If you hoped President Biden’s infrastructure spending might bring a smoother drive to an area near you, it’s worth reading the latest fine print.
Before funds are disbursed, bureaucrats are attaching strings that make it far more difficult to build new highways.
The restrictions come from a memo last month from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA).
The Transportation Department agency is fielding infrastructure project proposals from states and cities, and it has sway over regulatory approval.
Deputy Administrator Stephanie Pollack advised staff on the types of projects they should give the red light.
According to the memo, proposals should be sent to the bottom of the pile if they “add new general-purpose travel lanes serving single-occupancy vehicles.” She means cars.
That includes the construction of new roads and highways or expansions of existing ones. States and cities that need new capacity will take a back seat to those seeking upgrades.
This guidance is a bait-and-switch on Congressional Republicans who backed the infrastructure deal mainly because it would expand and improve surface transportation.
House Democrats led by Transportation Committee Chairman Peter DeFazio wanted similar limits on new building in the version of the bill they passed, but Senate Republicans kept those limits out of the final draft. Rep. DeFazio staged a public tantrum, but he had to accept it.
Now highway skeptics in the Transportation Department are imposing restrictions like those that failed to pass Congress.
Road construction will also be tied up by environmental reviews. Republicans tried to preempt the red tape by including the One Federal Decision framework in the infrastructure bill.
The policy imposes a 90-day limit on approval for projects reviewed under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).
But the FHWA is doubling down on other green restrictions. Its memo declares that any project requiring a new right of way is ineligible for a fast-tracked NEPA review.
States planning to widen clogged highways using federal funds could face months or years of scrutiny. We warned that the bill’s permitting reforms were insufficient, and here we are.
The restrictions will likely fall hardest on red states. Fast-growing areas in the Sunbelt and Northwest need highway extensions to improve local commuting and commerce.
Take North Dakota, where traffic on the Highway 85 corridor has caused an increase in fatalities.
The state transportation department plans to widen part of the two-lane route with new federal funds, but the new restrictions could jam up the process.
Texas also needs new interstate highway capacity, especially north from Laredo and from the Rio Grande Valley to the Houston area.
Disdain for highways is common among progressive regulators, who see blocking road improvements as a virtue that will assist mass transit and climate-change goals.
Upon her appointment as the interim highway administration leader, Ms. Pollack promised: “an agency that supports people rather than a singular mode of transportation.”
Her boss, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg, has said that traditional highway designs are racist.
States and cities will continue to seek highway expansions, and some may secure funding. But don’t be surprised when federal agencies continue to steer “bipartisan” infrastructure funds toward progressive priorities.
Read more at WSJ
Republicans are perennial dupes. Democrats are perennial grifters, so we should know how to deal with them: say ‘NO’ every time.
How many times did you hear “who can be opposed to upgrading our infrastructure?” Fool republicans voted for the bill based on it’s description not on what it actually does; not to mention it has more strings than a harp orchestra!
I have a feeling that American truckers are going to outdo Canadian truckers. They’ve lost the element of surprise so it’ll have to be eleven times bigger.
I haven’t seen Canadians so fired up since the 1972 Canada – Russia hockey tournament.
Biden on his Jackass riding right off the cliff into the Bottomless Canyon