« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

On Infrastructure Investment

The Numbers Show Uncle Sam is Spending More Than Ever

Democrats argue that their stimulus proposal must include a massive infrastructure component not only because it will help the economy (which it won’t), but also because the government has been chronically underinvesting in infrastructure in recent decades.

The Congressional Budget Office puts the lie to that claim. This chart is of all public capital spending on infrastructure, from 1956 to 2006:

overallspending

It’s obvious that both the federal share and state and local share are increasing at a healthy rate (just like most other government spending).

This shows all public spending for infrastructure capital, as well as operation and maintenance:

moreonspending

The picture is the same. Spending on both functions has consistently increased.

This last graph shows only federal spending:

federalspendingonly

No matter how you look at it, there’s been no significant dropoff in infrastructure spending. Government at all levels is spending more on infrastructure — roads, bridges, transit, water, etc. — than at any time in the post-war era. And that includes the period when we created the National Highway System.

Democrats may want to spend more — they always do. But they can’t argue that there’s been a drop in spending.

These slides are from a CBO powerpoint presentation given in September, 2008.

COMMENTS

  • 6eorge Jetson

    The more you have to operate/maintain,
    the higher your operations/maintainence cost will be.

    Great, another trillion (remember Obama’s stated $450 billion number comes w/ an expiration date) of stuff that hasn’t yet been willingly funded that we the taxpayers will have to support for the rest of our lives.

  • david farrar

    The infrastructure investment of the Obama’s stimulus proposal has nothing to do with repairing the national infrastructure, which isn’t broken to begin with, as you point out, but all about giving states and local governments taxpayers’ money to keep their unionized state employees inflated salaries and benefits packages funded.

    Heck! I thought everybody knew that.

  • http://blog.wayofthebit.com AskMeLater

    Our dollar has lost much of its value over the years. For instance a dollar in 1981 is equal to about $2.34 in 2008.

    Not saying that we don’t waste money on these projects or that the American taxpayer should pay for all these new projects. Just saying the value of our dollar has decreased, thus you would expect expenditures to increase. Just as they have for all Americans.

    • Brian Faughnan

      All 3 of the graphs show spending as counted in constant (2006) dollars. Thus they are already adjusted for inflation.

      • http://blog.wayofthebit.com AskMeLater

        Sorry about that. Says so right there above the graphs.

  • johnt

    From time immemorial statist gangsters have had love affairs with with public building and construction. To leech wealth off the private or governed sector and waste it on the ostentatious projects pf the ruling class has been a fixation and steady constant for more than 3.000 years. Bad enough our little Chicago hustler is going back to FDR’s idiotic concepts of economics, but does this “progressive” have to take us back to the Sumerians and their ziggurats ?

    Underlying this massive rip off is the delusion of grandeur that accrues to the Leader, a monument to his own vision and magnificence, just ask Senator Byrd. Or where he around, Hammurabi. And down through the centuries the dopes fall for it.

  • http://com-con.us/ C. E. van Avery

    While the data is adjusted for inflation, it does not appear to be adjusted for population growth. More people and businesses mean more infrastructure. Given the U.S. population went from about 170mil in 1956 to 300mil today, one would expect infrastructure spending to increase about twofold. Consumer habits have also changed significantly, with more cars and more miles driven per capita (which shows in the breakdown in the last graph). In short, I have doubts you can conclude much by just looking at inflation-adjusted spending.

    The real problem in discussion of infrastructure spending is it appears to be driven by anecdotes and news about bridge failures, power outages, water main breaks, etc….

    • E Pluribus Unum