Engineers Give U.S. Infrastructure A 'D'

[thundley4]

WASHINGTON (AP) - America's roads, public transit and aviation have gotten worse in the past four years. Water and sewage systems are dreadful. The basic physical backbone of American society is barely above failing, a report by top engineers says.

It'll cost $2.2 trillion to fix America\'s ailing infrastructure, according to highlights of a report being released early, just as the House of Representatives readies its first vote on President Barack Obama\'s call for a massive economic stimulus spending package.

The country's roads, dumps, dams, bridges, schools and rail systems need lots of that money, say the engineers, who would get a piece of the pie in working on the repairs. Government officials are already aiming billions of dollars at those physical needs as part of what at the moment is a $825 billion economic stimulus package. But the engineers say that\'s not enough.

Overall, the American Society of Civil Engineers gives the U.S. physical backbone for everything from schools and parks to dams and levees a D. That\'s the same overall grade as the last time the group gave a report, in 2005, but it really is slipping from a "high D" to a "low D," said report chairman Andrew Herrmann.

Herrmann, an engineer with the New York firm Hardesty & Hanover, said his group is issuing the highlights of the report - the full document won\'t be out until late March - "to be relevant ... investing in our infrastructure will create jobs."

How Convenient.

Just more ammunition bullshit reasons for the left to push through Der Fuhrer's Pork Package.

[Chris_]

Hmmm, ask the people would benefit financially from spending if more spending is needed.  Yeah that'll work.  Kinda like asking the "scientists" and "researchers" if more money should be spend on globalwarming prevention.   

[Carl]

Yet property taxes have been rising fast and furious over the years.

[Redstatecka]

Maybe it will cost this much. It's an estimate.

But even if the number is half that or a quarter of that -- and as we all know, given the inflation of money, costs will rise -- wouldn't this effort be the place to help stimulate the economy through the so-called Stimulus Bill, rather than the three percent of it now that's focused on infrastructure? Or all the other things that don't seem to have wide impact?

By the way, I don't know what the roads and bridges and other such things are in other people's regions of the U.S., by where I live, in the general Mid-Atlantic/South Atlantic area, things could be much much better re: highway bridges and repairs, just general maintenance--and that includes not just US routes by also Interstate roadways and infrastructure.

[NHSparky]

say the engineers, who would get a piece of the pie in working on the repairs

And as my Econ prof used to say, "If you pay me $100K a year to solve a problem, I guarantee it'll NEVER get solved."

[djones520]

If they wanted to spend $825 B, and it was 100% for infrastructure improvement, I wouldn't oppose it as much as I do. (I still would, based on the fact that we simply do not have the money)

The Porkulus bill falls very, very short on this.

Only 50 billion of that is going to infrastructure...