Transcripts For CSPAN Washington Journal Kevin DeGood And Ma

CSPAN Washington Journal Kevin DeGood And Marc Scribner February 17, 2018

For american progress, and Marc Scribner, a senior fellow at the competitive enterprise institute. They are here to discuss President Trumps newly released infrastructure plan. This is still infrastructure week. Thank you both for joining us. Guest thank you for having us. Host the president says he can create 1. 5 trillion in infrastructure by using just 200 billion in federal money. I want to get an idea about how that can happen, and i will start with you. Guest it is unrealistic, to say the least, that you will get 1. 5 trillion infrastructure activity based on this plan. It is important to look at the plan in the context of his fy 2019 budget. The budget actually cuts more money from federal infrastructure programs than the plan calls for. The existing federal infrastructure programs that have cuts, he wants to cut 280 billion. If we put that next to the plan, and dollar . 40 for every one dollar proposed expenditure, that would create a loss of construction jobs and a reduction in total construction. Ast i want to give marc chance to respond about this idea of creating infrastructure growth on the local level with federal money. Can that work . Guest as kevin pointed out, the 1. 5 trillion figure is a very rosy projection. That is how the white house arrives at that figure, are some very optimistic assumptions about how federal Credit Assistance programs will be used and also in the context of if there is a theme and the president s plan, it is increasing state, local, and private sector involvement in these projects. He does a number of things to try to do that. One is an incentive grant where the national the maximum shares 20 versus 80 . He also lists restrictions on states lifts restrictions on things they cannot do now. More state, local, and private, less federal. Why if the impetus will be mostly on state and local governments to do this, why arent they doing it now . Guest they are doing it now. I think the majority of Infrastructure Spending in this country is at the state and local level. Just surface travel and water, 75 . A little more is state and local and that is under the status quo. This would increase that slightly, but fundamentally it is not a major shift in how we deliver infrastructure in this country right now. The state and local are still the most important. They own this infrastructure. As kevin said, if you take this in the context of the budget it means one thing. If you assume that this program goes on top of additional spending, which some of what was telegraphed in from the administration leading up to the announcement suggests they do not think congress will enact any of the cuts they are suggesting. You can view this in two very different ways. Host how realistic is it, given the current state of congress, that an infrastructure plan, even the republicans and democrats both like infrastructure, that an infrastructure plan can pass . Guest it is very difficult to envision a scenario where this president s plan can pass. In addition to the cuts called for in the budget and the structure of the plan, there is an incredibly large deregulatory component. Huge environmental rollbacks are part of this. For on most all democrats in congress, that will be a nonstarter. We do not want to try to tie together dirtier air, water, land, and distraction of communities in the name of Economic Growth and progress. Those do not go together. Air,ed to protect the water, and our communities while we are building things. Congress needs to protect air and water. Host we are joined by kevin degood and Marc Scribner. We are here talking about the president s infrastructure plan that was released this week. Republicans can call 202 7488001. Democrats, 202 7488000. And independents, 202 7488002. I want to talk about private Sector Investment and i want to play a clip of transportation secretary elaine chao talking about how to get private investment in infrastructure and other creative ways to pay for this project. There are tough decisions. We all want better infrastructure, but unfortunately theres not enough money in the world to pay for all the infrastructure, which is why the president s infrastructure emphasizes the private sector. Rugged sector Pension Funds are a tremendous source of capital for funding Public Infrastructure. Disallow states which the private sector from investing in Public Infrastructure, so we hope those restrictions can be removed. And then for those states and localities that want to work with the private sector, it is their decision as to whether they want to use private activity bonds, whether they want to use tolls, whatever. What we are saying in this proposal is that we are looking for creative ways for financing. Way. Is one we are not advocating for them. We are also not endorsing them. It is really up to the local entities that are involved in trying to raise the financing. Host some Democratic Leaders are calling this the trump tolls program. What is your reaction to what the secretary said . Guest i agree with much of what she said. It is important to keep in mind what the administration is imposing is not the imposition of tolls, but allowing states to told there interstate segments their interstate segments. Putting more tools in the toolbox is a good thing. I certainly dont think the Trump White House plan addresses many problems that we have, but on this count i think they are right. Host kevin, what is your reaction . Guest it is important to understand that private Equity Capital is extremely expensive. If we look at how state and local governments finance infrastructure today, they go to Municipal Bond debt. That carries an Interest Rate of 3 to 3. 5 depending on creditworthiness. Ive it Equity Investors look for 10 to 15 annual returns private Equity Investors look for 10 to 15 annual returns. There are some limited circumstances in which it can make sense to choose a Publicprivate Partnership with a certain risk profile. It is a small percentage of the total need. We should recognize the Municipal Bond market is Capital Private capital. When you invest in a new to this municipal fund, that is your private capital. Host we have a lot of callers wanting to wait in. Emma is on our democratic line from stockton, california. Caller good morning. All i wanted to say is that infrastructure is very important. Hurricanes,ds and and america is raggedy right now. Jobs, give to give it to the people that have discussions within their area. You have taxpayer money, so you can afford to pay them, and you have carpenters, electricians, plumbers, whatever you need, every area has what you need to be done. They have somebody that is capable of doing it. They keep on paying playing games and saying, we need this for this and that for that, but nothing goes to where it is actually needed. We the people of america fill the contents of the treasury, so i do not understand. We are being conned. We are being played. People thatyou have can do these jobs. Host i want to give kevin a chance to respond. Guest i think you raise a really important point, and that is we need to make sure to target federal investments weather is the greatest need. One of the most troubling aspects of the plan is it does not have stated goals or Performance Measures to judge applications that would come in from state and local governments. The only real requirement in this plan is that state and local governments bring new revenues to the table. By that standard, the bridge to nowhere in alaska that was ultimately not built would be an acceptable project under the trump lan. Plan. Goalsd clearly defined and we need to use those to send money to the greatest needs, and where the federal dollars will create the biggest bang for the buck. Host you are not in your head. Nodding your head. Guest we are not delivering the money to the projects where it could be best used. The fundamental problem at its core is the nature of the federal program, which is capital grants, some new projects or reconstructing existing projects, not maintenance, which is really where our problems lie. It is not a nationwide problem. These are local problems. Infrastructure quality varies greatly across the country. They can be helped by additional maintenance spending now. These federal programs, including the new ones proposed by the white house do not address these problems. Host you wrote a piece on the cei website that the good, bad, and ugly about the infrastructure plan. The good, it allows states to systems,r own highway it eliminates the capital also it increases funding for the federal Credit Assistance program. Some of the bad you listed 20 billion in new annual Budget Authority for infrastructure, a quarter of the total funding dedicated to rural areas. Thatop that with a core incentive of federal infrastructure funding remain unaddressed. Talk about some of the shortfalls. Guest i think one you mentioned that i pointed out was the outsized Rural Program. Rural infrastructure is tricky, because in a lot of rural areas we have overbuilt infrastructure. We have highways that are outsized for the needs of the communities, which makes it expensive to maintain and operate. In recent years, a number of ed some ofe depav their roads because they decided it was not worths worth the expense of using a paved road that is not used often. Another problem with the road program, unlike much of the rest of the spending, this would start flowing immediately. These are largely block grants to the state. It is unlike the other programs, the this would start flowing immediately, and my fear is we would have even less accountability than now. Host shelby is calling from tallahassee, florida on our independent line. Caller i think the cei has hit upon the nature of this dilemma we have been in for quite a bit of time. Thise looking here now at rural versus urban. We have had the amtrak train issue, and the rails in the northeast corridor where you two gentlemen are thank you so much, cspan, for the Wonderful Program you are giving us on many topics along with this form. The article is very suspect. S is about sis synced florida is first. Here we are with the need of regional rails in this country, where we had in the state, we have lots of rails im sorry, tolls. The government are investing because the federal government has not been a partner for the past number of decades in this country. We need regional rails. We need to improve the northeast corridor rails. We need to get rid of these toll roads in Central Florida, particularly. You are spending 30 and 40, two dollars to go one way, 2. 50 to go the way back. What workingclass people can do that question mark we have 20 billion that senator nelson has brought forward after a tenyear lobby to create the i4 corridor. What happens . Rick scott comes in and decides not to do that after years. This is a man who had not lived connectione, had no to the state, versus the lobby and the people who needed that service. It would modernize florida. Central florida, central south florida, which is where our urban center is host i want to give our guests a chance to address the issue of railways and infrastructure. Guest i think the caller raises a great point, that the needs vary greatly by state. Within a state, the needs can vary greatly. I may have a different take on tolling, but i do believe that we need a federal program to actually, if it is going to exist, to be a partner with states and locals. That means giving states and locals to make the best decisions and not incentivizing them to make the wrong decisions, which i think that is what much of the federal program does now. It may serve politicians in states, but does not serve the taxpayers and the users of the infrastructure that is getting built and mismanaged. Host on the issue of railroads, or have been some recent accidents. The president himself tweeting after at least one of them, saying this is why we need infrastructure. Is there specifically a railway problem in this country . Guest there is. There are two problems. One is broadly a safety question and the other is investment. Following a couple of highprofile derailments and accidents, Congress Passed a safety standard about positive train control. It is a Communications Technology that allows the monitoring of trains to understand the potential for a collision, or if a train is speeding in an area they need to go slower. Congress extend the deadline of that safety technology. It is time for us to get serious about holding railroads accountable. That includes amtrak putting more money on the table so that it can get implemented. I think that will lead to an increase in the safety of our railway system. Host linda is on the democratic line from florida. Caller good morning. How are you . Host you are on, go ahead. Caller i also am from Central Florida. I do not like this plan. Is eating away at all of us in Central Florida. We can no longer afford to ride the highway. Interstate and fromgh way to move people one place to another, and when you cannot afford it, it is insane. You cannot afford to go to work. The caller before me was very relevant. We have tracks that are no longer used that could be used, yet no one does anything. We used to have away from Central Florida to jacksonville to tallahassee, where students could ride that. That has been disbanded because of a hurricane, i think it was katrina. Freight still rolls over it. There are no answers. Pick, these tolls, pick, pick on poor people. Host i want to give marc a chance. Guest i do not think every road should be tolled, but there are good reasons why you would want to do tolling over say, a gas tax increase. One, the gas taxes even more regressive and tolling, and another is, we do not have much time left for the gas tax. I mean in the infrastructure sense, so maybe 15, 20 years before ac just before we see a highly electrified vehicle that makes relying on gas much less tenable. Tolling i think has its major damages in that you are charging users directly for their use. You can also do things like congestion pricing, which is the only effective way we know how to deal with urban congestion. If you just build more roads, the congestion will come back and you will be spending more to pay for it. Host i want to get to some points you made in the piece you wrote on the infrastructure plan. You pointed out six things to watch for on what you call the infrastructure scam. That cuts at least one dollar 69 cents for every one dollar proposed an expenditure on infrastructure funding infrastructure. Slash funding for vital family plans. Allows Product Developers to side stec start step and deepens regional inequality and Political Divisions. Sort of a breakdown. Guest the reliance on state and local revenue in particular is where that question of exacerbating economic inequality and Political Division comes from. The Trump Administration has pointed to a number of local issues as being the value they want to try to push. Increasegeles, a sales that voters approved by two thirds. While that is a great accomplishment for that region, we have to recognize that los angeles is sort of unique in its. Conomic dynamism Los Angeles County has an annual gdp of more than 700 billion. That is not representative of many communities in this nation. When we talk about pushing the burden for Infrastructure Investment further on to states and localities, we are saying some places will be able to handle the burden and others will be left behind. One of the benefits to having a robust federal expenditure as you can make sure that money goes to every part of the nation. You should not leave it up to locals because there will be places that cannot do it. Host you also hit on the deregulation angle. Guest we go through an Environmental Review process and before we dig shovels in the ground, we want to understand the potential negative impacts that project could have on wetlands and wildlife or local neighborhoods. What the Trump Administration is doing is trying to tear the guts out of that Environmental Review process. We are worried that will create longterm harms we have to pay for down the road. Host is that a concern you share . Guest we disagree on the environmental streamlining reforms the white house is calling for, but i think there is a problem. Some proponents of these measures have made it out to be that these are suddenly going to fix permit streamlining as soon as this were to go through congress. What we have seen in the past, environmental permit took years to promulgate the regulations to implement these permitting reforms, so it is not instantaneous. It will take a lot of work, many years at these departments to implement the law. Guest it is important to point out that congress has voted three times in the last six years to ease environmental requirements. Roughly half of the rulemaking is associated with those three pieces of legislation has yet to be implemented. There is a great deal of authority from this president that has not been tapped into. Host david is calling from waynesboro, georgia on our independent line. Caller good morning. , i hope you do well. Marc, quit lobbying for the private folks. I have 40 years as a Service Transportation worker. I have seen this, and go. Is talking about raiding Pension Funds. That is why we have laws and they are trying to change them. As far

© 2025 Vimarsana