Infrastructure Bill: Deja Vu All Over Again
Biden's "Bipartisan" Infrastructure Victory Tour Invites A Stroll Down Memory Lane. It Rarely Accrues Political Benefit.
It’s a cliche: “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” Attributed most frequently to George Santayana, it rests close to a biblical phrase, “And there is nothing new under the sun.” King Solomon is credited for that (Ecclesiastes 1:9).
Both still ring true. So does a malapropism from legendary philosopher and late baseball legend Yogi Berra: “It’s deja vu all over again.”
President Biden’s ceremonious signing of the $1.2 trillion (in reality, about $500 billion in new spending), deficit-increasing, and barely bipartisan infrastructure bill remind those of a certain age of similar “infrastructure” bills going back to President George H. W. Bush in 1992. Probably sooner, if you want to include Franklin Roosevelt’s multitudinal programs to end the Great Depression (actually ended by World War II) and Dwight Eisenhower’s launch of a federal interstate highway system in 1956 (an election year). Never mind the deep recession that occurred just two years later.
In Biden’s case, the bill has been held hostage for weeks by so-called progressives as leverage for their $3 trillion-plus “Build Back Better” boondoggle budget reconciliation bill. They finally relented, but is there any evidence that its passage, or even its promises, will pump any new life into Biden’s and the Democrat’s badly sagging poll numbers and political fortunes?
I find none. While not highly regarded and distrusted as partisan and wildly unreliable, a Washington Post/ABC poll conducted earlier in November ominously portends further erosion of political support for Democrats. Biden’s approval numbers continue to sink. A new Quinnipiac poll released Thursday has Biden’s approval at 36 percent, and an increasing number of Americans now prefer a Republican congress. For Democrats, that’s a dark and foreboding place to be, politically speaking.
Of course, reliably Democratic media outlets largely blame not Biden but you. You “don’t get it.” CNN (with an assist from the Washington Post), of course:
Americans don't get it yet. The Washington Post headline for a new Post-ABC News poll was grim: "Biden approval hits new low as economic discontent rises." I asked CNN's director of polling and election research, Jennifer Agiesta, how we should be viewing these polls.
What kind of a drop is this? "There certainly hasn't been much good news for Biden in any of the recent polling -- his numbers are not in great shape -- but the way that polls are sometimes reported may make it sound a little worse than it actually is," said Agiesta.
"While Biden has reached new lows recently in several polls, the previous comparison points for some of those polls were a while ago. So while his numbers have certainly dropped since the summer and around Labor Day, it is unclear if they are currently still declining or if they have plateaued."
Not only do Americans question Biden's accomplishments, there is also concern about his priorities. Agiesta pointed to a CNN poll conducted by SSRS in early November, when 58% said the President has not paid enough attention to the most important problems.
Bottom line. "Biden's approval rating numbers are consistently landing at low points across several major polls, but it is unclear if they are currently still declining or if they have plateaued," said Agiesta.
Quinnipiac poll: Hold my beer.
This particular infrastructure bill, while enjoying modest GOP support, is unimpressive. Even the bill’s strongest supporters admit that at best, about a third of the bill, $350 billion, will be used for traditional infrastructure (broadly defined to include roads, bridges, ports, airports, water systems, and the electric grid). Others suggest it is closer to $110 billion. Lots of your money goes for things like electric vehicle charging stations, a topic that deserves but won’t get attention and scrutiny from our illustrious media. Billions are tossed into the 50-year black hole known as Amtrak to benefit customers and communities in mostly northeastern Democratic states. Known as the “northeast corridor,” Amtrak has long been profitable there. It’s their long-distance “ghost” trains elsewhere that few ride, a colossal and never-ending waste of tax dollars. That will continue.
And don’t forget the “pilot project” to test a new tax - a mileage usage fee designed to make up for the loss of gas tax revenue resulting from increased electric car use. There’s no escaping the taxman, it seems.
“Equity” language is found 64 times in the bill. Electric charging stations will be dispersed fairly, including in neighborhoods that typically aren’t associated with these pricey vehicles. And we’ll see how long those charging stations last. After all, as recently-absent Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg says, the spending bill will fix “racism physically built into some of our highways.” It seems electric charging stations might feature installations mainly based on race.
But putting aside the dubious if not wasteful provisions of this new law, Americans have a long history of not giving Presidents or their political parties credit for “infrastructure” bills. And in some cases, it’s not hard to figure out why. In this case, most of the money goes to Democratic states, communities, and constituencies used to, and expect, your cash. And as for the 13 House Republicans who voted for it? Guess where most are from - left-leaning states like New York, New Jersey, Michigan, Illinois, and elsewhere with aging “infrastructure” or a heavy dependence on federal largesse (Alaska). Let’s call it for what it is, the “Democratic Payback Better” bill.
You can always count on Democrats to bribe voters with other people’s money.
1992, President George H. W. Bush
Bush was riding high after the 1991 Operation Desert Storm liberation of Kuwait from Saddam Hussein’s Iraq and the fall of the Soviet Union earlier, despite a lingering recession that began in 1990. His approval rating in polls then hit a high of 89 percent. His 1992 State of the Union address highlighted a $150 billion transportation bill coupled with regulatory initiatives. Bush successfully got his ISTEA bill through Congress (Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act), including a 5-cent federal gasoline tax increase. What happened that November? Bush lost to Bill Clinton, capturing just 37 percent of the vote against two candidates (Clinton would win with 43 percent - “it’s the economy, stupid”). Much of the Transportation bill’s benefits didn’t occur until well after the election; the projects weren’t exactly “shovel ready.” More about that later.
(Disclosure: I served as a Deputy Assistant Secretary of Transportation for Public Affairs for President Bush from 1991-1992).
1993, President Bill Clinton
Clinton’s 1992 election victory was credited to a lackluster economy. He proposed a $16.3 billion stimulus package primarily based on local projects proposed by the National Conference of Mayors. Staff for the Senate Republican Policy Committee, chaired by US Sen. Don Nickles (R-OK), dissected the Mayors’ submission and found all manner of wasteful projects. Clinton’s stimulus package failed. Coupled with his complicated universal health care proposal, his party would lose 54 seats in the US House of Representatives in the 1994 election and eight seats in the US Senate. That would result in complete control of Congress by Republicans, led by Speaker Newt Gingrich and Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole.
(Disclosure: I served as staff director for the Senate Republican Policy Committee 1992-95 and was Secretary of the US Senate 1995-96.)
2009, President Barack Obama
It took less than a month from his inauguration for President Obama to sign HR 1, the American Rescue and Recovery Act. The roughly $800 billion measure was classic Keynesian economics - it spread lots of money around in the belief that government spending would stimulate the economy after the financial meltdown of September 2008. Some $48 billion was designated for “shovel ready” projects and jobs, which turned out not to be so “shovel ready.” If any of the elements of that bill look familiar, it’s because they are - everything from broadband access to highways and transit was included. Just like the latest infrastructure bill. Deja vu all over again.
How did the projects funded by Obama’s “stimulus” bill fair? Not well. Remember California’s “Bullet Train” project? Or how about Solyndra, the solar panel company?
Obama would double down with another “Jobs Act” in 2011, but not until he lost 63 US House seats and the Senate would win six seats, four seats short of control. Not because of his “stimulus” bill, but mainly over the unpopularity of “Obamacare,” much of which has since been obliterated. Except, of course, those of us (small businesses, self-employed, early-retired) who still have to pay as much as $32,000 per year per couple in premiums and deductibles before the first dollar of coverage, other than for preventative care. Thanks, Obama. He was reelected in 2012, but no one seriously credits his infrastructure or economic policies for that since he presided over the slowest economic recovery in American history.
You may ask: Wow, we’ve spent a lot of money on infrastructure over the past 30 years, yet we still have deficient bridges, potholes on streets and highways, and decrepit rail tunnels (see: Baltimore) and airport, broadband, and seaport “issues.” And that money is largely still being spent. When was the last time you encountered a highway construction/repair project? Yesterday, I bet. Maybe even today. There’s not a day I traverse the streets and highways, even some bike trails, around Washington, DC, without street closures and blockages due to construction. Then again, DC always gets more than its fair share of federal largesse. Just ask why 3 of the six wealthiest counties in America surround your nation’s capital (including my home of Arlington, Virginia). And they all vote heavily Democratic. Elitism is profitable, it seems.
Infrastructure proposals poll well and seem popular. Infrastructure touches everyone and affects every job. Virginia Governor-elect Glenn Youngkin made infrastructure improvements involving ports in the southeast and broadband in the economically-struggling southwest a key component of his successful campaign this year. But polling doesn’t always equal political benefits or success when it comes time to cast ballots. Other issues often intervene, like immigration, inflation (the most insidious tax), and embarrassing national security failures (see: Afghanistan). And more.
If Democrats are looking for a political lift from the just-signed infrastructure bill - especially the inflationary boondoggle budget bill - they should look elsewhere, especially if history is any guide.