The Interstate highway program was first thought to be funded by a 50-50 % shared revenue between the federal gov't and the states. By the time it got seriously underway (after 1956) the share was 90% federal, 10% states.
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/interstate/faq.cfm#question4
According to Wikipedia, about 70% of the funding is derived from the fuel taxes (user fees), with tolls, bonds, and general revenues making up the difference.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System
Prior 1982 all the proceeds of the diesel&gas Fuel taxes were dedicated to roads & bridges, construction & maintenance; since 1982 some portion is allocated to transit (presumably bus/train/urban).
So, increasing the fuel tax rates to account for inflation should enable most road/bridge maintenance.
The project designs should require minimum maintenance; the project management and contractor choice should favor high productivity, and engineering oversight ensure specified quality.
I’m so unimpressed.
We used to build infrastructure by paying for it. Directly and locally. The Triboro Bridge, the Hudson River tunnels, the whole subway system, the turnpikes of New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Ohio: all built with bonds backed by tolls. Each has long since paid for itself many times over.
If the residents of Ohio and Kentucky want a new bridge, why don’t they build one? Why don’t those who use it pay for it? Why wait for an act of Congress, and by what theory should the rest of the country carry any of the burden?
If the residents of Ohio and Kentucky don’t want a bridge and refuse to build one, and the rest of the country wants a working, coast-to-coast I-70, then clearly the federal government has the right and duty to build one, and is perfectly within its rights to charge a toll for construction and maintenance. No resident who didn’t want the bridge is obliged pay that toll: they don’t have to use their detestable bridge.
170,000 cars a day. Let’s say 200,000 for round numbers. That’s $1000 per car for a $2 billion bridge. Over 10 years, that’s $100 per year. Fifty cents per vehicle crossing would more than cover it. Charge $2 and pocket the profit.
Instead of writing about why congress won’t do anything, why not write the real story about why towns and states across the country are sitting on their hands hoping someone else will pony up the puny funding they need for their boring bridges and roads.
11
@James K. Lowden
It's a Federal bridge, it's I-71 and I-75 combined as it crosses the Ohio river valley. I-75 is the most traveled trucking artery in the U.S. It moves goods all over the nation from Canada to Florida and this bridge pays the wage of that heavy use.
The bridge doesn't server Ohio and Kentucky residents nearly as proportionately as it serves how the trucking economy of this entire nation works. Apparently that reality is "boring" to some.
If you toll the bridge to pay for it it would force commuter congestion to the other bridges that connect Cincinnati, Covington and Newport which would create mass havoc on the economies of those cities.
You could instead toll it (starting tomorrow) for trucks only and ban trucks from the other bridges within city limits, start a fund from this process (could be done with electronic monitors vs. toll booths) that would help pay for the new bridge. This would cut into the bottom line of operators using this route but not in the extreme. It would not however come close to making this a State funded project.
Or force all truck traffic off of this section of I-71/75 and divert them to the two bridges on I-275 that eventually reconnect to I-71/75. This would probably extent the lifespan of the Brent Spence, but that would make a mess of those other interchanges and smaller bridges not built to withstand that amount of traffic. Spreading the problem wider.
Federal funds, now, is the only workable solution.
11
@james lowden - over 3% of the nation’s GDP, or more than $417 billion in interstate commerce, crosses this bridge annually. In addition, it connects 10 states as it is I-75/I-71 from Michigan to Florida. Although Ohio has said it is willing to foot part of the $2.6 billion to replace it, it is appropriate and fair that the federal government pitch in as well.
4
@James K. Lowden:
1) I think $2 billion, $2,000,000,000 divided by 200,000 cars equals $10,000 per car, not $1,000.
2) Also, I think your computations ignore the time value of money. You assume that $100 received 10 years from today is equivalent to $100 received today. It is not. The $1,000 collected in tolls from the bridge would be an annuity with 10 periods. At an assumed 10% discount rate, an annuity with an annual cash receipt of $100 for 10 years would be multiplied by its present value factor, 6.1446, to equal $614.46. The initial construction cost of $2 billion, however, must be paid today.
3) For a business, its ROIs from potential investments can be compared via internal rates of return (IRR) with its cost of capital (C of C), and if the IRR exceeds this hurdle rate (its C of C), the investment's cash flow is positive and the investment usually made.
4) But, with government funding decisions, there is no universal criterion such as a quantifiable hurdle rate to compare alternatives. Prioritizations must be made, like medical triage decisions, when governments expend funds based on extremely subjective and disparate criteria.
[JJL 11/28/2018 W 2:05p Greenville NC]
2
Here in Cincinnati, the conservative folk dominating Hamilton County sure have got themselves in a pickle.
They vote in anti-tax politicians and then wind up with bad roads, obsolete bridges, broken promises, and none of that does much to attract business or help schools.
The anti tax folk also fought a light rail proposal in the 1990s and that was voted down, so heavy bridge and road traffic continues.
But somehow the vote was "yes" for taxpayers to fund the two sports stadiums mentioned in this article.
GOP priorities never cease to amaze.
24
“It ain’t fallen down yet,” Paul Moore, a contractor and Trump supporter, said of the bridge.
Oh well, nothing to worry about, then. But sadly this is the attitude of far too many people about infrastructure until there is a catastrophic failure. They put off replacement, defer maintenance and fob off concerns all in the name of “saving money” until something does happen. By then it’s too late and the cost is then calculated in lives.
45
If there’s one thing I know for sure, it’s that neither Trump nor the Senate are gonna do jack to fix this. Trump never tried—his “infrastructure plan” was laughable—and Mitch already gave the $2 trillion away to the wealthiest.
Far as I know, the plan is to get all 14, 000 laid-off auto workers (who also were made some iron-clas promises) onto the bridge at once, have it fall into the Ohio, and blame Nancy Pelosi.
Two birds, one stone thrown elsewhere.
6
Nationwide, 55,710 bridges were found to be deficient by the American Road and Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA). The Republicans chose to fight two wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. These have cost us well over a trillion dollars for nothing in return. The Republicans just gave the wealthy and corporations a trillion dollar tax cut with no returns for the rest of us. We need to claw back these tax cuts and start spending money on our failing bridges, roads and power grid. The bill has come due Mr. trump and your fellow Republicans or are you waiting for an economic collapse.
4
Preventative Neglect is always a superior policy to Preventative Maintenance. Just wait until it falls down and Blame It On The Democrats. That's What Jesus Would Do. MAGA. KAG. /sarc
3
I love reading the NYT, but I really take issue with articles that show the conservative point of view by interviewing a single Trump voter that is uneducated on the issue. Your articles on Wisconsin, Ohio, and Kentucky have these quotes plastered all over them. I have lived in all of these states and am a proud liberal.
But I don't see how this does anything but further divide us and cause your coastal readers to cringe and confirm their biases against "flyover country". Please instead add perspectives from educated people on both sides.
3
Has there been no way to perform maintenance on this structure?
Everyone gets all excited about a bright and shiny new structure - they think there will be no need for maintenance for a long time! Guess what - if you don't allow funding set aside for maintenance every year, you end up with another Spence bridge in an amazingly short amount of time. Allocate the funds every year to do the maintenance and limit the number of bone-jarring truck loads, and the structure will last indefinitely.
You do know that the damage done to roads and bridges increases exponentially with axle load?
Send large heavy loads by rail. The railroads are built to take them, plus they pay for their own maintenance. Stop trying to stick the passenger vehicles with the cost to build and maintain truck roadways.
4
@Chris
There’s frequent maintenance, but the bridge has too much traffic. Many years ago the shoulders were removed to put in an extra lane, but that didn’t help. What could help would be to make the semis take I-275 around the city. Driving on the bridge frightens me, and I’m not easily frightened.
3
If the federal gasoline tax had been simply indexed to inflation way back in 1993 as it should have been, there would have been more than enough tax revenue to make the necessary repairs to the interstate infrastructure.
3
@WmC - and since we have to raise enough money to keep our infrastructure up to shape, we need to make some changes now, in case people again change it once, then ignore it for decades.
Fueled vehicles are more efficient than in 1997, so miles traveled per gallon taxed have increased. Electric vehicles don't pay fuel tax, so a mechanism has to make sure they don't get a free ride on roads they use.
Maybe an annual fee based on odometer readings, though consumers would be really upset by having to come up with a lump sum that used to happen invisibly every time they gassed up.
Trump's idea of infrastructure improvement begins and ends with his Mexican wall. He's more than willing to hold desperately needed projects hostage to assuage his massive ego. Not unlike his willingness to put the screws to General Motors because they refuse to play by his rules.
2
There were two reasons Gary Cohn signed on to the Trump cabinet: To engineer himself and his buddies at Goldman Sachs a massive tax cut, and to shepherd through a public/private infrastructure bill, which would have earned Goldman billions in "management fees", skimmed right off the top for doing absolutely nothing. Despite his bogus resignation threat in response to Charlottesville, Cohn somehow - somehow, mustered the fortitude to stick it out for the tax cut and then jumped ship when it became clear that the infrastructure scam was a goner. What a mensch!
1
As I cross over the Brooklyn Bridge often, I guess they just don't make them like they used to, eh.
2
Dear American public. When you build something, it starts falling apart - the speed depending in part on how much you paid up front to have it well designed and constructed for its purpose.
When you raise money to pay for a shiny new thing, your fundraising job has just started, because you now need to raise money to maintain the shiny new thing. As it becomes an older thing, you'll also have to repair it - depending in part on how much you paid for proper maintenance.
Anyone who thinks taxes are evil and should never be raised (national gas tax last raised 1997) should be given a pick and a shovel and sent out on the road gang.
2
1. if trump said it, it is a lie.
2. Kentucky has control of the Senate and the department of transportation. Elected their choice of president. but still no bridge that they were promised by these people.
3. the should pay for their own bridge that they locally use beyond its design
2
@Howard64 Add to your#2: Chabot (R) in Ohio and Massie (R) in Kentucky are the local congressional representatives on the river and they are AWOL on this one.
The former Speaker of the House Boehner (R) from a nearby Ohio district failed to get anything done.
They're at the front of the line to vote tax cuts for their donors, but cannot serve the public interest in their role as public servants.
Nobody will act until it falls. We are becoming a sad and stupid people.
1
It's all about ideology. SOuthern Ohio and Kentucky a red-state havens; voters there have bought into the Tea Party lies, hook, line, and sinker.
The inattention to this bridge is a direct consequence of ideology over practicality and facts. Who cares if 35 people die in a bridge wreck, as long as taxes didn't go up???
4
Kentucky and Ohio...now what do these 2 states have in common? Oh right...they voted for Trump. I have a nice bridge I'd like to sell them
2
Why on earth would people in Ohio or Kentucky believe Trump’s promises about a bridge, or anything else? They mostly, like say Mitch McConnell or the myriad white men and women who adore Trump, are quite comfortable with his boasts and promises that rest on a flimsy bed of lies. So if the bridge falls into that river bed of mud and filth, surely they can have no complaints. That’s what they voted for.
1
Instead of spending in excess of $5 billion for "the wall", Trump will use the money for vital infrastructure. Not a chance. "Build the Wall" sounds more Trumpian than "build the bridge".
Since it's already understood that this bridge is a danger, the lawsuits that will come after it collapses will be monumental.
Hard to believe that a paint job could help hold up this structure, but paint stops the rust which weakens it.
Something must be done before it's too late.
Here in New York, we have the Williamsburg Bridge which feels rickety the times I've crossed it. I doubt this one's safe either.
4
I attended the University of Cincinnati. Haven't been there in a long time but remember the bridge. Amazing that Elaine Chao, Mitch McConnell, DeWine and Trump can't move on the upgrade. They want your vote but they give the perks to their corporate masters. They are clearly not interested in the people who elected them.
7
Time for commuters to find another route. Trumps promises, like his press conferences, mean nothing.
6
$2.5 billion to "fix?" What would be the cost of building a new one?
Also, I am assuming this bridge did not come under disrepair in the last 2 years. What did the prior administration do to try and "fix" the bridge?
2
The problem again here are the voters, who want want want but want want want someone else to pay for it.
Back in the day, we ALL paid for the Interstates. We didn't need tolls. We had a common purpose.
4
Since Mr. Montague "don't like government handouts", I've got a simple solution. The Cincinnati MSA is about 2.5M. The estimated bridge cost is $2.5B. So every man, woman and child in the Cincinnati MSA should write a check for $1000 to fund the bridge. So then no darn government handouts (from which a disproportionate share are funded by those lousy coastal elites).
7
The Chinese could build it for you. Of course it would be built by a Chinese company with Chinese workers and I'm sure they would provide the financing as well if required.
5
what plan? WHAT PLAN?
don the con hasn't got ANYTHING that resembles a "plan" for anything
a "plan" requires thought, knowledge, actual understanding of a problem, ability to build a consensus for how to solve the problem, and enough attention span to see something through
a GNAT has more "plans" than don the con
17
@Brian May I recommend a book? The Fifth Risk by Michael Lewis a real quick read that gets to the heart of how disorganized and clueless this administration is
Trump says what the believers want to hear while forgetting his promise(s) within minutes.
9
Infrastructure plans create jobs and get a lot of people off assistance and can pay their medical
Washington is in a world of hurt until the Dems take over in January
3
Infrastructure projects shouldn't be as hard to get going as they actually are. The benefits of creating jobs and overall benefiting the economy will go to help more people and gain the support of many people - but these benefits are overlooked through the bureaucracy of the system and require so much effort that politicians do not see it as worth it.
7
@Joseph
We suppose this bad bridge is the fault of the EPA, the Iran agreement, the lack of a Mexico Wall, the UN, the PAris Accord, oh, and lack of raking.
How about building a bridge instead of a wall?
27
Is it infrastructure week again? I guess those indictments will be issued before Friday...
8
Which is more important, The Wall or Infrastructure? Which one adds greater security to Americans? Unbiased studies and interviews with drug dealers have made it clear the building of The Wall is baseless. These are facts and not alternative facts, and so unfortunately will be ignored.
13
A promise from Donald Trump is worth its weight in gold.
6
Republicans in control of House and Senate for 4 years,, and the last two with a Republican president,,,,and no infrastructure bill. No balanced budget. No immigration reform.
What did we hire these guys for? I have not heard a Republican promise kept. There seems to be just Trumpeted fear and blame. And no work. no results, no nothing.
14
If it aint fallen down yet, dont fix it !! How simple.
Ohio and Kentucky need to vote out everyone and start over.
The Federal Transportation Secretary wont comment on the bridge??
McConnell wont help his state? How corrupt is it there?
9
Do I understand correctly that Donald Trump lied to these people, just like he said he would bring back manufacturing? I’m shocked.
13
A Bridge to Trumpland. Lies, ridiculous "promises ", and unending greed. Who could have guessed ??? Do better, or perish.
Seriously.
4
Regarding this Cincinnati bridge, Ohio and Kentucky should do what was done a decade ago in Louisville. On that project Indiana and Kentucky joined forces to build two bridges across the Ohio River at the same time.
I'm uncertain of all of the funding streams that were used in the Louisville project, but they include hefty electronic tolls billed to a transponder attached to your windshield.
While I'm not thrilled to be paying tolls to reach my native Louisville, it would be unfair if a new bridge is built in Cincinnati without the same tolling scheme.
Can someone remind me what federal subsidies (if any) were used in the Louisville project?
3
I looked it up on the internet. The Louisville project cost $2.4 billion. The only federal cash input was a low interest loan to KY for 0.5 billion.
So this project was largely paid by 40 years of electronic tolls plus withdrawals from KY's and IN's allocated shares of federal gas tax.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. A similar self-funding scheme should apply to a bridge project in Cincinnati.
3
Trump promised a lot of things during the campaign that have yet to germinate. Money for infrastructure. That beautiful healthcare plan that was "better and cheaper than Obamacare." New steel factories opening everywhere. He's so fixated on that multi-billion-dollar wall that he's forgotten the rest of the country.
13
Rep. Steve Chabot, Cincinnati’s 22-year Republican incumbent, has done next to nothing to try to fix this major problem and danger in our community, just as he has ignored a smaller, but vital, local Western Hills viaduct that is literally crumbling. Why is this man who hasn’t held a town hall meeting in years and who, in this racially diverse city, arrogantly ignored repeated requests and invitations from the NAACP to its annual candidates forum still in office? His district is one of the most extremely gerrymandered in the nation. In fact, he openly thanked the Ohio Republican House for drawing a safe seat for him.
Cincinnati overwhelmingly supported his highly accomplished challenger, Democrat Aftab Pureval, but rural, conservatives in the adjacent county overwhelmed the vote. Thus, Cincinnatians effectively have no representation in Congress and can look forward to the bridge literally crumbling, since we still have in Congress a Trump/MAGA follower, like the man in the article who proudly said, “It ain’t fallen down yet.”
55
@J.Our attitude seems to be ":if it ain't broke don't fix it". I drive over this bridge several times a year and it is scary. Perhaps something might be done when it falls down like the Silver Bridge that collapsed and killed about 47 people. We don't do much unless death is involved and even then not too much. Money is much more important than people.
24
@J.
voters deserve what they vote for. if they want a useless fraud - that's what they get (in Congress and in the White House)
When the bridge does fall down - at a loss of life and property - I'm sure these voters will be on the news, crying, bemoaning the disaster - and will forget it is of their own making.
7
It seems to me that blaming presidents for the failure of Congresses to act on issues like infrastructure modernization. And the problem in Congress isn't that the Republicans want to prevent it and the Democrats want to propel it. The problem is how to arrange the funding ---- the Eisenhower model for interstate highway, or directly funding and managing projects from Washington. In the 1950's, Congress allocates money to the several states, which themselves contracted and managed the construction. The national government issued standards that have to be met in order to receive funding from Washington. President Trump proposed to the Congress a somewhat similar program, which was ignored by the GOP and adamantly opposed by the Democratic Caucus.
2
@DMH The Republicans in Congress won't agree to any new tax or tax increase to pay for infrastructure improvements. And despite what he said in the campaign, Trump won't support it either. Not gonna happen until the Democrats control both Houses and the Presidency.
5
I’ve no idea how to explain reality to somebody who thinks that Eisenhower’s federal—I say again, FEDERAL—highway project, which was largely justified as national defense, wasn’t a Federal highway project. Even after they say that it was federally funded and supervised.
It’s still laughable to try and sluff this off on anybody except Republicans and donald trump. I just don’t expect to be able to explain that.
4
I guess I would support a largely state solution as long as Ohio and Kentucky had an effective mechanism for sharing the cost. Now, since states can't just print money, the residents of those two states would have to pay for at least some of it. The fact that a part of the Federal interstate highway system uses it does argue for at least some Federal dollars as well.
Since some combination of tolls and taxes would be required, these should be apportioned somewhat according to who benefits from this investment. From the description, few people use this bridge purely for recreation. I would assume that ordinary people use it for some combination of commuting to work, driving while at work, and shopping. All of that directly benefits the local businesses, so it would make sense to collect most of the revenue from local businesses.
5
@Grindelwald Your comments make too much sense and lack drama, I'm not sure how to process such anymore. Please run for office :) Unfortunately, big business gets big tax breaks and they seem to donate to the cities/states in which they reside depending upon the marketing value of the causes they choose. This seems like a cause all the businesses could glean valuable marketing from.
3
Good idea, could you send us back some of that “big dig” money used in Boston, including some of the tax revenue resulting from improved neighborhoods above it.?
2
@Grindelwald I drive from NC to Indiana so I too benefit from this bridge. Everyone has some connection to that bridge.
If the Federal government stops helping the poor (mostly red, southern states) then good help them since they can not or will not help themselves.
4
The infrastructure initiative remains stalled by the very issues that led to the devastating lack if maintenance for the last forty or more years. First and foremost, what rate shall the workers be paid, a middle-class wage or a poverty wage. Who will oversee the management of each project, the public or private mega contractors? What kind of environment-protecting factors should be included, such as bike lanes and pedestrian walkways? (Cincinnati-Northern Kentucky has several other bridges, so there are several options for walking across the Ohio River, but Brent Spence would benefit from both bike lanes and reserved multi-passenger lanes to separate truck traffic from airport and commuter traffic.) Lastly, every project faces the question of maintenance after the ribbon-cutting, and the same questions apply.
It all boils down to one quest: Cui bono? Who benefits? Apparently, the answer is, anyone but the general public.
19