The Briefing Room
General Category => National/Breaking News => Topic started by: corbe on March 27, 2017, 10:31:29 pm
-
Trump requests, and receives, infrastructure priority list from builders union
Lindsay Wise and Stuart Leavenworth, McClatchy Washington Bureau on Mar 27, 2017
WASHINGTON -- Labor unions representing construction workers have sent an infrastructure priority list to President Donald Trump at his request, as his White House searches for projects to greenlight that require little if any federal funding.
North America's Building Trades Unions sent the White House the wish list of 26 projects, including more than $80 billion worth of energy transmission lines, water and wind projects, and pipelines across the country.
More than half of the projects on the list given to Trump aide Stephen Miller are privately financed. All but one are in the midst of permitting and could use the Trump administration's help in the form of regulatory relief.
The lone project seeking taxpayer dollars is the $20 billion Gateway project, which would add passenger rail capacity between densely populated New Jersey and New York and replace 100-year-old rail tunnels damaged by Hurricane Sandy in 2012.
The unions' president, Sean McGarvey, told McClatchy his organization gave the list to Trump's team in mid-February following a meeting with the president on Jan. 23. Trump met that day with McGarvey and a dozen other leaders from the building trades' affiliated unions.
If the Trump administration can clear the regulatory hurdles in the way of major infrastructure projects, the union officials told Trump, they can deliver the workers. Trump, in turn, could fulfill his pledge to create good-paying jobs for his working-class voters.
"They want to use this as an economic development tool," McGarvey said, "not just to refurbish the infrastructure, but to use it as a tool to create jobs."
McGarvey said he had told Trump that the unions' 14 affiliates around the country could train the skilled workers needed to get the projects moving -- including the pipe fitters, boilermakers or underwater welders, jobs that pay anywhere from $20 to $100 per hour.
The demise of Republicans' plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act has left McGarvey and other union officials hopeful that Trump will turn his attention to fulfilling a different campaign pledge: to invest $1 trillion in the nation's crumbling infrastructure.
Unions are not a typical Republican constituency but Trump pulled out unexpected wins in union-heavy states, such as Michigan.
"I am quite confident the president is committed," McGarvey said. "There are people working on that program in the White House, there are people on Capitol Hill working on it, there are all kinds of outside groups working on it, which is the usual course of business for big legislation."
The White House did not respond to questions specifically about the builders unions' list.
It issued the following statement about infrastructure planning more broadly: "President Trump promised the American people an incredible $1 trillion impact on our nation's infrastructure," said Lindsay Walters, deputy press secretary. "The infrastructure team at the NEC" -- the White House National Economic Council -- "has been hard at work gathering ideas from the 16 federal agencies and departments that impact our nation's infrastructure, and they have reached out to every state. Together with these agencies and with leaders at the state and local levels, we have already begun the process of identifying the reforms that will help us reach that visionary goal of creating dependable and efficient facilities and resources that will last for generations."
The unions compiled the list in consultation with all 14 of the affiliated unions, which represent construction workers in trades such as bricklaying, cement masonry and electrical. The main requirement to make the cut was "only awaiting government approval," meaning the projects had funding sources, preferably from the private sector, and just needed expedited permitting from federal or local officials.
The unions' list differs from another list of 50 priority infrastructure projects compiled for the Trump transition by Ohio developer Dan Slane and the consulting firm CG/LA Infrastructure, a draft of which McClatchy published in January.
But some projects appear on both lists. McGarvey said his unions had consulted with Slane on his list.
"We liked his plan and we concurred with the initial outline," McGarvey said. "We think it was important (to spotlight) a series of projects, which are almost completely funded, completely permitted, completely engineered and are the quote-unquote real shovel-ready programs that we could get going right away."
<..snip..>
List and Descriptions of Projects at LINK
https://www.arcamax.com/politics/politicalnews/s-1941078-p2 (https://www.arcamax.com/politics/politicalnews/s-1941078-p2)
-
Seems Appropriate.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grYBKcuWowM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=grYBKcuWowM)
-
More policy idiocy (and this time with a whiff of corruption) from Trump. The relevant people to ask for infrastructure priorities are those who use and maintain infrastructure.
Ask the ironworkers union for infrastructure priorities, and will be steel-girder bridges all the way, even if the concrete span bridges are the ones that are crumbling, the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers will be all for replacing lots of copper wiring, even if what's really needed is ripping it all out to put in fiber-optic cable, the bricklayers will be all for refacing brick buildings, even if they only need to be repointed, and so forth.
More or less everyone acts in their own guild interest rather than the public interest, and unless one is clear-eyed about this fact, it is impossible to actually make public policy in the public interest.
-
Color me surprised. Not.
-
The demise of Republicans' plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act has left McGarvey and other union officials hopeful that Trump will turn his attention to fulfilling a different campaign pledge: to invest $1 trillion in the nation's crumbling infrastructure.
While I would personally prefer that Trump now devote his political capital to tax reform, this may make more political sense. I suppose he could give the Freedom Caucus one more chance to get with party leadership on tax reform, but I don't hold out much hope for those dopes. A swift infrastructure victory could be the first step toward greater bi-partisan cooperation on a variety of fronts, including avoiding a government shut-down at the end of April.
The cause of tax reform has been severely damaged by the FC's rejection of health care reform, which would have ended the ACA subsidies and reduced the budgeting baseline by billions of dollars. Tax reform that puts a dent in marginal rates is going to very difficult to achieve with the spectre of continuing ACA subsidies. There's a reason why Ryan and Trump tried to tackle ObamaCare first - it was the key to freeing up the budget room for dramatic tax reform.
The FC has put the kibosh on that, so one-time infrastructure spending seems to the best way of flanking conservatives while providing the direct boost to jobs that is at the heart of Trump's message and appeal.
-
Nothing like going to the unions and asking "So what would you like the taxpayers to pay for"?
-
Jobs, jobs, jobs. That's the catnip that wins elections.
-
Jobs, jobs, jobs. That's the catnip that wins elections.
He already won the election.
-
More than half of the projects on the list given to Trump aide Stephen Miller are privately financed.
Excellent. Do those projects and skip the stupid train between NYC and NJ and everything will be fine.
-
bigger, gold-plated government
bigger slush funds for all
-
Jobs, jobs, jobs. That's the catnip that wins elections.
gibsmedat government, very very Democrat of him
-
He already won the election.
Payoffs
-
Don't overlook that these projects, or most of them, will be done in any case. Would it be better to have everyone from Jerry Brown to Andrew Cuomo running the show? Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer?
-
I suppose he could give the Freedom Caucus one more chance to get with party leadership on tax reform, but I don't hold out much hope for those dopes.
Yes, he could give the GOP a chance to step in line with the promises they have been making for the past 7 years now that they are out of excuses. A swift infrastructure victory could be the first step toward greater bi-partisan cooperation on a variety of fronts, including avoiding a government shut-down at the end of April.
sell out to the Democrats because WIN! YUUUGE! Now I know why I'm not a billionaire. I just don't give up easy enough.
Is he so desperate to feed his ego with a "win" that he would flirt with corruption so openly?
The cause of tax reform has been severely damaged by the FC's rejection of health care reform, which would have ended the ACA subsidies and reduced the budgeting baseline by billions of dollars. Tax reform that puts a dent in marginal rates is going to very difficult to achieve with the spectre of continuing ACA subsidies. There's a reason why Ryan and Trump tried to tackle ObamaCare first - it was the key to freeing up the budget room for dramatic tax reform.
If that is key, then why in the hell was the 'effort' such a half-assed mess. It sure seems to me that the essential items would get a lot more attention and effort than some take-it-or-leave-it cobbled together crap bill. Move the one stuck in committee out, repeal the ACA, and get on with the program.
The FC has put the kibosh on that, so one-time infrastructure spending seems to the best way of flanking conservatives while providing the direct boost to jobs that is at the heart of Trump's message and appeal.
How about the rest of the GOP owning some failure? Seven years of promises, seven years to be ready for the day, there is no 'Plan B", and plan "A" comes off like the morning after pill. You want some tax leeway? REPEAL OBAMACARE.
As for"Flanking Conservatives", is this the GOP or the DNC? We're used to hearing this from the latter, but now the masks are off. The Uniparty is alive and well in the halls of Congress, and a handful of Representatives have called it out by standing by the promises they made to their constituents--the people they work for.
It's deja vu all over again, and I only wonder how long it will take to be flanking that 'pesky Constitution', too.
Maybe the new big infrastructure project should be further south, and more vertical, or has he given up on the wall, too?