6 months in, Biden's infrastructure plan has 4,300 projects

[In It to Win It]

AP via Yahoo News

WASHINGTON (AP) — Six months after the signing of President Joe Biden's $1 trillion infrastructure package, the government said Monday there are 4,300 projects underway with more than $110 billion in funding announced — milestones the administration is publicly heralding as midterm politics intensify.

White House senior adviser Mitch Landrieu, the former mayor of New Orleans, said the roads, bridges and other projects are laying “a foundation for tremendous growth into the future.” Landrieu said Biden and members of his administration have made more than 125 trips to highlight the bipartisan investments in infrastructure. He declined to predict how much the storytelling will resonate with voters as construction starts.

“I think that if Americans step back, we will all have to admit that for the last 50 years we’ve had the need to do this and we haven’t found the will or the way to get it done,” Landrieu told reporters. He added that this is a “wonderful down payment” on infrastructure needs in the country that total roughly $7 trillion.

[babylonsister]

1. Dems need to shout this from the rooftops; first

I've read that so much is happening.

[dlk]

2. If only our mainstream media actually had a liberal bias

They might do a better job informing the American people.

[rogue emissary]

19. +1000

[nuxvomica]

3. Is there a way to see which projects are in my district?

It would be helpful to have a detailed listing of investments by congressional district. I want to be able to identify which projects Stefanik will take credit for after voting against the bill.

[BumRushDaShow]

4. Here is a summary of what is in that law

https://www.whitehouse.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/

Here is the "Guidebook" (PDF) - https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/BUILDING-A-BETTER-AMERICA-V2.pdf

Here is the Infrastructure law itself (PDF) with funding allocations - https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr3684/BILLS-117hr3684enr.pdf

Here's the FY22 appropriations that includes some of the funding for the above - https://www.govinfo.gov/link/bills/117/hr/2471?billversion=mostrecent&link-type=pdf

And I swear I saw some document somewhere that had actual "projects" already designated for each state and I remember chuckling "pork!" Am trying to find that again.

Much of the rest hasn't been explicitly designated yet as it will need to be "planned", where the funding would go to the states to dole out as needed (and you know how THAT goes ).

[nuxvomica]

8. Thank you very much!

This is a good starting point. Yes, the "pork" list would be ideal as that is how Stefanik keeps getting re-elected. People complain about her but qualify it with things like, "But we should be grateful for all the funding she got for the hospital" when she probably originally voted against the funding and called those that voted for it "communists." This is the fix we are when it's hard to connect the dots and Repubs can crow about funding they voted against.

[BumRushDaShow]

11. I remember seeing a "list"

and was thinking maybe it was associated with the "America Rescue Plan" -

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1319/text

(and/or something that was designated in the final appropriations for FY22) -

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/2471/text

(which would designate the funding for this FY that relates to that Infrastructure bill)

And agree that the very hypocrites who loudly objected to this are always the first ones to go back home to tout that they "brought the bacon home" while "owning the libs".

[Johnny2X2X]

5. Dems blew the entire 2021 year when they should have been bragging

2021 was the best year for GDP growth since the early 80s, best year for jobs growth in US history, and the best year for wage growth in decades. But Dems let the whole year go by without bragging because all they wanted to talk about too was inflation. Inflation is only part of the picture.

And now they'll let this massive success go without touting it.

I get it, inflation is a big deal and it effects the whole country, but it's not the whole story. It's not everything. Jobs and growth still matter, wage growth still matters. And now we're forcing a recession to lower inflation, mostly by lowering wages and cutting jobs, Dems are cruising for a blowout in the Fall and they never even talked about the many successes of the Biden adminstration.

[jaxexpat]

7. Democrats operate at a disadvantage.

They don't have a 24-7 "news" channel pushing their message and demonizing their opponents.

[Johnny2X2X]

10. Agree, but messaging has been awful

But they rarely even touted their record on GDP and jobs growth themselves. Dems also chose to only talk about inflation.

Hell, almost every day I have to remind posters here, on DU, that wage growth has almost kept up with inflation overall, and for the lowest wage workers, wage growth has exceeded inflation. Our own Democratic posters on a Democratic website don't even know the great numbers Dems should be boasting about. That's a failure in messaging.

[jaxexpat]

12. There's another angle to the infrastructure improvements.

Actual construction usually follows funding approval by several months. Many of the necessary projects weren't even to the engineering phase. I once had a road project that didn't get started until the sponsoring legislator was out on parole. That's why so often the opposing party takes credit for their predecessor's efforts. As well as receive blame for things his opponent actually caused.

[JI7]

21. It's not just that though. Too many focus on what hasn't been done

to the point it sounds like they are saying nothing has happened.

[moose65]

18. Yeah, but this is so detailed and comprehensive

Most average voters would think this stuff is "boring."

And they don't make the connection between the bill and the actual construction. Some people just seem to think that construction like this just "happens."

Democrats need to hammer it home. And calling it the "Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill" doesn't help, either. Dems need to shame Republicans who voted against it and then go out to ribbon-cuttings or other events celebrating it.

[Wounded Bear]

6. I hope there are signs up that say: Build Back Better Infrastructure Dollars At Work...

or something such.

[Ron Green]

9. No new roads, please.

I fear massive amounts of infrastructure money will be funneled into building roads, adding lanes and highway interchanges. This is what state DOTs do when funding becomes available; it’s in their DNA and it’s all they know.

[patphil]

14. Without knowing exactly how it will be spent, I would think maintenance would get most of it.

We have crumbling infrastructure all over the country, suffering from decades of neglect.

[Ron Green]

16. Yes; and much of it ought to be closed and abandoned,

or spaces for cars be reclaimed for spaces for people.

[patphil]

17. Transportation is vital to the national economy.

I don't see how it can be abandoned. What is your alternative?

[Ron Green]

20. Start shrinking the economy in a way to eventually establish

a steady-state economy, one that allows the earth’s resources to be replenished at least as fast as they are being consumed by humans.

An economy that does not depend on limitless growth on a finite planet.

Many, many roads in this country should never have been built. Now, we ought to have the wisdom to let them go.

[patphil]

22. I agree with the steady state economy idea.

But I don't see it shrinking, unless the population shrinks.
People aren't going to voluntarily reduce their lifestyle enough to do what you want without some sort of external event that forces it.
The Covid pandemic did result is a lot more people working from home. That, plus the shutdown of businesses to reduce the rate of infection, did bring down the amount of traffic and result in blue skies.
But as soon as that threat was reduced, the use of transportation went back up again.
It's deeply embedded in our way of life. The railroads and highways aren't going to go away as long as there are people to use them, and goods to be moved on them.
We are a very mobile people.

[Ron Green]

24. Of course, I understand that we are a very mobile people.

That mobility is not sustainable if we intend to inhabit an earth that will support us.

The alarming thing is that people my age saw a time in which the general understanding was that humans could continue to grow and consume at their previous rate, and now live in a time when we know this not to be true.

[David__77]

26. No thanks. People will reject anti-growth politics.

More and higher quality economic development is absolutely a good thing.

Zero growth ideology is anti-human.

[Ron Green]

27. That you as a Democrat believe that more economic development

is a good thing, in the face of much evidence that GDP is directly tied to environmental degradation, is saddening; but to equate “humanity” with what humans have done to life on this planet is excruciating.

[patphil]

13. All those projects, and all that money spent and to be spent equals a huge number of jobs.

And infrastructure is always a great way to spend money. It gives back again and again and again.

[iluvtennis]

15. Cool - excellent news! n/t

[UTUSN]

23. K&R

[Vinca]

25. Wish Democrats wouldn't keep these things a secret.

[betsuni]

28. K&R