• Home
  • About

Evan Sparks's Aviation Policy Blog

A wonk's-eye view of everything in the sky.

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« ATA SmartBrief: “Biggest aviation news of 2008”
Friday fun: “Aviation Dally” »

Getting our “infrastructure” priorities straight

December 11, 2008 by Evan Sparks

It’s pretty common knowledge that the United States has for years underinvested in “infrastructure” — from the power grid to physical plants to transportation — and thus one of the first priorities of the next administration should be to devote massive resources to repairing infrastructure. And I’m sure the commuter inching forward on a Dallas interstate on his way home from work or a passenger on a regional jet at LaGuardia groaning as yet another thirty-minute delay is announced would agree. And Barack Obama has endorsed a massive infrastructure spending program in hopes of stimulating the economy. So then — let’s get busy! Where to start?

As Bob Poole writes in yesterday’s WSJ, the mayors of 427 cities have helpfully identified more than 11,000 “ready-to-go” infrastructure projects worth $73 billion. Okay, there’s a start. And what kind of projects are these? Poole lays out several of them: a “waterfront duck pond park,” community centers, tennis centers, “life style centers,” a “Grand Central Station” in San Francisco for a rail line that doesn’t exist, and the like. (More “infrastructure priorities are listed here.) That is, the mayors have, in a recession and what is widely acknowledged as a crisis in infrastructure, presented the taxpayers with a gold-plated wish list. No doubt Congress would be happy to pony up the money in exchange for naming rights.

Why are these projects even on the list? For several reasons. First, they’re discrete and local. Highway, airport, and major transit projects often require consultation with and the involvement of multiple authorities, making it harder for the spending to have a quick impact — even if its long-term effect would outweigh that of a duck pond by a factor of, oh, infinity. Another reason might be the “spaghetti” approach: throw it at the wall to see if it sticks. No harm in trying, right? ask the mayors. (No harm, indeed, except perhaps the derision of a few lowly bloggers.)

We also strive for “fairness” in our infrastructure spending — at the expense of urgent needs. States with less urgent infrastructure needs have senators and congressmen angling for advantage regardless. Seattle, for example, is highly congested, but state and federal legislators don’t want to allocate money to the Seattle area, home to half the state’s population, unless their parts of the state get their fair share. This partially explains why marginal interstate projects like I-82 between Ellensburg, Wash., and Umatilla, Ore., get built before big highway expansions in the Puget Sound area. This princple extends to aviation, too: in Aviation Infrastructure Performance, Cliff Winston and Gines de Rus write that “the majority of [Airport Improvement Program] funds are allocated to airports that account for a small share of commercial enplanements.” In 1996, thirty-one airports accounting for 67 percent of scheduled commercial enplanements received only 24 percent of AIP funds — a smaller share than general aviation reliever airports that handled no commercial passenger traffic!

Given that the mayors have a clearly distorted view of infrastructure priorities, Poole suggests that the private sector can help determine what projects should top the list. Figure out what kind of projects would attract private capital — then fund those first. Investors are (not always, but generally) cautious about pouring money into Mickey Mouse infrastructure projects. Private capital builds the sensible (and frugal) Branson Airport (which had its first commercial service announced today); it doesn’t build the twice-as-expensive and soon-to-lose-commercial-service MidAmerica St. Louis Airport.

This is not to say that the public sector should not be involved in infrastructure spending. It should be. This has been a core government function since the earliest days of the American republic. But we seem unable to prioritize and optimize our spending. The government has failed to keep up. We need to look at different ways of responding to and meeting our most urgent transportation infrastructure needs.

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Evan's Commentary | Tagged airports, congress, dot, politics | 1 Comment

One Response

  1. on December 12, 2008 at 1:50 pm Jim

    My only real complaint with your article (and I have this complaint about a fair amount of the stuff you write, though I enjoy reading it) is that you seem to believe that commercial aviation is the only part of the system that matters. Those GA reliever airports that handle “no commercial passenger traffic” allowed some of the traffic that would otherwise be forced to compete for runways at the largest airports to go to smaller airports (often closer to where they really need to be to do business). GA airports also provide economic benefit for hundreds (thousands?) of communities around the country that don’t get commercial service and they shouldn’t be neglected either. What I don’t see here is any accounting for how those 24 airports that account for 67% of the passenger traffic used the income they made from landing fees, gate rentals fees, etc. to pay for their own improvements. Part of the point of the AIP is to help the smaller airports that don’t have the huge revenue streams keep up with necessary maintenance and upgrades.



Comments are closed.

  • Recently on the APB

    • America vs. Europe: who overrates whom?
    • Scare headline not so scary in article
    • Crew rest and training, new ATC contract, and more
    • The solution to NYC’s airport woes?
    • And… I’m back
    • Nothing to see here
    • Let your left hand not know what your right hand is doing….
    • Evan around the web
    • This is just ridiculous
    • Liveblogging Randy Babbitt’s confirmation hearing
  • 2008 aerospace airports air traffic control alitalia american asia ata atsb australia pacific Aviation08 BAA british airways budget airlines business canada competition congress consumer advocacy continental delays delta Deregulation 2.0 dot emirates energy environment europe faa fedex general aviation geography health history humor iata icao klm korean labor latin america lufthansa media Merger Mania 2008 mergers meta middle east middle east/africa military misc. nationalism network airlines northwest open skies politics prestige regulation ryanair safety sarcasm security small communities southwest Southwest and the FAA space tax transit travel tsa united usa us airways virgin virgin america world
  • Archives

    • August 2009
    • July 2009
    • June 2009
    • May 2009
    • April 2009
    • March 2009
    • February 2009
    • January 2009
    • December 2008
    • November 2008
    • October 2008
    • September 2008
    • August 2008
    • July 2008
    • June 2008
    • May 2008
    • April 2008
    • March 2008
    • February 2008
    • January 2008
    • December 2007
    • November 2007
    • October 2007
    • September 2007
    • August 2007
    • July 2007
  • Find me on Facebook!
  • Banner photo: Washington during landing at National Airport, November 2007. © Rachel Ayerst. Used by permission.

Create a free website or blog at WordPress.com.

WPThemes.


Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
  • Follow Following
    • Evan Sparks's Aviation Policy Blog
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • Evan Sparks's Aviation Policy Blog
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Copy shortlink
    • Report this content
    • View post in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
%d bloggers like this: