Today, the US Senate
approved “The Bipartisan Infrastructure Act,” commonly referred to as the
Infrastructure Bill. Early reporting
indicates that it will allow the federal government to spend approximately $1 trillion dollars on “infrastructure” projects provided for in the bill. CNN.com
put the figure at $1.2 trillion.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/10/politics/bipartisan-plan-infrastructure-vote-congress/index.html
NPR.org
provided a short list of the spending approved in the bill:
Transportation
·
Roads, bridges, major
projects: $110 billion
·
Passenger and freight
rail: $66 billion
·
Public transit: $39
billion
·
Airports: $25 billion
·
Port infrastructure:
$17 billion
·
Transportation safety
programs: $11 billion
·
Electric vehicles:
$7.5 billion
·
Zero and low-emission
buses and ferries: $7.5 billion
·
Revitalization of
communities: $1 billion
Other infrastructure
·
Broadband: $65 billion
·
Power infrastructure:
$73 billion
·
Clean drinking water:
$55 billion
·
Resilience and Western
water storage: $50 billion
·
Removal of pollution
from water and soil: $21 billion
https://www.npr.org/1009923468
Please note that the
list only accounts for about $548 billion. The npr.org article goes on to
inform us of how the Senate thinks the Infrastructure Bill will be paid for:
How would they pay for it?
The package would be financed through a combination of funds,
including repurposing unspent emergency relief funds from the COVID-19 pandemic
and strengthening tax enforcement for cryptocurrencies. While negotiators said
that the cost of the plan would be offset entirely, the Congressional
Budget Office predicted it would add about $256 billion to projected deficits over
10 years.
The White House gives
us a similar picture of how the bill would be funded:
Offsets
In the
years ahead, the deal will generate significant economic benefits. It is
financed through a combination of redirecting unspent emergency relief funds,
targeted corporate user fees, strengthening tax enforcement when it comes to
crypto currencies, and other bipartisan measures, in addition to the revenue
generated from higher economic growth as a result of the investments.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/07/28/fact-sheet-historic-bipartisan-infrastructure-deal/
The
Infrastructure Bill is not law yet. Now, it must go back to the House of
Representatives. The more radical Democratic members of the House may oppose it because
they think it does not provide for enough spending. Unbelievable!
I
respectfully submit that the US Government would need a revenue surplus of $120
billion a year for 10 years to pay off the principal only on the $1.2
trillion in spending provided for in this bill.
Can
you remember the last time the US Government had a revenue surplus? Was it
applied to the national debt, or was it given back to the taxpayers as a tax
refund to buy votes? Look it up.
Can
a reasonable person look at the plans provided to pay for the Infrastructure
Bill with any degree of certainty that they will work? Do you think the government will stop
spending and garner a revenue surplus? Look at what they are planning next for
your answer. They want to spend $3.5 trillion more! That is the spending they want for the
so-called Budget Reconciliation Act.
The
Democrats needed 10 Republicans to vote with them on this bill. Sadly, 19
Republicans voted for it. They are:
Roy Blunt, R-Mo.
Richard Burr, R-N.C.
Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.
Bill Cassidy, R-La.
Susan Collins, R-Maine
Kevin Cramer, R-N.D.
Mike Crapo, R-Idaho
Deb Fischer, R-Neb.
Lindsey Graham, R-S.C.
Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa
John Hoeven, R-N.D.
Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.
Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska
Rob Portman, R-Ohio
James E. Risch, R-Idaho
Mitt Romney, R-Utah
Dan Sullivan, R-Alaska
Thom Tillis, R-N.C.
Roger F. Wicker, R-Miss.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/08/10/infrastructure-bill-vote-count-19-republicans-voted-for-bill/5550287001/
To be fair, these Republicans may
have felt that they could limit the spending provided for by “reaching across the
aisle.” Perhaps they got greater influence over what the money is to be spent
on. Further, I have often asked that our elected officials learn to work
together. There may be other reasons for “bipartisanship.” They are beyond the scope of this post. The
point is … spending is not an issue that may be negotiated.
CONCLUSION:
It is our position
that the government’s excessive spending poses a threat to the very existence of
the United States of America as we know it. Our Senators and Representatives just do not seem to get it. We the People must let our elected representatives,
Democrat and Republican, know that we are opposed to deficit spending of any kind,
and that we will show our displeasure in the 2022 and 2024 elections.