Should America pay to fix its bridges?

[mmi]

Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

There are about 600K bridges in the US, and about ten percent are structurally deficient. We currently spend around $10-12 billion annually on bridge maintenance. To fix the ones with serious problems, we'd need to spend something like eight billion more. Should we tell Congress to find the money?

 

[SDET]

There are about 600K bridges in the US, and about ten percent are structurally deficient. We currently spend around $10-12 billion annually on bridge maintenance. To fix the ones with serious problems, we'd need to spend something like eight billion more. Should we tell Congress to find the money?

We should force Mexico to pay for them. "Make America Great Again"

 

[mmi]

This god damn thing is too complicated for me. I can't figure out how to post the choices, or even how to delete this. I will therefore have to ask a mod to delete it. Thanks.

 

[mmi]

There are about 600K bridges in the US, and about ten percent are structurally deficient. We currently spend around $10-12 billion annually on bridge maintenance. To fix the ones with serious problems, we'd need to spend something like eight billion more. Should we tell Congress to find the money?

 

[OrphanSlug]

If only we paid attention to our own infrastructure like we pay attention to bombing some nation for whatever reason... we would not have to have this conversation.

Ah **** it, let's go to bomb someone else... who needs maintained bridges anyway? :roll:

 

[mmi]

I apologize to anyone posting in this thread. I've started a new one with options. I suppose I'd like to have a mod move the answers here to the new thread. I should be banned from posting polls.

 

[David_N]

Yes. Money isn't an obstacle.

 

[Chomsky]

We should force Mexico to pay for them. "Make America Great Again"

:lamo

"Bridge"?

"BRIDGE"?

"I'm building walls! I'm not building any bridges to anywhere! America! AMERICA! We're gonna' be SO great"!

 

[cabse5]

Here is the taxing and spending con job in US politics: Monies are diverted from voter approved accumulated tax funds to projects that 'get the politician reelected' and weren't voted for.

Infrastructure, the voter approved tax fund that this thread talks about, has tax monies diverted into such non-voter-approved tax projects like, for example, free WiFi for tractors and the resulting towers.
When the tax monies are diverted, more tax money is needed to fulfill the needs of the original tax fund. Why, for instance, there is never enough money for infrastructure and why politicians are always asking for more taxes for infrastructure.

Taxation without representation.

 

[Kal'Stang]

Moderator's Warning:

Merged your two threads into one. This god damn thing is too complicated for me. I can't figure out how to post the choices, or even how to delete this. I will therefore have to ask a mod to delete it. Thanks.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

There are about 600K bridges in the US, and about ten percent are structurally deficient. We currently spend around $10-12 billion annually on bridge maintenance. To fix the ones with serious problems, we'd need to spend something like eight billion more. Should we tell Congress to find the money?

It's the responsibility of the local and state governments to pay to repair bridges on local streets or state roads. The federal government only pays to repair bridges on USDOT FHwA Federal-aid Highways System.

Federal-aid Highway Program

The Federal-Aid Highway Program supports State highway systems by providing financial assistance for the construction, maintenance and operations of the Nation's 3.9 million-mile highway network, including the Interstate Highway System, primary highways and secondary local roads. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is charged with implementing the Federal-aid Highway Program in cooperation with the States and local government.

Local government - primarily counties, cities and towns, or local public agencies (LPAs) - own and operate about 75 percent, or roughly 2.9 million miles, of the Nation's highway network. LPAs build and maintain this network using a variety of funding sources, including the Federal-aid Highway Program. An estimated 7,000 LPAs manage about $7 billion annually in Federal-aid projects, or roughly 15 percent of the total program.

That's why understanding Federal-aid requirements is so important in the delivery of Federal-aid projects at the local level. Federal-aid Essentials highlights key components of the program to help LPAs and their State partners successfully manage locally administered Federal-aid projects.

Each program has a federal share and a state or local match. In the case of highway bridge replacement and/or rehabilitation, the federal share is 80%, which means that the local or state government has to come up with the other 20%. That 20% can be millions of dollars that local governments just don't have, and can't get. Go to page 75 (76 counting the cover) of this PDF document for more detail.

There's more to repairing bridges and roads than just fussing at Congress to pass a funding bill.

As we all saw vividly with the Obama Administration's "Shovel Ready Projects" that shovel ready projects don't exist. The truth is, we do need to repair our bridges - desperately. But, it isn't as easy or simple as many people would have you think it could be. If it were that simple, the bridges would have been repaired decades ago. Yet, the problem is not going to get better, it's just going to get worse, and more expensive as time goes on.

If we're going to do this, we must have a system to manage the money, the contracting, and the auditing. FHwA doesn't have that in place at a level that could handle such a major undertaking. The only government agency that could potentially take on such a project would be the USACE (US Army Corps of Engineers). However, the Corps' overhead added to most projects they manage is 35%-40%. That means that for every Billion Dollars of work done, the Corps would spend $400 Million in General, Administrative, and Overhead costs alone.

 

[shrubnose]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

The USA has a lot of infrastructure above and under the ground which should be repaired or replaced.

Doing this now would put a lot of people to work and save money in the long run

 

[Helix]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

yes, we should prioritize fixing our infrastructure.

 

[mmi]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

There's more to repairing bridges and roads than just fussing at Congress to pass a funding bill.

I agree that the funding mechanisms associated with our system of federalism make this a complicated process. But I also believe that we should not allow that to get in the way of public safety.

I don't want to "fuss at Congress," but rather give them a choice between getting this done or crossing the Bridge of Death.

 

[ludin]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

It's the responsibility of the local and state governments to pay to repair bridges on local streets or state roads. The federal government only pays to repair bridges on USDOT FHwA Federal-aid Highways System.



Each program has a federal share and a state or local match. In the case of highway bridge replacement and/or rehabilitation, the federal share is 80%, which means that the local or state government has to come up with the other 20%. That 20% can be millions of dollars that local governments just don't have, and can't get. Go to page 75 (76 counting the cover) of this PDF document for more detail.

There's more to repairing bridges and roads than just fussing at Congress to pass a funding bill.

As we all saw vividly with the Obama Administration's "Shovel Ready Projects" that shovel ready projects don't exist. The truth is, we do need to repair our bridges - desperately. But, it isn't as easy or simple as many people would have you think it could be. If it were that simple, the bridges would have been repaired decades ago. Yet, the problem is not going to get better, it's just going to get worse, and more expensive as time goes on.

If we're going to do this, we must have a system to manage the money, the contracting, and the auditing. FHwA doesn't have that in place at a level that could handle such a major undertaking. The only government agency that could potentially take on such a project would be the USACE (US Army Corps of Engineers). However, the Corps' overhead added to most projects they manage is 35%-40%. That means that for every Billion Dollars of work done, the Corps would spend $400 Million in General, Administrative, and Overhead costs alone.

yep 100% agree. most of the infrastructure is owned by the states but we already tried the spend billions of dollars to fix stuff
and the states spent it on other things that is why the shovel ready jobs never occurred.

also what people fail to understand is that there has to be costing and analysis done. is it cheaper to repair or just build a new one.
usually the cost to repair is higher at times given all the new codes that have to be put in place. then you have to deal
with major traffic issues and delays.

the budgets on these things swell easily as very few times they are performance driven as they should be.

 

[Fiddytree]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

America's infrastructure as a whole is a massive problem that I really do not think will be satisfactorily dealt with on a traditional "government infrastructure package." I haven't done much digging around, but I became curious by some proposals floated around by the Bipartisan Policy Center and Eric Cantor last winter, who cited what Virginia was up to. It seemed to center on a public-private partnership in the funding portion, rather than merely in having private entities do the work. Of course, that brings with it its own sets of challenges and continued costs, but given the political climate, what will break first?

 

[SocialD]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

yep 100% agree. most of the infrastructure is owned by the states but we already tried the spend billions of dollars to fix stuff
and the states spent it on other things that is why the shovel ready jobs never occurred.

also what people fail to understand is that there has to be costing and analysis done. is it cheaper to repair or just build a new one.
usually the cost to repair is higher at times given all the new codes that have to be put in place. then you have to deal
with major traffic issues and delays.

the budgets on these things swell easily as very few times they are performance driven as they should be.

I have seen many a time that road repair/upgrade crews ( contracted construction companies ) often milk the government.
For instance they will tear up say 20 miles of road. they will remove layers of asphalt and then grade the road for their asphalt crew to come along.
Well by the time the repaving crew gets to the second half of that 20 miiles its been a week or so since it was graded and now wind and rain and whatever else has messed it up and now they have to regrade it again.
I think they do crap like that on purpose.

 

[ludin]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

I have seen many a time that road repair/upgrade crews ( contracted construction companies ) often milk the government.
For instance they will tear up say 20 miles of road. they will remove layers of asphalt and then grade the road for their asphalt crew to come along.
Well by the time the repaving crew gets to the second half of that 20 miiles its been a week or so since it was graded and now wind and rain and whatever else has messed it up and now they have to regrade it again.
I think they do crap like that on purpose.

they do because there are little to no performance penalties built into it.
also usually the contractor is a friend of the person doing the bills and handing out the money.

to me this is gross negligence to the point of bribery.

the contractor also does it if a job falls through that was planned to start the next month or something.

so lets say there is a 4 month project to fix a road. in month 5 you have another project but the next one isn't till month 7.

so lets say the month 5 project falls through. that means you have 3 months till the next one.

 

[clownboy]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

Sound like a great opportunity to put Americans to work.

 

[Beaudreaux]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

yep 100% agree. most of the infrastructure is owned by the states but we already tried the spend billions of dollars to fix stuff
and the states spent it on other things that is why the shovel ready jobs never occurred.

The reason shovel ready never happened is because there are laws regarding bidding, contracting, and then technical specifications that take a heck of a lot of time to accomplish - in other words, the proverbial Red Tape. States didn't spend highway money on other things. IF they did, the people that did so would be in federal prison, and the state would have had to reimburse the feds for the amount of money that was not spent correctly - that's according to other laws and regulations that control how federal funds are spent, audited, and accounted for (2 CFR 200 for instance).

also what people fail to understand is that there has to be costing and analysis done.

Agreed, and I alluded to that when referring to USACE.

is it cheaper to repair or just build a new one.

That's probably correct in many instances.

usually the cost to repair is higher at times given all the new codes that have to be put in place.

Exactly, as in earthquake resistance codes, hurricane/tidal surge codes, flood plain resistance codes that have been implemented over the last 50 years (some of which were just updated this year).

then you have to deal with major traffic issues and delays.

That's the only part that the average citizen even has a clue about, because it's in their face every day, and costs the government and the citizens through lost productive time.

the budgets on these things swell easily as very few times they are performance driven as they should be.

Agreed.

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

I agree that we should fix our bridges and other infrastructure but I also recognize that there isn't much money available since the government is already spending well beyond their means. My suggestion is to dump government spending that is less important than bridge repair to free up the money.

According to the OP, we need 10-12 billion annually to do the job so I suggest we dump Michelle's 14 billion encroachment into State's rights known as her school lunch mandates. That should take care of the problem, don't you think?

 

[d0gbreath]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

Don't forget the dams. I'm sitting in the disaster plane of the dam the inspectors call "Trouble". Lake Lewisville earthen dam built back in the 1950's.

A catastrophic failure would bring a death toll of 431,001 people. A bridge couldn't possibly have that many casualties. Of course if you're on the bridge.....

 

[radcen]

There are about 600K bridges in the US, and about ten percent are structurally deficient. We currently spend around $10-12 billion annually on bridge maintenance. To fix the ones with serious problems, we'd need to spend something like eight billion more. Should we tell Congress to find the money?

I'm not one to advocate "busy work" by the government, but I DO support upgrading and maintaining our infrastructure. It's our lifeline, and the work would be real with a real benefit. I would favor taking some money from "entitlement" programs and funding more infrastructure projects. This, I believe would kill two birds with one stone, so to speak. We have a lot of bridges and roads and municipal utilities that honestly need maintenance and/or outright replacement. We could be doing this for years to come, provide legit jobs and reduce (direct) government dependency.

 

[radcen]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

It's the responsibility of the local and state governments to pay to repair bridges on local streets or state roads. The federal government only pays to repair bridges on USDOT FHwA Federal-aid Highways System.

Yes and no. The feds also hand out grants to localities for stuff, too, regardless what their official status is supposed to be. We have several traffic lights in my city that were funded by "free money" via federal grants.

I actually had this conversation with a city planner one day while I was in for something else. He started talking about a new light. I complained about the cost and questioned that the light was actually necessary. He literally used the term "free money" and told me of the grant. I countered with it's still my tax money regardless whether it comes from local property tax or the feds. He hemmed and hawed, and agreed, then said if we didn't take it somebody else would... which is true, but we really need to stop with that mindset.

 

[Cardinal]

Re: Should America pay to fix its bridges?[

There are about 600K bridges in the US, and about ten percent are structurally deficient. We currently spend around $10-12 billion annually on bridge maintenance. To fix the ones with serious problems, we'd need to spend something like eight billion more. Should we tell Congress to find the money?

As opposed to, what, making Mexico pay for them?

Edit: whoops, sdet beat me to it, and only on the second post. I guess that was low hanging fruit.