The project would be directed toward two primary goals. The first is to support establishment of a major "National Infrastructure Bank." This proposal has generated some bi-partisan support in the Senate and from an alliance that includes both Dick Trumpka of the AFL-CIO and the head of the Chamber of Commerce. It's probably as "non-partisan" a proposal as we can find in this divisive age. (See the New York Times article below.) A national infrastructure investment initiative is an important on its own merits, and has the additional virtue of not being difficult to sell as good policy across a broad spectrum of our citizenry.
The second, and equally essential piece, is to build a constituency that can lobby for direct federal aid to state and local governments to support immediate regional infrastructure repair and retro-fitting. (The financing might take the form of some kind of Fed-backed bonds, given that the market for U.S. Treasury instruments is still remarkably advantageous to our country as a lender, despite the bizarre tantrums, cranks and hysterics over our becoming "Greece.")
So two fundamental social and economic needs are combined in the basic proposal: investments in large projects to modernize infrastructure,and immediate investments in maintenance and repair of basic, existing infrastructure. The Bank would support larger projects that are essential to sustaining the US economic base into the 21st Century. The injection of direct aid for repair and retro-fitting at the state and local level deals with critical, short-term needs and can give a quick boost to employment and injecting some cash into a still-staggering economy.
This proposal has the basis for a broad appeal - if only because nearly everyone can see potholes in the streets that haven't been repaired in years, as our communities struggle with a declining revenue base just to maintain the most essential services like police and fire departments.
No doubt much information already exists regarding this kind of needs assessment among local public agencies, but the initiative will expand on this knowledge base and bring discussion of vital infrastructure needs into the sphere of civic discourse and with the urgency of a national campaign directed toward concrete goals.
What the "infrastructure inventory movement" is and how it might work
Component "A" - The National Infrastructure Bank: This piece - the big piece - would be directed toward identifying and planning financing for larger "shovel ready" and medium term projects.
This "big" infrastructure investment inventory would include:
Basic Transportation - roads, highways, bridges, tunnels, rails and mass transit.
"21st Century" Communications & power grids
Green energy Projects
Water systems
Waste disposal
Component "B" - An even more urgent proposal would provide for aid directly to state and local government targeted to immediate infrastructure repairs and retro-fits. This investment would quickly spur new hiring and contracts for smaller-scale repair projects. The proposal would include additional money to be allocated for "Conservation Corps" jobs for youth in the 18-24 year old age range, to assist in local repairs, serve apprenticeships and develop job skills. As Leo Girard, the President of the United Steelworkers has noted, unemployment in this age group is at least 16%. It is imperative that these unemployed youth begin being placed in jobs, rather than languish in a still stagnant economy as part of a "lost generation."
The Organizing Initiative - "Rebuild the Dream": Local grassroots committees could begin the work of research and strategic outreach in their communities around the issue of repairs and improvement of basic infrastructure. (This conversation could also include the issue of local budget crises and cuts that are causing a decline in general services and quality of life.) Start with simple and obvious issues like potholes & needed repairs to local schools; follow with assessments of roads & bridges; the state of public buildings and parks; and include ideas for basic retro-fitting throughout the community for energy conservation. Then move to some assessment of larger projects that aren't "shovel ready" but are needed over the mid-to-long term in order to keep the region economically sustainable. Link the direct benefits of these repairs and projects to the estimated impact on jobs, economic growth and future revenues from a revived economic base.
The Research and Organizing Strategy: Each local initiative, beginning with a rough assessment of areas to explore would involve local government & transportation agency officials; academics, engineers & contractors with appropriate expertise; visit local schools or meet with education officials to assess existing repair and retro-fit needs in the school district; and - if enough organizers could be recruited - canvas neighborhoods to gather information/ideas and to build a base for positive "public opinion." Organizing grass-roots outreach at the block-by-block "friends and neighbors" level would be ideal as a strategy to build credibility and "critical mass." One goal would be to create a local "infrastructure council" bringing together leaders from key sectors of the community, along with volunteer consultants who have expertise. Involve - in organization and in broad community outreach - local faith communities, unions, business associations including the local Chamber of Commerce, students as well as relevant departments & educators in local colleges and universities; city officials and department heads; issue-oriented or political action groups that are open to this discussion. Documention include any existing available agency reports, along with first-hand observations and expert testimony - as well as graphic and photographic evidence to support the proposals.
Coordiinate a Media Outreach and Communications Strategy: Begin media relations and the task of educating journalists early on. Invite journalists to cover initial planning meetings as well as stages of the process, up to and including the national campaign. Provide the media with good information on the project's rationale and goals from the start. Hold some well-publicized, broadly representative public forums on the outlines of the issue as part of the initiative. Certainly a "kick-off" forum would be useful - along with a forum farther along in the process that can focus on some tangible results.
Building on the Inventory Results: Establish some priorities within the collected data, but don't arbitrarily exclude anyone's reasonable concerns. Build layers of data locally, and coordinate regionally and at the state level. Compile the information gathered locally to create a "big picture" policy document (including a credible extrapolation of the "median" or "average" data to the areas that didn't directly participate.) This becomes the basis for a concrete agenda at the national campaign level
Use this collective policy agenda for further organizing, engaging people in "town halls" pressuring congressional representatives, Senators and federal officials. Use every avenue to publicize the campaign - from flyers, petitions, localized websites, blogs, and national campaign resources of Move-On, labor unions, Campaign for America's Future, Rebuild the Dream Coalition, etc. If the Chamber of Commerce can be on board in some fashion, fine. Keep the Infrastructure coalition and the resultant political pressure as broadly based as possible.
This is just the sketch of an idea for rooting a national campaign that can actually engage hundreds of thousands of ordinary citizens in a conversation about the must urgent of our economic issues. The virtue of this proposal - in my view - is that it has multiple components of practical proposals that draw on the experience of a broad citizenry, it develops an agenda that can bridge the concerns of politicians and activists at the local, state and national levels, it is action-oriented and provides a foundation for a broadly AND boldly conceived organizing strategy that goes beyond pre-fabbed rhetoric or political laundry lists.
The proposal combines an immediate and a mid-range agenda. It's easy to understand and doesn't have any "ideological" bias, beyond what could fairly be termed "keeping our communities from falling into further disrepair and - in many cases - desperation." It is "growh-oriented" in that it is a strategy for ensuring a more productive foundation for the US in the global economy. It's predicated on the necessary partnership of the public and private sectors for our economic vitality.
The process also opens up avenues for dialogue on the real nature of the economic crisis, shifting the focus to essential government investment rather than phony deficit hysterics. The underlying agenda is reasonable, "reality-based" and responsible, but - in the current badly-skewed political climate - also rather dramatically "radical" in the best sense of getting to the root of real problems. It offers common solutions that appeal to "common sense."
In terms of ambitions and scale, eight or a dozen local activists could have a significant impact as part of a national movement using this strategy in their community. But it has the potential of involving hundreds, even thousands, of people in any locality in conversations, petition-signing, letter-writing, phone calls, town halls, etc.
There is real potential for creating a ripple effect, as the circle of conversation on local infrastructure needs widens, that doesn't often present itself in the current environment. This is an issue that can cross a lot of the divides we often face in political organizing - the appeal and perceived need addressed is widespread. Unlike the unhinged antics of the "Tea Party", this isn't a protest movement, so much as a vision to move forward in the spirit of unity and basic progress as a nation. It bridges the urgency of a national agenda focused on jobs and the fiscal crises of many state and local governments with our longer-term economic future. It offers a platform that can bring local officials into a dialogue that starts with local needs - rather than just waiting for Washington to come up with an "answer." And the proposals connect the abstract notion of "government spending" with tangible benefits, while opening the door for a wider conversations such as the relationship of tax cuts to the deficits and the failure of "austerity agendas" where they've actually been enacted. It also, politically, offers an opportunity to put the question of responsive and responsible congressional representation on the table in districts that have elected "do nothing" Republicans. But, fundamentally, this is a non-partisan project - although admittedly within the constraints of rationality and faith in our country's future.
Please respond with any suggestions, further ideas, criticisms and commentary.
Additional documents - links:
New York Times - March 15, 2011
Group Wants New Bank to Finance Infrastructure By MICHAEL COOPER
Amid growing concerns that the nation’s infrastructure is deteriorating, a group of Democrats, Republicans, and labor and business leaders called Tuesday for the creation of a national infrastructure bank to help finance the construction of things like roads, bridges, water systems and power grids.
The proposal — sponsored by Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison, Republican of Texas — would establish an independent bank to provide loans and loan guarantees for projects of regional or national significance. The idea is to attract more infrastructure investment from the private sector: by creating an infrastructure bank with $10 billion now, they say, they could spur up to $640 billion worth of infrastructure spending over the next decade.
“We have a choice,” Mr. Kerry said at a news conference in Washington. “We can either build, and compete, and create jobs for our people, or we can fold up, and let everybody else win. I don’t think that’s America. I don’t believe anybody wants to do that.”
To underscore the need for better infrastructure, two frequent rivals were on hand at the news conference: Richard Trumka, the president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., and Thomas J. Donohue, the president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the main business lobby. With a nod to the strange-bedfellows experience of having a labor leader as an ally, Mr. Donohue said, “He and I are going to take our show on the road as the new ‘Odd Couple.’ ”
But the proposal may not have clear sailing. While Senators Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, and Charles E. Schumer of New York, the No. 3 Democrat, will undoubtedly support the measure, Senate officials said the outlook for such a program is dim, given the current fiscal constraints. And Congress, like state governments, has been hesitant to cede control of choosing which projects to finance, even as their spending priorities have often been questioned.
President Obama has called for establishing an infrastructure bank since his 2010 campaign. His budget calls for establishing one — and gives it the catchier name I-Bank — that would work somewhat differently: it would create a $30 billion bank that would invest in transportation projects alone, and that would provide grants as well as loans.
With an expanded reach that includes water and energy projects, the bank being proposed in the Senate would be able to spur investment from more types of private funds, and back projects in a wider swath of the nation, said Michael B. Likosky, the author of “Obama’s Bank: Financing a Durable New Deal.”
Leo Girard, President of United Steelworkers:
Infrastructure Crisis - Coincident with the loss of trade and manufacturing is the decline of our nation’s infrastructure. After years of under-investing in public infrastructure, America faces an infrastructure deficit of $3 trillion that is impeding economic growth and undermining our economy’s efficiency. We need to spend $2.2 trillion over just the next five years to meet America’s core infrastructure needs, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers. But actual spending plans fall far short.
• Create a levered National Infrastructure Bank. The administration and Congress should create a national infrastructure bank that would be an independent financial institution owned by the government. Able to fund a broad range of infrastructure projects beyond roads, rails and runways, it would make loans and loan guarantees and leverage private capital. It should be able to sell or issue general purpose bonds to raise funds for lending and investment, sell specific project bonds when necessary, and invite private investment, along with state and local government pension plan investments.
Green Economy Employment opportunities in the “green economy” can provide some relief, although not as much as some project. According to Booz Allen, green projects will create eight million jobs by 2013; the Global Climate Network puts that number at 20 million world-wide by 2030. Bolstering this segment of our economy will put people to work in manufacturing jobs that have the greatest multiplier effect, and will stimulate more economic growth. Leaders in Washington must do more to encourage growth in this industry.
• Extend the Cash Grant Program for renewable energy production. This program converts non-refundable tax credits for renewable energy production into cash grants. Extending the program until the equity and debt markets recover will help create jobs and avoid further job loss in the industry.
• Lengthen the period of the Advanced Manufacturing Tax Credit. ARRA authorized up to $2.3 billion in tax credits for investments in qualified advanced energy projects at manufacturing facilities, such as energy storage, electricity transmission, energy conservation technologies, and others.
• Expand Title 17 Loan Guarantee Program. Title 17 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 provides federal loan guarantees for the construction of energy-related facilities that use “new or significantly improved technologies” which are “non-commercial” and have high technological risk. These guarantees lower the cost of capital for these projects. Broadening Title 17 to include energy-efficiency investments would help spur this market and create new jobs.
Youth Employment The hardest hit among the unemployed are young people. Almost 25 percent of teenagers from 16 to 19 are officially unemployed. For young adults aged 20 to 24, unemployment is nearly 16 percent – a number not seen since 1948. Many of these disconnected youth are at risk of becoming permanently disengaged from the labor market. Young people who do not have a successful work experience by age 25 are also at greater risk of lifelong poverty.
Ref: http://www.ourfuture.org/blog-entry/2011073027/vision-economic-renewal-american-jobs-agenda
AFL-CIO's Trumka:
Grow America’s Economy by Investing in Infrastructure, Job Development
by James Parks, Mar 22, 2011 - AFL-CIO "NOWBLOG"
U.S. economic and trade policies over the past three decades have led to jobs lost offshore and a shrinking middle class, and the United States must address this economic bleed through trade policies and investment in infrastructure and manufacturing, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka said today.
Speaking this morning to the International Economic Development Council, Trumka said the United States must invest in building the 21st century infrastructure necessary for our future, including high-speed mass transit, smart utilities and universal high-speed broadband. That investment, in turn, would boost manufacturing because we will then buy what we need in America—from concrete, wire, steel and pipes to high-speed trains. And all this will restore revenues for crucial state and local services.
Trumka didn’t mince words when he discussed trade and the need for U.S. trade policies to keep jobs in this country.
Let me put this bluntly: China is cheating, and its currency manipulations have to rebuild our manufacturing base and pointed out that our trading partners—including China, Germany, India, South Korea and Brazil—have manufacturing strategies, but we don’t.
President Obama has proposed more investments in our country and, Trumka warned, those ideas cannot be drowned out by the deficit debate because they can yield great rewards.
The nation’s lack of a national industrial plan hurts all of us, workers and business, every day, Trumka said.
Individually, we’re all but powerless against hungry and powerful countries like China or India, which are willing to build-to-suit for any American corporation.
Separately, our voices get lost in the background noise. But if we join together, we can truly build an economic development movement, a massive tide of investment and research that will raise all of our boats.
The bottom line, said Trumka, is that this nation can remain great if we believe in ourselves and work together—business, economic development community, workers, government and colleges.
We can win today’s industrial race if we marshal our resources. We can build the best wind turbines and develop the new green energy technologies to capture and use solar and thermal energy.
US Chamber of Commercehttp://ncf.uschamber.com/lra_eventseries/
Philadelphia's Green infrastructure agenda:
http://www.theurbn.com/2011/06/a-new-green-infrastructure-agenda-in-philadelphia/
Obama's infrastructure agenda:
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-01-26/roads-bridges-high-speed-rail-top-obama-transportation-agenda.html
Brookings Panel on infrastructure (w PDF transcript):
http://www.brookings.edu/events/2010/0916_infrastructure.aspx
No comments:
Post a Comment