Every May brings National Infrastructure Week, which serves to raise awareness of the infrastructure policy challenges that the U.S. faces. The official infrastructure week, put together by a variety of business interests and advocacy groups, unfortunately has been competing with the many “infrastructure weeks” that have been announced by lawmakers in Washington. Many of the proposed solutions to America’s infrastructure challenges involve dumping taxpayer money into pork projects or “infrastructure banks,” but there are some concrete policies that could be enacted that would both address these challenges and protect taxpayers’ pockets.
Public officials on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue have proclaimed more than a few times over the past year, “this is the week we focus on rebuilding our nation’s (fill in the blank).” Those words, or something like them, have been uttered in abundance with very few deeds to match. Fortunately, there are plenty of good ideas that can be adapted for this year’s remaining legislative process. Here are just a few examples.
- H.R. 5310, the Municipal Infrastructure Savings and Transparency Act. Sponsored by Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX), this bill provides “maximum flexibility’ to state and local engineers in considering what materials to use for projects that receive partial federal funding from the Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Highway Administration, or the Department of Agriculture. As the legislation states, the goal is to encourage “free and open competition among suppliers of construction materials” on a given contract, provided the suppliers can fulfill the contract’s requirements. Currently, some states’ and localities’ contracting laws or regulations lock in governments to considering a limited range of project materials, driving up costs for taxpayers.
More than five years ago, an NTU study determined that open competition in water and sewer system replacement and new capacity could yield as much as $381 billion in life-cycle cost savings over the next several decades. Even more may be at stake today: a Utah State University analysis released just last month concluded between 2012 and 2018, water-main breaks in the U.S. and Canada rose 27%, driven in part by older iron pipes that many contracting procedures still unfairly favor. Bonner Cohen, a colleague of NTU’s wrote this week, “Because water-main failures tend to increase exponentially over time, utilities’ corrosion-driven crisis threatens more and more communities.” - HR 960/S 326, the Public Buildings Renewal Act (PBRA). Led by Rep. Mike Kelly (R-PA), Senator Dean Heller (R-NV), and an impressively broad swath of bipartisan cosponsors, this bill is key to restoring fiscal responsibility to state and local government building projects such as schools, fire stations, and public libraries. PBRA smartly and carefully expands the availability of Private Activity Bonds to help underwrite more Public-Private Partnerships for these facilities, which have been proven to save as much as 25 percent over the life-cycle project cost.
For several years now, fiscal conservatives have recognized the value that PBRA could have in finally helping to tame the scandalously over-budget, behind-schedule construction schemes in which governments too often become mired. Last year a coalition of nearly a dozen free-market groups led by NTU endorsed PBRA, noting that it “has the advantage of transferring the risk of excessive costs or delays from taxpayers to the consortium and its investors” and that “the pressure on state and local property taxes, and on behalf of ill-advised federal assistance schemes for local construction, would be diminished.”
- HR 2714, the Revamping American Infrastructure Act. Authored by Rep. Mark Meadows (R-NC), this legislation would create a process at the Department of Transportation to identify more opportunities for converting “prescriptive” federal dictates into outcome-based rules. Already in place and working well for truck safety, this approach, which incentivizes innovation for meeting regulatory benefits while controlling costs, should be expanded for freight rail and other forms of infrastructure. As I wrote in 2017, “this is precisely the kind of nimble approach to regulation that serves everyone better.”
- Lest we forget that infrastructure is also the means by which data travels, Congress can continue streamlining telecommunications regulatory processes. Whatever its faults, the March 2018 Omnibus spending package did helpfully contain a version of the MOBILE NOW Act, which will clear away unnecessary government impediments to the development of 5G wireless capacity (not to mention limit predatory tax collections on certain wireless services). This evolving network can benefit taxpayers in a variety of ways, by making government services such as traffic system management and first responder communications more efficient. While many states and localities still must rationalize tax and fee policies toward the “small cell” technology that supports 5G, Washington has work of its own to do in other telecom areas. For example, HR 4795 from Rep. Mimi Walters (R-CA) would make permitting processes for installing communication facilities on federal property less burdensome. The Standard Merger and Acquisition Reviews Through Equal Rules (SMARTER) Act would establish clearer guidelines for the Federal Communications Commission to conduct and complete telecom company mergers. The bill (HR 5645) has passed the House and was introduced in the Senate as S 2847 by Mike Lee (R-UT) earlier this month.
Many more opportunities exist in this Congress to address other priorities, such as energy pipeline permitting reforms that have already passed the House and could be resurrected on the Senate side in some fashion. Passage of the AV START Act (S. 1885) could begin a reconciliation process with a bill the House enacted last year, so as to establish prudent but forward-thinking regulation of autonomous vehicles. Regrettably, one of the most important advances in infrastructure policy – creating a more modernized, user-accountable air traffic control system – will likely have to wait until the next Congress.
At the same time, lawmakers ought to avoid legislative potholes that could trap taxpayers. The House of Representatives wisely decided against recklessly boosting the allowable Passenger Facility Charge in its Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization bill; the Senate should follow this lead. On the other hand, it will be up to the House to put the brakes on a Senate-passed Congressional Review Act resolution that would effectively reimpose 1930s-style regulations on the Internet. Congress can also speak with a more unified voice against tariffs that raise the price of critical infrastructure materials like pipeline steel.
The odds of a massive, sweeping, infrastructure package getting to the President’s desk this year are diminishing with each passing day. At this point, whether taxpayers would benefit from “thinking big” is anyone’s guess. What’s more certain is that in the meantime, incremental progress can be made on smart reforms that stress private-sector innovation, public-sector accountability, and fiscal discipline. Whether offered as stand-alone legislation, amendments, or language embedded in targeted bills, they can all help America reach a more desirable destination for infrastructure policy.