I thank the gentlewoman for her courageous lead on this issue. This $35 billion for Afghanistan is roughly equivalent to the amount in the Recovery Act for highways and transit. If instead of Afghanistan these funds were invested at home, we could do the equivalent of what we did in the Recovery Act, 35,000 lane-miles of highway improved; 1,262 bridges; 12,000 transit buses and rail passenger cars; 5,000 transit stations improved; and 1.3 million jobs that we've documented on our portion of the Recovery Act. But this is a conflict with no exit, no end, no offset; and we should not provide more money for it.
James Oberstar: “I thank the gentlewoman for her courageous lead on this issue. This $35 billion for Afghanistan is roughly equivalent to…”
Editor's note · Context
Oberstar discusses the allocation of funds for Afghanistan versus domestic infrastructure investment.
Share
More from James Oberstar
We want to protect our waters. We want to protect our wetlands. We want to provide for future generations.
We must move away from complete reliance on public funding for infrastructure and forge a new, stronger connection between private capital and infrastructure needs.
The efforts of Federal agencies can overlap and at times conflict, and currently, there is no body within the Executive branch to provide substantive coordination or, if necessary, resolution of disagreements among agencies to ensure…
A combination of analysis and tests may be used to show that the airplane is capable of being evacuated within 90 seconds...





