I want a republican voter to tell me his plan for fixing and repairing our decaying infrastructure...please?

Question

Most republicans I have heard talk on this matter seem to always say its the responsibility of the states. Ok. Lets assume that I agree with you on that. How will the states pay for it. Ok. Lets assume you say that the federal government gives the states money for it, but that the states squander it on other things. If that is your view, can you tell me which programs the states should eliminate to help fix the decaying infrastructure? and lets assume you give me a list of 2 3 4 or 5 programs etc that you would eradicate to fix infrastructure a) what will those who benefit currently from those programs do in their absence, and b) what happens to all the money that the federal government collects in taxes if most social spending is the states' responsibility. Does the fed govt get to pretty spend that money at leisure and waste it...while the states pile on tax payers with additional taxes?

Redisca, first of all, let me congratulate you for not being a republican. The assumption is that the federal government colllects already an awful lot of money from tax payers..even with bush tax cuts. The thing is a matter of priorities. Republicans have no quarms about spending the tax payers money at the federal level, but they prefer to spend it on military matters, war making, and entitlements to other countries. Where would the money come from you ask, well...let me point to you the amount of money that we are pissing away in iraq alone as one source for starters.

i read somewhere that in the years between 1950 and 1980 we spend of GDP on infrastructure. Since then we have been spending on average about a third less that....so clearly we are allowing the infrastructure to decay..there is no denying that. IT NEEDS FIXING

between 1950 and 1980 we were spending about 3% of GDP on infrastructure.

hardwood, in my question I said nothing about the bridge in Minnesota, so I dont know why you are asking me that question. My question has to do with the general known fact that we have decaying infrastructure in this country. Open up your mind a bit and stop being so defensive.

Answer 1

okay, I live in CA where the fed takes 18 cents in tax, the state takes 18 cents in tax, the state takes 8% in sales tax, the county takes an additional 1/2% sales tax, per gallon. They have been collecting this tax for years and then diverting this money to other earmark projects. Why should I have to pay for any additional road repairs? Is it my fault that all politians, both parties did this? The only way to solve this mess is either no more earmarks, or a line item veto. While I admitt the republicans did a lousy job, the democrats, since taking power, have attached 32,000 earmarks to bills. So you tell me how would a liberal solve this problem? Let me guess more taxes! More taxes are not the answer. Fiscal resposibility is.

Oh and Nasty, guess what, the bridge was declared unsafe long before the war in Iraq. Why wasn't it repaired then? How is this the fault of the current administration? Why didn't the Clinton Administration take the bull by the horns and fix it? None of these are things you will choose to answer though, are they.........typical liberal

And the Minn Gov when the bridge was declared unsafe was a Democrat. But some how it is the current administration's fault.

Answer 2

Didn't Congress just last year pass a 268 billion dollars highway and infrastructure bill ?

Doesn't the Federal Government have a Federal Bridge Program, that provides matching money to States to fix Bridges?

It seems like your saying, if a State can come up with the money to build a bridge, etc, then the federal government should maintain that bridge, etc for ever, and not the State that built the bridge in the first place.

Answer 3

First of all, it IS the responsibility of the states. If the Constitution were being read as the Founders intended it, we'd realize that it's actually unconstitutional for the federal government to spend money on infrastructure, as Article I, Section 8 does not list that among the powers granted to Congress, and the Tenth Amendment says that because the power wasn't given to the federal government, it's reserved to the states. But of course, we gave up on reading the Constitution the way it was intended long ago.

By this same argument, it should be noted that ALL, not most, social spending is the states' responsibility. If we were running the federal government the way it was intended, there'd be a LOT less money going to Washington, which the states could use to make these improvements.

The long-term plan is for the states to take their power back from the federal government and for this nation to return to the way it was meant to be run. For that to happen, We the People must educate ourselves on when and how it all went wrong in order to fix it. We ultimately only have ourselves to blame, as we stood by and allowed it to happen.

Answer 4

Nasty, I am not a Republican, but may I point out that your question is woefully flawed. You suggest that the States cannot fix the infrastructure because: (1) How will they pay for it? (2) Wouldn't the States have to eliminate programs to fix the decaying infrastructure?

Alas, the same questions can be asked if you decide that the Federal government should pay for the infrastructure: (1) How will the Federal government pay for it? and (2) Wouldn't the Federal government have to eliminate programs to fix it?

In other words, you first have to answer: What is the basis for your assumption that the Federal government has more money per-bridge than the States? and What is the basis for your assumption that federal programs are less important than state programs and therefore can be eliminated?

Answer 5

There is no "right" answer to fix the economy. Just like there's no sure way that Ben Bernanke and the Fed can "control" inflation. It's all guesswork. Thing is, the current economic situation was caused by shady mortgage practices and people who were stupid. Stupid enough to not bother researching what they were doing, just saw that beautiful 700K house and someone told them "you can afford that" on a minimum wage salary. Those of us who did it right are suffering a loss of home value, but at least we still have our homes due to sound financial decisions. Until we wise up and start taking care of ourselves, the government can't do much. There's only a list of things they shoudn't do because it hasn't worked in the past. That includes raising taxes on the wealthy. I'm not voting FOR McCain as much as I'm voting AGAINST the Barack policies. Why not tax the wealthy to get rid of the deficit? Because the wealthy own the businesses and create the jobs. I work for a private company and I'm going to guess that the owner is pretty wealthy. If he gets taxed more, either my salary is going down, or people are going to lose their jobs. And he won't be able to afford to hire on more staff, so we'll end up being overworked and underpaid. Taxing the wealthy is the worst idea ever. For the record, I'm not even close to wealthy, and have nobody in my family that is wealthy. I do have several aunts and uncles that have filed for bankruptcy though.

Answer 6

I'm not a Republican, but just wanted to mention a couple of articles with info some might find interesting about the national highway fund and the privatization of our nations highways and infrastructures.

-- Following Minnesota Bridge Collapse, New Scrutiny for Nation’s Ever-Privatizing Roads
"On the national level, the highway trust fund is about to go broke. When President Bush took office the fund had a $23 billion surplus, but it is expected to be running a deficit by next year in part because Bush killed an increase in gas taxes two years ago."
"The columnist Jim Hightower recently accused the government of deliberately defunding these vital infrastructure projects in an effort to open the door to privatization."
http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=07/08/03/1348236

Answer 7

This is not rocket science. Its pure mathematics. This is a zero sum game. If we spend money on military matters and wars, it means there is less for peaceful things that help a peaceful country prosper.
Since we are now involved in a perpetual war called the war on terror which pretty much guarantees we will be fighting a hot war somewhere or 2 or more in the world at any given time, it means the people's money will not be used much for the benefit of the people here in america. We can take some comfort in knowing that we at least have helped destroy and then rebuild the infrastructure of several other countries, and are feeling much safer as a consequence (tongue firmly in cheek).

Answer 8

Yes. How about that for the short answer.

It is the states responsibility. The worthless politicians take the money allocated for infrastructure and divert it to pet projects that get them re-elected. The Federal gov does the same thing.

So, raising taxes is not the answer to fixing infrastructure. Getting the waste out of government is the answer. There is plenty of money available, the problem is that it never sees the intended target.

Answer 9

Funny how this wasn't an issue untill a bridge fell down... and it's now an issue even though we don't know why that bridge, a bridge under repair, fell. Why do people take advantage of a tragedy for political gain?

Here's what I wouldn't do: waste taxes collected for road construction and repairs on pet projects where it isn't needed. I wouldn't re-direct taxes or "fees" collected for road construction and repairs to income re-distrabution programes ment to buy the votes of low income and minority voters.

More people benifit from a solid bridge than a welfare check.

Edit:
"let me congratulate you for not being a republican"

It's hard to take your question and comments seriously when you are obviously so partisan. This is not a "republican" or "democrat" issue, you just seek to make it one with your idioligy on the side of raising taxes.

These taxes would hurt low income earners who would have to pay a higher precentage of their income on gas taxes. Here's a news flash for you... More money was collected in gas taxes than the oil companies got in profit. MORE. Yet the oil companies are the bad guys.... State Governments need to quit wasting the money on entitlement programs!

Answer 10

Cut welfare spending & use said money on infrastructure before 1964 the high tax rate dollars were spent on infrastructure.