits the sale of non-rescue dogs and cats in pet...

College Station to Vote on ROO in Special Meeting Today

The College Station City Council meets Monday at 4 p.m. at city hall to consider a Restricted Occupancy Overlay (ROO). The ordinance would allow single-family...

College Station Plans on Borrowing Additional $62 Million Without Taxpayer Vote

The College Station City Council voted to begin the process of issuing $62 million in certificates of obligations for capital projects. The...

Brazos Valley Hospitalizations Continue to Decline After Mask Order Rescinded

Texas Governor Greg Abbott issued Executive Order GA-34 on March 2, 2021, and the order went into effect on March 10, 2021....

Passengers board an Amtrak train inside New York’s Penn Station in 2017. (Brendan McDermid/Reuters) It would massively increase public spending, prod us unwillingly onto public transit, and make our goods and fuel more expensive to please labor unions.

The House of Representatives will soon vote on the “Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation in America (INVEST in America) Act” — a piece of legislation that would spend half a trillion dollars over five years on surface transportation. Despite the proclamation in its title, the bill is a bad investment for America. In addition to massively increasing public spending, it would also disproportionately privilege little-used transit programs compared with roads that people do use and hurt America’s successful freight rail industry. While surface-transportation funding needs to be renewed, the INVEST in America Act is not the proper way to do it.

As a general matter, the bill does wisely prioritize maintenance of existing roads and bridges — something that Congress has given lip service to over the years but has never really tackled. The vast majority of miles traveled by Americans is by road, and those roads need to be up to speed to allow their most efficient use. This is the one piece of the president’s infrastructure plan that has widespread bipartisan support.

Scrutinize this a bit more closely, however, and that positive goal begins to be railroaded by massive and poorly targeted spending for spending’s sake. The bill increases highway spending from about $250 billion to well over $300 billion over five years, according to the Congressional Research Service. Part of the reason it does so is because it reintroduces earmarks — otherwise known as “pork” — into the process. Indeed, Section 107 of the bill lists nearly 1,500 projects designated by House lawmakers for funding. (The Senate has yet to get in on the act.) Building new road projects because they are actually needed — rather than pleasing politicians — is apparently not the purpose of this legislation.

Beyond that, the bill goes into overdrive by adding large sums

Continue reading on National Review

More articles

- Advertisement -

State News

Dickson: Eastland Votes to Move Forward to Outlaw Abortion, While Edinburg Abandons Pursuit

On Monday, July 19, Eastland’s city hall was packed, with standing room only, as the city commissioners voted 4-0 on a first reading to...

US Rep. Ronny Jackson Backs Petition for Amarillo City Hall Election

U.S. Rep. Ronny Jackson (R–Amarillo) expressed support this week for a citizen-led plan to put the Amarillo City Council’s latest push for debt in...

Choosing Sides

William Travis famously drew a line in the sand, asking his fellow Alamo defenders to join him in putting their lives on the line...

Choosing A Side

In this 50th episode of the Reflections on Life and Liberty podcast, Michael Quinn Sullivan continues from last week his look at the plains...

All Eyes on Texas?

This week Brandon is joined by Texas Scorecard’s Jeramy Kitchen to talk about the week’s news. Catch The Headline LIVE right here this, and...

Continue reading on National Review