Is Huckabee's highway plan the nuttiest thing to come out of this presidential election?
I don't want to speak too authoritatively, because I certainly haven't tried to catalogue every nutty thing everyone has said. But it certainly seems like a good candidate. I say that as the daughter of an avid transportation infrastructure advocate--indeed, my dad just co-authored a report on transportation finance for the next 50 years, which I hope he'll be joining me for a podcast on next week. Transportation spending takes years, even decades, to complete, which makes it less than ideal for stimulus spending. In a phone chat a few hours ago, my father estimated that in a best case scenario, if you jammed through a law mandating the widening of I-95 from Florida to Maine today, it would clear the EIS process and be ready to break ground about 20 years from now. And the idea that adding two lanes to I-95 would lower America's energy usage is, to put it mildly, unsupported by any sort of credible evidence.
As Dad points out, if you want to use government works projects for fiscal stimulus, the only way to do it is to initiate a large number of small-scale projects like playground reconstruction in low-income communities, which fly below the EIS ceiling, and which you could therefore require be initiated in 90 days from successful bid.
In a phone chat a few hours ago, my father estimated that in a best case scenario, if you jammed through a law mandating the widening of I-95 from Florida to Maine today, it would clear the EIS process and be ready to break ground about 20 years from now.
The same, incidentally, is true of rail. The history page is instructive. The project has been going on since 1992, though I suppose you can date approval to start the EIS back to 1998. Twelve years of EIS to identify that, yes, the rail is going to run along existing right-of-way, some of which is currently abandoned. "2010 The Final Tier II EIS and Record of Decision are expected to be completed by the end of the year. Right-of-way and permit acquisition can then begin."
And the estimates for extending the Metro Orange Line along I-66 and creating a new station where there's already park-and-ride lot? Disturbingly long as well.
First of all, you meant the daftest thing, I presume.
But keep in mind, Congress made the EIS process, and Congress can unmake it. So, if you gave the job to KBR on a no-bid basis, you could break ground in a week or two.
How can you advocate poisoning the environment (and poor people, too) in order to make I-95 into 500 lanes! I guess you plan to take away food stamps from starving children to pay for it all, aren't you?
Wait, something just occurred to me: why doesn't Huckabee announce his support for the NAFTA superhighway? Or is he still trying to pick up Paul's endorsement?
Wait, something just occurred to me: why doesn't Huckabee announce his support for the NAFTA superhighway?
Because he wants to win Texas? The (R) base here in Texas is Up In Arms about the NAFTA highway.....
What's nutty about that? He clearly said this is a long term idea. And he's right, why waste capital on people buying more useless consumer products from China? Our infrastructure is falling apart and the 110 billion dollars would be better spent on infrastructure or education. What good is short term stimulus? When it ends, won't we have to stimulate again?
Because he wants to win Texas? The (R) base here in Texas is Up In Arms about the NAFTA highway.....
I don't know what the NAFTA superhighway is, but I'm guessing you're referring to the Trans-Texas Corridor. It might not be quite accurate to say that the "Republican base" in Texas is agitated about the TTC, since it's supported by Texas governor Rick Perry (R) and a fair number of what I'd guess you might call "economic conservatives." But if you're talking about the portion of the Republican base that has strong nationalist tendencies, then I guess you're right about them being strongly opposed to the TTC.
Building more toll roads is okay with me so long as no portion of public funds is used for construction. Double taxation really pisses me off.
But what Huckabee has not thought out is how does he prevent these people from spending their paychecks on cheap stuff from China? A-ha! Gotcha Mike!
I'm waiting for a Congressman to argue that earmarks are a form of economic stimulus...
Winning Iowa by pandering to evangelicals: $57.98 per vote
Proposed stimulus package: $150 billion.
Look on Romney's and McCain's faces when you give, on an apparently unrelated question, a bizarre out-of-nowhere policy that reveals a sharp disconnect with reality: priceless.
[don't actually know what he spent in the caucuses, that's the figure for the straw poll]
I love that the first couple of youtube comments are so supportive. Caplan's NPR podcast from a few days ago comes to mind.
Building more toll roads is okay with me so long as no portion of public funds is used for construction. Double taxation really pisses me off.
Um, I'm not sure I understand. Are you suggesting that a road paid for part by toll and part by public funds is double taxation inherently, in a way that it wouldn't be if it were paid by either alone? Surely there's a difference between tolls, which are a regular expense that pay for upkeep and keep congestion down, and initial construction, which is a capital expenditure. Even so, would you be opposed to a road whose maintenance is paid for partly with tolls and partly from public funds? If, for example, it were impossible for the road to cover the maintenance costs from tolls alone, why would it be such a bad option to get some money from tolls and some from more general highway funds?
How about 150 $1B prises. $1B prize for solar energy at $0.10/watt installed in Ohio. $1B prize for a practical 30mpg SUV. Things like that. Besides the end result being profitable, there is an immediate payoff.
Try to make the goals broad enough so you aren't choosing the winner. Don't say solar cells with a particular efficiency, say solar energy so solar thermal, bio-energy (which is solar) and wind (also solar) can compete.
20 years to break ground? And I thought New Zealand's Resource Mangement Act was bad.
The first thing that struck me about this proposal is that it seemed eerily similar to one of the ideas advocated by Roderick Spode (leader of the Blackshorts) in the Jeeves and Wooster novels.
He adovcated ripping up all the railway lines in England and substantially widening the rail gague. His argument was that the cost would be offset by being able to store sheep lengthways across the rail carriages.
Make of that comparison what you will ...
Are you suggesting that a road paid for part by toll and part by public funds is double taxation inherently, in a way that it wouldn't be if it were paid by either alone?
Technically speaking, a toll isn't a tax, but rather a form of usage fee, so a toll road built with public and private funds doesn't technically tax me twice. So, maybe complaining about double taxation wasn't the right turn of phrase on my part.
Let me put it this way: I don't like paying for things twice. If public tax funds are used to construct (and maintain) a toll road, or transform a public highway into a toll road, I would be opposed to that. My tax dollars already funded the road and pay for its continued maintenance; why should I have to pay for the privilege of using it?
If, for example, it were impossible for the road to cover the maintenance costs from tolls alone, why would it be such a bad option to get some money from tolls and some from more general highway funds?
It's not a bad option if the goal is simply to build and maintain roads. What really twists my panties is the idea of public funds being used to finance a capital project which is then handed over to private ownership. Them roads is public infrastructure, paid by the public, for the public.
Here's a neat Slate article by Daniel Gross covering some of the same ground: http://www.slate.com/id/2138950/
Aren't economic stimulus packages inherently socialistic? So if President Bush, the democrats in Congress and Mike Huckabee are all for something, what does that tell us? Exactly!
http://www.realmikehuckabee.blogspot.com
Is there a ceiling these days? I thought we were practically at the level where an EIS was going to be required for putting in a new roll of toilet paper any day now.
Nutty indeed. I thought the same thing after hearing his proposal -- and wrote about it on my own blog, http://www.agkyra.com/?p=188. What's worrisome to me is that HUckabee doesn't seem to understand the first thing about economics.
Building a big highway to simulate the economy? What is this? 1950?
Building a big highway to simulate the economy? What is this? 1950?