The only ace up the sleeve for the Iron Range (and Minnesota) is transportation

A new legislative session has arrived in Minnesota. I must admit, I am a bit sheepish that I have not written more about what might come out of this session, especially since it is the all-important biennial budget session. The truth is that the crippling state budget deficit situation makes this session less about what the state should do and more about what the state can do. Conservatives cheer this sentiment, but I see it the same way a family sees a lost job. Hard times. Less quality. Less quantity. A state more like Alabama, which is great if you are a very rich person who lives in Alabama.

For the Iron Range this session is 99 percent about defense. I don’t see much new, innovative or exciting coming out of this session for the DFL Iron Range legislative delegation to pursue. Instead, the gang will be seeking the best possible outcomes for public education, local government aid and other crucial government functions, all of which will be threatened with serious budget cuts on both sides of the political aisle. But there is 1 percent I’m leaving on the table. One ace up the Iron Range sleeve. Transportation.

Transportation projects have the dubious distinction of being expensive. They also have the distinction of being short-term economic boosts, as the construction of highways calls up hundreds of workers from the construction trades. Furthermore, transportation projects have an intangible value in how they shape public attitudes. No one ever — EVER! — feels worse after driving over a newer, safer, faster highway. It’s road crack. People dig it and if one out of 100 feels good enough to upgrade their house, buy a new car or reinvest in their retirement plans, you’ve got all the economic recovery you need.

Check out these excerpts from two very important Minnesota political figures. First, a press release from the office of House Transportation Chairman and Iron Range (OK, 8th CD) Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-MN):

Congressman Jim Oberstar says 2009 will be a big year for the nation’s roads, bridges and other transportation systems. As chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Oberstar is planning to introduce and pass what he is calling “the largest transportation investment package since the creation of the Interstate Highway system in the 1950s.”

“The need is certainly there; we have been shortchanging our roads and bridges for decades,” said Oberstar. “We have been lax with our maintenance, and we have failed to upgrade our roads and bridges at a speed that has kept pace with the growth of our economy.”

Then, an excerpt from a letter to Congressional House leadership, from several state legislative leaders including Minnesota State House Speaker Margaret Kelliher Anderson:

A significant investment in a broad array of infrastructure projects will create jobs and satisfy identified public needs. We recommend an immediate investment in transportation and public infrastructure, clean water and safe drinking water projects, public university facilities and a temporary waiver of state matching requirements to ensure that these projects get started quickly. This can lead to a broader, long-term investment partnership to boost unmet capital needs for a wide range of transportation, water, energy and other infrastructure projects.

So, what possible joy could be found in Mudville this year? Not much, for sure. We need to see how Gov. Tim Pawlenty will negotiate and how well the large DFL majorities in the House and Senate will hold up. But if there is to be anything for Minnesota lawmakers to pride themselves on, beyond mere survival and balancing the budget, it would be harnessing the massive investment in transportation at the federal level and using limited state matching investments to create the beginnings (lord knows we can’t afford it all) of a 21st century transportation and civil infrastructure. This puts people to work and makes communities stronger, both right away and in ways that can’t be detected until years to come.

For the Iron Range that means the four-lane completion of the trans-region highways 53 and 169 and maybe some efforts to expand internet speed and reach across the region, but for the rest of Minnesota it means similar efforts and more.

Comments

  1. “Hard times. Less quality. Less quantity.”
    Being dependent on government largess is not what our founders intended.

    Defense and infrastructure is the government’s responsibility.

    I support spending for roads and bridges.

  2. Both the state and federal will probably get their wishes of infrustructure funding galore. Unfortunately, the uncalculated dirty little secrets are: This will not actually “create” any jobs, but fool people into diverting their careers towards these short term government projects, only to be dumped into unemployment once the gig is up.
    Someone has to pay for all of this. If you are suggesting that you would rather fork over the additional tax money it will require instead of buy yourself a new TV, a family vacation, a new car, save for college, keep your house or any of the other pressing needs you may have, then you are not too smart.

    the problem with your logic is you fail to think in cost vs benefit analysis, much like most liberals junk think. If your belief that government spending can create jobs and pull us out of recession and screw rights of citizens to have any choices on what to spend their money on, then we can do three times as much for the economy if we hired people to build the roads, hired others to tear down the roads and hired yet more to build them again. Productivity does not come from government, it comes from the private sector. Government can only consume as they do not produce anything. One of these days, you’ll figure it out.

  3. The Keynesian’s have been proven wrong too many times.

    I pray Obama isn’t Carter malaise part deux.
    Funny (not really) how the Obamanation now support deficit spending; about $2 Trillion in additional debt in Obama’s first year! How’s that for change?

    I do support spending for roads and bridges.

Speak Your Mind

*

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.