This week, the long-awaited Trump infrastructure plan was finally released. What a disappointment, after coming here a year ago and promising a $1 trillion plan. Then, in his State of the Union, saying it is going to be even bigger--huge--$1.5 trillion. In the fine print, however, $1.3 trillion of the $1.5 trillion comes from communities like my hometown of Flint, Michigan. Now, let's be clear. If States and local communities had an extra $1.3 trillion laying around, they would be servicing those roads and bridges. They would be rebuilding their water systems. They would be doing this work already. If we are going to have a Federal infrastructure plan, we need to have a Federal infrastructure plan that is really investment and not just checking the box so that the President can say he submitted a big, bold infrastructure plan. Well, it is not big and bold, from the Federal Government's point of view. The $200 billion investment from the Federal Government, offset by a $170 billion reduction, boils down to $3 billion a year over 10 years. That is not big. That is not bold. That won't fix the roads and bridges in this country. ____________________
Share
More from Dan Kildee
repealing the Inflation Reduction Act or any of the suggested cuts to some of our most critical health insurance infrastructure in the country would have catastrophic effects for not only the affordability of care, which is the number one…
In closing I will just say this: I hope my colleagues join me. This is something we ought to be able to do together. We ought to solve this problem in a bipartisan fashion. I ask you to join me in voting for the motion to recommit to right…
I was unable to attend votes due to a death in the family. Had I been present, I would have voted ``nay'' on rollcall No. 96, H. Res. 987; ``nay'' on rollcall No. 97, H. Con. Res. 86 ``yea'' on rollcall No. 98, H.R. 1836; ``nay'' on…
On that I demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote. The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 217, nays 192, not voting 22, as follows: [Roll No. 417]…





