Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!


Forgot your password?

Submission + - Does the US Need A Infrastructure Czar? (citylab.com)

mikeebbbd writes: Writing in CityLab, Kriston Capps argues that we need a better way to pick infrastructure projects for public funding. While it's unlikely that the real bill (over $1 trillion) will be covered, ever, he argues that even if it were to be covered we need a different way to pick WHAT gets funded and when. For instance, Flint needs clean water right now; Kansas City probably can wait a bit for an improved streetcar.

This ignores, of course, the fact that the feds don't fund all public infrastructure. When some place uses its own or its state's money rather than federal, they can be excused for placing their own interest first. And there's always Trump's desire to privatize it all. Still, the author has some good points, and it's clear that federal infrastructure funding is kind of fractured by type (with transportation getting a very large cut). Would a cabinet-level post or other "czar" to coordinate it all be worthwhile, as suggested in the story?

This discussion was created for logged-in users only, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Does the US Need A Infrastructure Czar?

Comments Filter:

Never ask two questions in a business letter. The reply will discuss the one you are least interested, and say nothing about the other.