Legislative Blog

J.B. Williams, J.D.

Studies galore along with items not really actual infrastructure based

A Blog about Invest in America 2021

A Bit of Background

The following backgrounds help summarize the author's views on both the general topic: Federal and more specifically Invest in America 2021 as it relates to that topic.

Brief Summary of Federal

This should be a fairly limited bills area for management the overall structures like highways, military, federal buildings, federal laws, and the like. However it has become the micro manager of all micro managers. They get involved in areas that no federal government should be involved in, and shift more power upward. This has led to each party trying to run over the other party in the eyes of the voters, all the while doing everything possible to maintain their power. They do this by holding onto all of the money, and claiming they know best how it should be spent. But they run debts so badly that no one should be looking to them as an example of anything other than the way to overspend and go further into debt.

Summary of Invest in America 2021

Expanding infrastructure and including the federal government in state decisions.

Blog Summary

Looking for climate resilient infrastructure. I'm sure they'll implement things that cause issues similar to Californians. Lack of trucks that meet the needs, so more perhaps we can transport more on rails that are less environmental than current trucks are now.

Looking at small businesses controlled by women and wanting to award them certifications, commitments. Not just overall wanting women to own small business but concerned they don't own businesses in certain areas as often as men. Perhaps they don't want to.

They are also address water issues here. Hmm maybe they can complain about being in a drought and then think, we will now have to institute water restrictions. Maybe that should have happened years sooner.

Studies galore along with items not really actual infrastructure based

Published: 2021-10-26

Congress wasted no opportunity to pay for a study into anything that could be considered remotely connected to surface transportation. Spending is set to begin in 2023. This should be just long enough post it's passage so that Congress can claim it did not create the need for additional taxes, all the while creating additional taxes. Of course the additional taxes will be blame entirely on something other than this bill/act. Funding starts over $56.5 billion. There are built in increases over time. And if they plan to only fund these with existing tax revenues, and truly do not increase taxes; then great, but a majority of the items would potentially not be funded.

They want a study to determine areas where minorities and/or women are underrepresented, and a study to determine how to encourage minorities and women to go into these areas. They seem to belief underrepresentation if numbers in a particular area do not match overall workforce participation. Perhaps differences are related to other reasons like people seeking out areas in which they are interested rather than discrimination or lack of inclusion. Men are underrepresented in nursing fields but I don't think they are being excluded.

They want a study to consider methods to prevent people jumping from bridges. After searching I did not find overall data for suicide attempts/suicides from bridges, but I did find statistics for several specific bridges. The statistics state they are the bridges with the highest rates of suicide attempts/suicides. They provided total numbers of 70 deaths over the time studied or .2 deaths on average per year. There was no indication that these numbers have been increasing or decreasing over time. Based upon numbers this small it seems unwise to spend money to figure out how to prevent these type of suicides and then significantly more funds to implement the methods. It would seem much more wise to spend that money providing assistance to facilities that treat attempted suicides and/or severely depressed individuals. But one is virtue signaling and will most likely not change the suicide rate. The other potentially helps people but not in a way that is visible or sound bitable. For instance, banning guns and claiming there are less gun deaths as victory; yet failing to admit that murders only continued to decrease at the same rate after the ban as it was on before the ban.

There are sections for more electric vehicle charging stations. An item that seems to appear in more areas, though I'm not certain why. From a little research, and talking to individuals that have fully electric vehicles, there seems to already be an expanding availability of charging stations. They already exist in sufficient numbers for traveling across country. It would seem the industry is providing for increasing demand. Interestingly gas stations were not something the federal government sponsored to built when converting from horses. A more efficient model would let demand drive the expansion. If they force purchases of electric vehicles then the increased demand is caused by the government not directly by the people. Or perhaps people will learn to maintain and keep their vehicles longer and create less trash disposing of them. Of course it shouldn't concern environmentalist that electric vehicles weigh significantly more than gasoline-powered models. For instance, a Ford F-150 electric weighs about 1,600 pounds more than the gasoline-powered model. Or the electric Volvo weights about 1,000 pounds more than it's gas-powered model. This will cause more wear and tear on roadways. And the fact that they are looking to mine more materials necessary for batteries gives the appearance of an expanding need, without them being full recyclability.

Congress has a sense that contractors should be providing work training to create safe, respectful work sites that are free from bullying, hazing, discrimination, or harassment. Seems to be more virtue signaling - let's say there is an issue, create a bunch of things that will fix the issue so that contractors will have to implement them. This can lead to claims of failure on the part of contractors, and create more jobs for these claims to be investigated. In the end, there will likely be additional items that the federal government will appropriated funding for, thereby costing additional tax payer money; and nothing will probably change. It's almost as if of celebrating the lack of major problems, we work to create major problems from minor ones.

For broadband they want to require digging only be done once during installation. This will require states and other entities to provide the federal government with details regarding installations. I understand the digging can weigh heavily on installations, but if it were a truly capitalist entity they would naturally limit this cost to increase profits. It would seem to make more sense to require impact moling (that is having a launch and a catch receptacle) wherever possible. Again this seems to be over reaching unless it is limited to cable being laid on federal land.

They are also looking at climate resilient infrastructure by reviewing a 2018 report and a California climate safe infrastructure report. Maybe they could make insane requirements for trucking companies similar to what California did, and then complain when there are enough of them to transport things. All the while increasing pollution rapidly by having ships waiting off the coasts to be offloaded. But as long as it would limit truck pollution. So then they could correct the ship pollution by limiting fuels used or carbon footprints. Maybe that would slow trips or substantially increase costs. Then the end goods would increase in costs, and it will be more difficult for people to afford to purchase items. Then Congress can talk about needing to increase minimum wage more, and social security will have to be increased due to increased cost of living. And the cycle can drive itself round and round. Not to mention continually increasing social security will merely endanger the fund sooner. They are currently seeing it default in 12 years.

Somewhere along the line the fact that all of these things are intertwined. It is repeatedly claimed that companies just make giant profits that are substantially above and beyond their expenses, which include the wages. Many do not seem to understand that a mere $100 per month raise for every employee for a company with 100,000 employees is equivalent to $120 million annually. For example, Walmart employs 2.3 million people with 1.6 million in the United States. If you were to assume .3 million are upper management, then you would increase wages output in the United States by $1.56 billion. And as a side note, I often hear numbers that are revenue and not profit numbers being tossed about as if they are profit. Remember that total revenue numbers are before they pay for things like buildings, taxes, wages, insurance, etc. And general accounting principle profits are not net taxable profits. Often included in income on balance sheets are unrealized gains. There are a multitude of issues with taxing unrealized gains, especially while limiting losses to only $3000 over gains.

For each year 2023 through 2026,

• transportation appropriated at $250 million;
• ferry boats appropriated at $120 million;
• federal lands and tribal transportation appropriated at $800 million;
• territory and Puerto Rico highways appropriated $200 million;
• projects of national and regional significance appropriated $3 billion;
• community transportation investment grants appropriated $600 million;
• community climate innovation appropriated $250 million;
• national scenic byways appropriated $16 million;
• rebuild rural bridges appropriated $250 million;
• parking for commercial vehicles appropriated $250 million;
• active connected transportation appropriated $250 million;
• wildlife crossing appropriated $100 million;
• reconnecting neighborhoods appropriated $750 million;
• metro performance appropriated $250 million;
• gridlock reduction appropriated $500 million.

The state needs to annually compile a list of small businesses that are controlled by women, socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. These businesses will become eligible for certification and to receive awards, commitments and achievements. The basis that these are lacking comes from what they are hearing in news media. And the assumption is made that this is due to discrimination and not merely a lack of interest on women, socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.

They include a vague best context sensitive design for spending federal funds on highways. I'm sure this term will be more firmly defined when the regulations and rules are drafted outside of Congress. They will follow some groups concept of what that means and nothing more. It could cost more funds, and it may not be the best option for the area but it will fit the rules and regulations outlined. It also permits non-toll roads to be converted to toll roads. Currently tolls are limited within the interstate system, and federal funds may not be used to build toll roads. So now we are going to permit the Secretary the authority to convert a road paid for by taxpayer dollars to a toll road. There is a document entitled Federal Prohibitions on Tolls Roads, How They Got There, and How the GROW AMERICA Act Proposes to Change Them - The Eno Center for Transportation at enotrans.org. This proposal was made while President Obama was in office and seems to be moving in that direction again.

They are not looking at merely freight management, but that combined with combating climate change, sustainability, and transportation system access. Meaning that rules and regulations will, more likely than not, be substantially expanded to include this additional matters. They are looking to fund projects of mass transit, freight movement, or highways over a five year grant program. The program should serve low-income communities, use innovative technologies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions (or claim to). Total federal funding may not exceed 80%, of which 60% can be in the form of a grant.

The are also making grants for what are called Colonias, or communities in Arizona, California, New Mexico, or Texas that are within 150 miles of the Mexico border. This is based upon the apparent lack of potable water, adequate sewage, and decent/sanitary housing. They talk about land that is sold without water and sewage connections, but this would cover a multitude of areas where people have septic tanks and/or water wells. Neither of these make the areas less sanitary or decent. I have family in South Texas that have things connected to catch water when it rains to supplement water from their well. I know a multitude of people that have septic tanks, many of which are multi-stage and extremely efficient.

They are also having a storm water runoff from highways for best practices management report completely, because the 2019 review that already studied this is now three years outdated. This study needs to be done every 5 years, although this seems extremely frequent. Hopefully this does not result in hundreds of new rules and regulations, more funds to be spent to meet the new rules every 5 years. Previously the reports were 14 years apart, but apparently going to 10 years is not sufficient.

Priorities are being given to reduce single use vehicles, to encourage walking/bicycling as transportation and use of mass transit. It seems items like Uber and Lyft would be covered here as single occupant vehicles since they are generally used as a taxi and do not transport groups. General safety for pedestrians and bicycles is requiring a study to be done, and it will not be limited to federal roadways and land. This seems like a silly thing to challenge the federal government on, but the more intertwined they become in state and/or local issues, the more they gain power over decisions and outcomes. It is becoming the norm or accepted practice that the federal government tells states what to do. The federal government intends to bi-annually provide public safety assessments. This will add layers of bureaucracy, causing more funds to be spend for administrative costs and less spent where it will matter. I am not sure which came first, but people thinking the federal government will solve all the problems will not result in solutions. It only equates to people believing they do not personally have to do anything, it is someone else's job. You see it every day. In the simple things like not returning shopping carts to the rack, or ensuring trash is actually put into a trash can. Instead people believe it is someone else's job to get the carts back into the racks and then back to the store. Rather than merely walking their cart to the return rack, which is closer than returning it to the store itself. I've watched people push a cart away from their car rather than walking 5 or 10 steps to put it in the return rack. All because it is someone else's job.

They want a study on the impact of drunk driving child endangerment laws. These areas are generally under state purview, and should remain so. States are quite capable of sharing information between states. I mean my own locality worked with one in Oklahoma regarding juvenile sexual offenses as they had developed a program to reduce recidivism to almost 0. I seriously doubt that drunk driving or child endangerment is lacking focus in states/counties/cities. Law enforcement and other government entities can and do know how to share information to assist one another. In another semi-child related area, they want to study pollution caused by idling in school zones. Last I checked majority of school zones are not on federal land.

They are going to allow digital real ids, along with physical real ids. This will require you to unlock your phone to show your real id. Unlocking my phone for anyone needing an id is not something I care to ever do, and yet I use my phone merely for placing and receiving calls, with an occasional text. Currently if you are stopped, an officer may be able to wake your phone if they believe you were using it while driving but they cannot require you to unlock it. At least this was true in Texas the last time I checked. Placing id on there opens the door to doing more once it is unlocked. I'll personally continue to carry my id, insurance cards, etc and keep my phone private.

Congress wants a DUI study. Apparently states are to report DUI offenders into a federal database so that they can be more easily identified. And this study is to help determine the issues surrounding failures to provide this data. My issues here are the same as any federal database. First not all states DUI laws are the same, nor should they be required to be. Second, not all states handle DUIs the same, nor all jurisdictions within a state. My county has a deferral program for offenders that results in a much smaller recidivism rate than standard probation and vehicle breathalyzers. Third, are offenders advised that they are being entered into this database and is there a way to have their name removed.

They are looking to require larger school buses have seat belts, and school buses to have automatic emergency breaking and electronic stability control. And a fire mitigation system is being considered. I searched for fires on school buses and was not able to find any. The only places I found death caused by fire were a camping stove being used on a bus and the person using it fell asleep. This did not sound like conditions of the school bus actually being used as a school bus but rather it being no longer in service and someone was seeking shelter inside it.

Unfortunately a multitude of what the feel needs to be addressed are being addressed in ways they believe is how it should be done without regard to actual environmental impact. They search for data that supports their belief and go forward. They do not consider other viewpoints. The stricter the government goes with the rules the less options are being considered. If private entities were free to find the answers, they would likely reach positive solutions, that may or may not match the governments path. Instead it seems that someone gets an idea, pushes the government to back it and forward it goes. Private businesses must make shareholders/boards happy and keep consumers in mind in their business practices. As the government takes more control, removing more choices from private businesses, the feedback slows and things can potentially not go down the best path. I mean when I was younger using re-usable bags rather than single use bags were an idea that people felt would be better environmentally. Now they have determined that using a single use plastic bag twice, that is once for carrying things home and one other time, makes them a better environmental choice than re-usable bags. And sadly a large percentage of re-usable bags end up in landfills after not being used or barely being used. Yet just a few short years ago re-usable bags were being pushed by many governments and charges were being made for using single use bags. Of course, then COVID-19 appeared and all of that became irrelevant. Governments, not just federal, push these ideas all the time. Take the banning of straws based upon some child's report. Yet there is no ban on plastic water bottles, nor even a limit. I know that banning straws had effects on individuals with certain disabilities. These things come to pass because some vocal minority screams and some government runs with it. And sadly a majority of people merely believe it to be true without doing any research.

 

J.B. Williams, J.D.

4,312 federal laws were passed from 1995 through December 2016.
Along with 88,819 federal rules and regulations.