Transportation & Infrastructure Archives - Progressive Policy Institute

Paying for Progress: A Blueprint to Cut Costs, Boost Growth, and Expand American Opportunity

Posted on July 23, 2024October 23, 2024 by The Progressive Policy Institute

The next administration must confront the consequences that the American people are finally facing from more than two decades of fiscal mismanagement in Washington. Annual deficits in excess of $2 trillion during a time when the unemployment rate hovers near a historically low 4% have put upward pressure on prices and strained family budgets. Annual interest payments on the national debt, now the highest they’ve ever been in history, are crowding out public investments into our collective future, which have fallen near historic lows. Working families face a future with lower incomes and diminished opportunities if we continue on our current path.

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) believes that the best way to promote opportunity for all Americans and tackle the nation’s many problems is to reorient our public budgets away from subsidizing short-term consumption and towards investments that lay the foundation for long-term economic abundance. Rather than eviscerating government in the name of fiscal probity, as many on the right seek to do, our “Paying for Progress” Blueprint offers a visionary framework for a fairer and more prosperous society.

Our blueprint would raise enough revenue to fund our government through a tax code that is simpler, more progressive, and more pro-growth than current policy. We offer innovative ideas to modernize our nation’s health-care and retirement programs so they better reflect the needs of our aging population. We would invest in the engines of American innovation and expand access to affordable housing, education, and child care to cut the cost of living for working families. And we propose changes to rationalize federal programs and institutions so that our government spends smarter rather than merely spending more.

Many of these transformative policies are politically popular — the kind of bold, aspirational ideas a presidential candidate could build a campaign around — while others are more controversial because they would require some sacrifice from politically influential constituencies. But the reality is that both kinds of policies must be on the table, because public programs can only work if the vast majority of Americans that benefit from them are willing to contribute to them. Unlike many on the left, we recognize that progressive policies must be fiscally sound and grounded in economic pragmatism to make government work for working Americans now and in the future.

If fully enacted during the first year of the next president’s administration, the recommendations in this report would put the federal budget on a path to balance within 20 years. But we do not see actually balancing the budget as a necessary end. Rather, PPI seeks to put the budget on a healthy trajectory so that future policymakers have the fiscal freedom to address emergencies and other unforeseen needs. Moreover, because PPI’s blueprint meets such an ambitious fiscal target, we ensure that adopting even half of our recommended savings would be enough to stabilize the debt as a percent of GDP. Thus, our proposals to cut costs, boost growth, and expand American opportunity will remain a strong menu of options for policymakers to draw upon for years to come, even if they are unlikely to be enacted in their entirety any time soon.

The roughly six dozen federal policy recommendations in this report are organized into 12 overarching priorities:

I. Replace Taxes on Work with Taxes on Consumption and Unearned Income
II. Make the Individual Income Tax Code Simpler and More Progressive
III. Reform the Business Tax Code to Promote Growth and International Competitiveness
IV. Secure America’s Global Leadership
V. Strengthen Social Security’s Intergenerational Compact
VI. Modernize Medicare
VII. Cut Health-Care Costs and Improve Outcomes
VIII. Support Working Families and Economic Opportunity
IX. Make Housing Affordable for All
X. Rationalize Safety-Net Programs
XI. Improve Public Administration
XII. Manage Public Debt Responsibly

Read the full Blueprint.

Read the Summary of Recommendations.

Read the PPI press release.

See how PPI’s Blueprint compares to six alternatives.

Media Mentions:

Lewis for Chicago Tribune: Saving President Joe Biden’s infrastructure agenda from itself

Posted on May 21, 2024 by Max Sherrill

By Lindsay Mark Lewis

When an Interstate 95 overpass collapsed in Philadelphia in June, Pennsylvania’s Democratic governor, Josh Shapiro, responded with a master class in executive leadership.

Slashing through thousands of pages of red tape with a stroke of his pen, Shapiro focused solely on rebuilding as fast as possible and refused to let interest group politics or bureaucratic inertia slow things down. Shapiro stunned the world by cutting the ribbon on a fully rebuilt span just 12 days later.

This “Philadelphia Miracle” should have been top of mind when President Joe Biden travelled to Baltimore recently with a promise to “move heaven and earth” to rebuild the destroyed Francis Scott Key Bridge. but then the coda: “And we’re going to do so with union labor and American steel.”

One might dismiss this sop to organized labor as a typical election-year throwaway line. But it actually holds a clue to the riddle of why Biden’s infrastructure agenda is drifting and why skeptical voters aren’t yet giving the president full credit for his legislative wins.

Keep reading in the Chicago Tribune.

Where the Railroads Need to Go Next

Posted on April 18, 2024September 18, 2024 by Max Sherrill

February marked the one-year anniversary of the Norfolk South train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio. Residents, driven out by a controlled burn of spilled chemicals, have mostly returned to their homes, and the town is working towards a return to normalcy. Norfolk Southern just settled a class-action lawsuit for $600 million without admitting liability, and no deaths or injuries were reported in the crash itself. Nevertheless, the long-term health and environmental impacts of the controlled burn remain to be seen.

In the immediate wake of the crash, local residents, and Center for Disease Control and Prevention officials experienced severe ailments associated with chemical exposure. One year later, residents report continuing health impacts and worries about long-term risks persist. Preliminary results from the National Transportation Safety Board’s investigation have not shown evidence of rail industry negligence in the crash, but the derailment has prompted serious questions about the need for more safety regulations.

Now, the freight rail industry faces several different regulatory pressures, including an understandable call for safety improvements such as increasing the number of trackside sensors. These devices span the rail network because of voluntary industry action, but some policymakers have proposed stricter regulations that would require more sensors to be installed.

Along with these safety-oriented proposals, however, has come a drive towards increased economic regulations that would impose additional costs and controls on railroads and reduce incentives for investment. Remarks from Surface Transportation Board (STB) chairman Martin Oberman and proposed legislation like the Reliable Rail Service Act are part of a broader push to redefine railroads’ obligations as common carriers, which dictate certain obligations for service quality, frequency, and pricing.

Railroads’ common carrier status has been a critical factor in the development, structure, and operations of the industry since it was first defined in the late 19th century, and changes to the economic and regulatory burden that railroads face could substantially alter the competitive balance of the market as it stands today. Though the push for a redefinition of common carrier status was underway prior to the derailment in East Palestine, these efforts have accelerated in its wake, with stakeholders in favor of these stricter service obligations (like shippers) seizing on the public’s anger towards railroads’ safety practices to further advocate for the changes.

In addition, California is putting pressure on the industry to quickly reduce emissions from diesel locomotives and pursue “zero emission technology.” Paradoxically, implementing these economic and environmental regulations could make it more difficult for the railroad industry to afford the new safety equipment while risking increased emissions if shippers opt for truck transportation instead, which is currently less environmentally efficient. Increasing technological capabilities, along with lowering sensor costs to make data collection, monitoring, and analysis more accessible, represent a meaningful path forward to safer and smarter rail transportation.

The Freight Rail and Trucking Industries

A backbone of American shipping and logistics, the American freight rail system is one of the most robust in the world. Following the partial deregulation of the industry with the 1980 Staggers Rail Act, the industry has grown to be an essential method of freight transportation. In 2023, freight railroads transported shipments valued at $403 billion, and six railroads (including Norfolk Southern) were classified as Class I, indicating annual revenue of more than approximately $500 million.

Productivity has also risen in recent years, outpacing freight trucking, the industry’s primary competitor (and customer). According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, labor productivity increased by 15.9% between 2019 and 2022 for the rail transportation industry, while productivity in truck transportation increased by only 4%. Producer prices have also risen more slowly in the rail industry, rising only 17.1% between 2019 and 2023 compared to the trucking industry’s 27.8% increase during the same period.

Compared to the trucking industry, trains today emit far less pollutants than trucks, and shifting trips from roads to rails can reduce transportation emissions. While the efficiency advantage of rail may decrease as trucks adopt technologies like autonomization and electrification in the future, trains are an essential and efficient mode of transportation, whose continued use help to minimize the carbon footprint of transportation.

Safety in the Freight Rail Industry

Unlike airlines or road transportation, railroads own and maintain the tracks and infrastructure to support their network, incurring significant capital costs in doing so. With an average of $23 billion spent annually on capital expenditures and maintenance by Class I railroads, the industry has made significant strides in safety in the past two decades. As the Association of American Railroads highlighted in a recent press release, Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) data indicates that since 2000, per carload hazmat accident rates have fallen 75% to their all-time low; Class I railroads’ mainline accident rate is down 42%; and derailment rates have dropped nearly 30% for all railroads through 2023.

Though the NTSB is not set to rule officially on the final cause of the February 2022 East Palestine derailment until June, preliminary reports on the crash have noted the failure of an overheated wheel bearing and its detection using a hot bearing detector (HBD). HBDs, which are sensors placed along tracks to detect, report, and alert operators of overheating components, have grown in popularity and adoption in recent years. In East Palestine, HBDs successfully detected and notified the train’s operators of an overheating bearing, but while attempting to stop the train to survey the issue, the component failed entirely, and the train derailed. Under current regulation, both the HBDs and train operators functioned and acted as intended, but the approximately 20-mile distance between the sensors meant that the bearing’s temperature of 253 degrees above ambient — well above the alert threshold of 170 degrees — was not detected until it was too late.

Hot bearing detectors are widely acknowledged as an important train safety measure. Today, HBDs are in use across the network, but in some places the gaps between sensors exceed the optimal distance of 15 miles that a 2017 study concluded provided maximum safety benefits. The Federal Railroad Administration, which enforces rail safety regulations, issued and later amended a safety advisory calling for reviewing and expanding HBD systems and their associated policies to better detect and prevent similar accidents moving forward.

Railroads have also voluntarily taken steps to improve railroad safety. The Association of American Railroads, representing all Class I railroads, announced in the wake of the East Palestine derailment that approximately 1,000 new HBDs would be installed across the country to close existing gaps in the rail network. Once installed, these sensors will ensure that the gaps between sensors are no more than 15 miles. These improvements, along with lowered action temperature thresholds and improved data reporting and sharing, represent meaningful investments in improving railway safety in the United States.

This issue shows the crucial link between safety and technology. Promising advanced technologies, like vibration detectors, can proactively monitor component integrity with greater accuracy and detail than HBDs, which detect failures once they occur. However, these vibration detectors remain extremely limited in their adoption because of their prohibitive costs. Improvements in technology, manufacturing, and production at scale could make these advanced sensors more financially accessible to railroads. As regulatory reports and guidance in the wake of the East Palestine derailment concluded, improving both data collection and the capacity to analyze it are areas for future improvement. Pairing manufacturing improvements and falling costs with a drive for more robust data collection and processing will pay dividends for future safety and efficiency.

Economic Regulation and the Surface Transportation Board

Oddly enough, the drive for additional regulations to improve safety has become a vehicle for calls to further regulate railroad prices and customer relations.

Broadly, the Surface Transportation Board, the agency responsible for regulating the economic functions of freight railroads, has proposed regulations, like updated rules for mandatory reciprocal switching and new requirements for determining market dominance, that impose further obligations (and consequently increased costs) for rail carriers. Mandatory reciprocal switching grants shippers who would otherwise have access to only a single carrier access to others by mandating that railroads offer to switch shippers’ cars to another carrier’s network in the case of poor service. The policy, which advocates say increases competitiveness and provides a remedy to anti-competitive behavior by railroads towards captive shippers, has long been a topic of contention tied closely to the industry’s complex history of mergers and consolidation.

While mandatory reciprocal switching can provide major benefits as a remedy for shippers lacking choice or bargaining power, if implemented poorly, these regulations can lead to service inefficiencies and delays, with the potential to increase costs and worsen performance elsewhere in the system. The safety measures and logistics associated with reciprocal switching can introduce additional operational complexity, which increases costs for rail carriers. However, as experts have expressed, reciprocal switching can be accommodated in an economically viable manner if designed and executed properly. The STB’s recently proposed rules are well-intentioned in their goal of clarifying existing complex regulations and remedying poor service on less-used routes, and it is likely to be invoked on a limited number of routes based on the newly designed eligibility tests.

Looking forward, the STB should carefully consider the impacts on profitability and competition for the freight rail industry as they weigh new economic and competition policies like reciprocal switching. Particularly as new autonomous technologies threaten to reshape the competitive landscape for both the freight rail and trucking industries, regulators must ensure that the regulatory burden does not prevent railroads from remaining competitive in a fast-moving and dynamic market.

California’s Proposed Environmental Regulations

In April 2023, California’s Air Resources Board (CARB) enacted first-of-its-kind rules restricting carbon emissions from trains that would significantly impact operating costs and service for freight railroads. The rules, which include phasing out older locomotive engines and banning many trains from idling for more than 30 minutes, are well-intentioned. However, locomotives make up an extraordinarily small percentage of California’s emissions – just 0.4% of the state’s total carbon dioxide emissions in 2021 and only 0.9% of the transportation sector’s total carbon dioxide emissions, according to CARB’s carbon dioxide inventory database. The high costs associated with compliance would help to boost efficiency and reduce emissions but represent only a miniscule slice of a much larger pie when considering the broader context of the state’s carbon footprint.

Conclusion

Ensuring that railroads remain well-resourced to allow for investment in safety-boosting technologies is critical, while also acknowledging that rules like California’s, which mandates a rapid transition to zero-emission locomotives, have the potential to divert investment dollars away from safety. Regulators should not rush to enact heavy-handed regulations by riding the coattails of well-reasoned changes to improve safety. Regulation does have a role to play in the market and can help to ensure a healthy balance of competition, efficiency, and coverage, but these policies should stand on their own economic merits. With the burdens of maintenance and safety falling on railroads, allowing carriers to remain profitable and competitive is critical for building a safe and functional system for years to come.

Weinstein for Forbes: 2023 Was A Good Year For American High Speed Rail

Posted on December 21, 2023 by Alyssa Brown

By Paul Weinstein Jr.

2023 has been a particularly good year for American high-speed rail. In Florida, Brightline expanded its fast train (top speed 125 mph) from Miami to Orlando with plans to break ground on an extension to Tampa. The company’s project (186 mph) to connect Las Vegas with the exurbs of Los Angeles both acquired the necessary environmental approvals and received $3 billion (about $9 per person in the US) from the federal government. The Biden Administration awarded $3 billion of the $10 billion needed to help California finish its new 171-mile central valley corridor (220 mph) between Merced and Bakersfield (220 mph). Finally, Amtrak’s new, lighter, and faster Acela train sets (160 mph) may finally hit the rails in 2024, which along with some important upgrades, will cut the journey between New York and Washington by two-and-a-half hours from about three.

But, while some believe the dream of U.S. high-speed rail is finally within reach, the reality is America is still worlds from boasting a high-speed rail network like those found in Asia and Europe. The reason is simple—cost.

U.S. rail projects are more expensive and take longer to finish than anywhere else in the world. Domestic rail/transit projects cost 50 percent more (on a per mile basis) than those in Europe and Canada. U.S. projects also take more time. According to one study, European tunnels can be completed 18 months faster than anything similar in the U.S. That extra time is costly, as companies must pay salaries and benefits during the long wait.

Read more in Forbes.

PPI Statement in Support of the Biden Administration’s Effort to Avert a Rail Work Strike

Posted on November 29, 2022 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Taylor Maag, Director of Workforce Development Policy at the Progressive Policy Institute (PPI), released the following statement in support of the Administration’s push to avert the looming rail strike and potential economic fallout:

“In September, the Biden Administration helped to negotiate a tentative agreement between rail workers and operators to avoid a strike and railway shutdown. This agreement was approved by labor and management negotiators and, when it was announced, those involved called it a fair resolution. However, this week, the deal was voted down by four of the 12 railroad unions. The lack of consensus means a looming strike.

“With less than two weeks until the strike deadline, the President has called on Congress to pass legislation that would codify this agreement and therefore avert a strike.

“While the President has been open about his hesitation to push a deal that has been rejected by some union members, he also said a rail strike would devastate our economy, as more than 500,000 Americans, many of whom are union workers, could be put out of work in the first two weeks. This concern has been reaffirmed by businesses across the country. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and roughly 400 business groups, representing a wide range of industries, sent a letter to Congress on Monday calling on federal leaders to intervene before the deadline to ensure continued rail service to avoid the economic fallouts.

“While a voluntary agreement with the four holdout unions would be the best outcome, the risks to America’s economy and communities is too great. A rail strike could threaten the nation’s water supply, halt rail travel, and trigger even more disruption to the U.S. supply chain — which could potentially worsen inflation.

“PPI supports the Administration’s efforts and calls on Congress to adopt the agreement, without delay or modifications. Congress has the power to prevent a railway shutdown and deliver for the American people — we hope Congress makes the right choice.”

‘Building a Better America’ Requires Stronger Tools for Implementation and Accountability

Posted on July 25, 2022September 18, 2024 by Alyssa Brown

The passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) in November marked the first large investment in American infrastructure in decades. The $1.2 trillion law includes over $550 billion in sorely needed new spending for areas including broadband, transportation, and sustainability. The Biden administration has prioritized quick implementation, but tools for accountability and efficiency have been lacking. To prevent misuse or wasting of funds, more centralized sources of information about current projects should be available to public entities, private sector investors, and citizens. Actions to increase accountability and efficiency will improve public confidence in the administration and ensure funds are being used for their intended purposes.

So far, around $110 billion in funding has been released and over 4,000 infrastructure projects are underway. Two recent projects include the Airport Terminal Program, which just announced $1 billion for improving terminals in 85 airports nationwide, and the Internet for All initiative, which provides funding for broadband infrastructure. The rapid action taken to implement the IIJA reflects the White House’s awareness of the law’s transformative potential. Mitch Landrieu, White House Senior Advisor and Infrastructure Implementation Coordinator, told CBS, “If we can … learn how to do big things again, which we are confident that we can do, it’s gonna be a wonderful thing to see.”

The Biden administration has demonstrated a desire to improve accountability and efficiency after the rapid dispersal of COVID-19 relief funds resulted in waste and fraud. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued a guidance memorandum to executive branch agencies directing them to work closely with Inspectors General and OMB during IIJA implementation. This collaboration should result in the evaluation of risks in implementation plans to reduce the potential for costly disruptions. In May, the White House released a Permitting Action Plan outlining the administration’s strategy for making sure environmental reviews and permitting processes are effective, efficient, and transparent, illustrating the administration’s determination to accelerate permitting processes to avoid expensive delays.

The White House has also created a Permitting Dashboard to allow the public to keep track of approved projects, adding another level of accountability. Additionally, in May, the administration released the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law Technical Assistance Guide to help communities and entities across the country access and employ infrastructure funding. These actions are good first steps for promoting transparency and efficiency because they show the American people what actions have been taken and provide resources to streamline implementation.

But there is still room for improvement. A main goal of the administration should be to centralize information about how IIJA funding is being spent and what funding opportunities are currently available. This interactive map released by the White House for the six-month anniversary of the law’s passage is useful for cursory examinations of funding outlays, but only provides information about total funding for each state and the percentage of funding spent on each of three main categories: Transportation; Climate, Energy, & Environment; and Other.

This map could be a powerful tool if it contained details about specific programs to assure the public that their taxpayer dollars are being spent wisely. Public accountability is essential and could keep state and local governments on track. For instance, one announced program is the Carbon Reduction Program (CRP), which provides states with funding for projects designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from on-road sources. However, this program allows states to transfer up to 50% of CRP funds to another state apportionment from the Department of Transportation, meaning outcomes from the CRP could vary greatly depending on state priorities. Transparency about each state’s use of CRP funding could ensure governments are held accountable for using this money as it was intended.

The Biden administration should also take steps to centralize information about available funding so eligible entities do not miss opportunities. With programs spanning multiple executive branch departments, it is difficult to track every program being announced. One tool, the Grants.gov database, is not operating as efficiently as it could be. When “Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act” is selected in this database, few funding opportunities come up even though there are many more IIJA-funded projects elsewhere in the database. The federal government is therefore running the risk of communities missing out on much needed funding by categorizing projects incorrectly.

While technical assistance is being made available as stated in the White House guide, it is also important that outreach to stakeholders is increased. For instance, individuals and households often qualify for internet service discounts through the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP) because they are eligible for SNAP, Medicaid, WIC, Pell Grants, or another assistance program, but there does not appear to have been any ACP information distributed through these programs to participants. Private sector inclusion in project planning and management also needs to be enhanced so the most efficient technologies and construction methods are utilized. Helping communities leverage private sector investment can ensure that even projects that are not part of competitive funding programs meet high standards for future performance.

The IIJA represents a meaningful investment in America’s future, but to reach its full potential, the federal government needs to consolidate information about its implementation. This will allow all stakeholders, from individuals to states, to hold the government and other entities accountable and access opportunities to better their communities.

Repeating Old Mistakes on Broadband

Posted on June 7, 2022September 18, 2024 by The Progressive Policy Institute

In a June 2021 paper, “A Radically Pragmatic Agenda to Connect Rural America,” we carefully examined the history of federal programs to provide broadband to everyone. We found that:

The federal government spent a stunning $105 billion on broadband- and telephone-related initiatives from 2010 to 2019. This total includes both grants and loans, and is reported in 2019 dollars.

The funding programs for broadband put in place after the financial crisis of 2008-2009 were spread out over far too many unrelated purposes, rather than focused on expanding coverage to unserved areas.

As a result, far too little progress was made in closing the broadband gap, especially given the size of the federal funding.

As we wrote in the 2021 paper, “no matter how many billions of dollars are allocated, history shows that the money can be spent unwisely if policymakers are not careful.”

Unfortunately, the Biden Administration seems determined to repeat history. The Notice of Funding Opportunity issued by NTIA to allocate funds for the “Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment Program” (BEAD) is filled with requirements that will divert attention and money away from the fundamental task of connecting unserved Americans. In particular, the NOFO requires that:

….each Eligible Entity must include in its Initial and Final Proposals a middle-class affordability plan to ensure that all consumers have access to affordable high-speed internet (emphasis in original).

The first problem, of course, is that “middle-class affordability” is a moving target. The second problem is that the NOFO suggests that applicants fulfill this requirement by a variety of approaches, all of which suck money away from the primary goal of connecting the unserved. For example, the NOFO proposes that:

….some Eligible Entities might require providers receiving BEAD funds to offer low-cost, high-speed plans to all middle-class households using the BEAD-funded network.

Of course, that requirement will either discourage providers from building a BEAD-funded network, or reduce the amount of money available for building new connections to the unserved. In either case, less money for connecting the unserved.

In addition, the NOFO also allows applicants to apply money towards “non-deployment” uses, including but not restricted to user training, computer science education programs, and prisoner education. All of these are worthy uses, but don’t move the ball forward in terms of broadband connections.

As we said in the 2021 report, we have a “once in a lifetime opportunity.” If Democrats want to finally close the broadband gap, especially in rural areas, they need to make sure that the $45 billion is used in a focused way — to connect the unserved.

Gresser for NYDN: Clogged ports, empty truck cabs: Good problems to have

Posted on December 3, 2021 by The Progressive Policy Institute

By Ed Gresser

Looking out at the Pacific this year, worried farmers see giant cargo ships turning around empty, leaving their wine, butter and almond cargoes on the docks and at least $1.5 billion in exports lost. Meanwhile, 80-ship pileups off the coast of Southern California mean weeks or even months of delays unloading industrial inputs and consumer goods; and with truckers and warehouse workers quitting their jobs at record rates, full containers are piling up in fields and parking lots.

The port problems are complicated and serious enough to worry even President Biden, who has given speeches and put out policies to head off complaints about everything from empty shelves during Christmas shopping weeks to lost farm exports and inflationary bottlenecks.

But they’re also the sort of problems administrations are happy to have. This is because they’re evidence of confident consumers, workers finding new opportunities, and a successful effort, at least so far, by the Biden administration’s work to create a strong economy that grows from the middle out.

Read the full piece in New York Daily News.

PPI Attends Signing Ceremony for President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

Posted on November 15, 2021 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Legacy bipartisan achievement will help rebuild our communities and create jobs across America

Lindsay Mark Lewis, Executive Director of the Progressive Policy Institute, attended the signing ceremony this afternoon for President Biden’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and released the following statement:

“The Progressive Policy Institute’s policy team is grateful to the White House and Congressional leaders for the opportunity to have contributed to the deliberations around the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. This landmark bill at last ends a generation of chronic underinvestment in the public goods that make the great American jobs and innovative machine run.

“Congratulations to President Biden for succeeding where his predecessor failed, and we thank him and his team for including PPI in today’s historic bill signing.

“It is finally infrastructure week in America.”

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.

###

Media Contact: Aaron White – awhite@ppionline.org

Progressive Policy Institute’s Statement on House Passage of President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Bill

Posted on November 6, 2021 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Will Marshall, President of the Progressive Policy Institute, released the following statement in reaction to the House passage of the Biden Administration’s bipartisan infrastructure framework:

“Congratulations to Speaker Pelosi and House Democrats for passing tonight a landmark infrastructure bill that is a key pillar of President Biden’s Build Back Better agenda for an inclusive economic recovery. The president has succeeded where previous administrations have failed, and this long overdue investment in modernizing American infrastructure will create good jobs, spur economic innovation and help U.S. workers and companies outcompete China for economic and technological leadership in this century.

“It is also a rarity in Washington – a major bipartisan achievement that fulfills President Biden’s pledge to make our government work for all Americans again. The infrastructure bill enjoys broad public support, including among voters in battleground districts and states likely to determine the outcome of next year’s midterm elections.

“We were also glad to see the Progressive Caucus retreat from their counterproductive and unsuccessful strategy of holding the bill hostage to their demands for higher spending. With a second landmark accomplishment under his belt, President Biden and the party can now move on to passing a transformative Build Back Better bill that can measurably improve Americans’ lives.

“To accomplish this goal, PPI urges lawmakers to focus on delivering a few core priorities well instead of trying to enact the full progressive wish list of spending programs on a half-funded and temporary basis. We remain concerned that the House bill – as currently written – tries to do too much with too little, wastes precious resources on tax cuts for the rich, and is not offset in a sustainable way. We encourage our friends in Congress to compromise and prioritize so they can deliver a durable progressive win for the American people.”

Read PPI’s statement on the agreement to the Build Back Better framework here.

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) is a catalyst for policy innovation and political reform based in Washington, D.C. Its mission is to create radically pragmatic ideas for moving America beyond ideological and partisan deadlock. Learn more about PPI by visiting progressivepolicy.org.

Follow the Progressive Policy Institute.

###

PPI Statement on President Biden’s Build Back Better Framework

Posted on October 28, 2021 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Will Marshall, President of the Progressive Policy Institute, released the following statement in reaction to President Biden’s announcement of a deal on the Build Back Better framework and imminent vote on the bipartisan infrastructure package:

“President Biden today unveiled a revised Build Back Better framework that better reflects his party’s diverse coalition, and he urged Democratic lawmakers to proceed to a vote on his bipartisan infrastructure bill.

“PPI applauds the president’s diligent efforts to forge a new consensus behind a more balanced and realistic reconciliation bill. While we are concerned that the new framework tries to do too much with too little, we believe all progressives need to compromise to help President Biden deliver on his core commitments to working Americans.

“We call on the House Progressive Caucus to stop threatening to vote down the president’s infrastructure bill. They have been heard for months and many of their demands have found their way into the new framework.

“The new $1.8 trillion framework in important respects resembles one PPI published earlier this month as a pragmatic alternative to the left’s $3.5 trillion wish list. Our package cost just under $2 trillion, with roughly half the money focused on helping working families, one third on combatting climate change and the remainder being used to cover the uninsured and lower premiums for those with health insurance.

“Unfortunately, many of these core priorities are cut short because the new White House framework tries to enact too many programs on a temporary basis instead of prioritizing a few robust and transformative initiatives. We think many of these programs merit further study and deliberation and that they should be taken up in subsequent legislation rather than depriving core initiatives of permanent funding in the current bill. We also have serious concerns about whether the tax policies included in the framework will actually produce enough revenue to fully pay for the spending, particularly if all these ostensibly temporary programs are eventually extended or made permanent.

“As the framework is translated into legislative language, we hope to see further refinements aimed at allaying such concerns. In the meantime, we commend President Biden for patiently brokering the compromises necessary to get his Build Back Better bills across the finish line. Together with the American Rescue Plan, they would have a transformative impact on American jobs, innovation and competitiveness, and would ensure a more inclusive economic recovery that helps those hit hardest by the pandemic.

“It’s past time to stop debating and take the first step by passing the bipartisan infrastructure bill.”

Earlier this month, the Progressive Policy Institute released a focused blueprint for delivering on President Biden’s promise to Build Back Better while addressing the concerns of moderates who cannot support $3.5 trillion of new spending. The report, titled “Reconciling with Reality: The top priorities for building back better,” outlines a bold plan to deliver on three urgent priorities of the Democratic party within the confines of a roughly $2 trillion bill: supporting working families, combating climate change, and expanding access to affordable health care for those in need. Read it here.

###

Marshall for The Hill: Democrats need a win — now

Posted on October 12, 2021 by The Progressive Policy Institute

In politics, success tends to beget success. That truism apparently eluded leftwing Democrats on Sept. 30 when they refused to vote for President Biden’s $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill.

Instead of basking in accolades for having passed a second landmark achievement to go with Biden’s $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan, Democrats are treating the public to an extended exhibition of their inability to forge the internal consensus necessary to govern.

Even as clogged U.S. ports and long delays in delivering goods of all kinds underscore the urgent need for upgrading the nation’s economic infrastructure, the Congressional Progressive Caucus vows to persist in blocking the bill if they don’t get their way on a follow-on reconciliation bill that would spend trillions more on new social entitlements and climate protection.

That’s sewn anger and mistrust among moderate House Democrats, who were promised a vote and stood ready to pass the infrastructure bill last month. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) set a new deadline for a vote — Halloween, fittingly enough. To arrest the administration’s faltering momentum, Democrats need a big political win, and soon.

Read the full piece in The Hill.

Ritz for The Washington Post: A Build Back Better bill all Democrats can get behind

Posted on October 12, 2021 by The Progressive Policy Institute

President Biden is trying to build consensus around a $1.9 trillion to $2.3 trillion reconciliation bill, after several lawmakers in his own party made clear they could not support the full $3.5 trillion proposal working its way through Congress. Although some on the left are understandably disappointed, this package would still be an enormous accomplishment: Combined with the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan and the $1.2 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill, it would represent the third pillar of the largest and most progressive public investment since the Great Society over 50 years ago. But to get this transformative win across the finish line, Democrats must agree to spend smarter, not bigger and coalesce around a plan to pay for it.

The Progressive Policy Institute (PPI) recently published a report detailing what such a package could entail. Our blueprint includes $925 billion for a permanently expanded Child Tax Credit, universal preschool and a more robust system for non-college-educated workers to acquire marketable skills. To combat climate change, we propose $600 billion for tax credits and other incentives that would encourage the adoption of affordable electric vehicles and technologies such as carbon capture, hydrogen and geothermal energy and advanced nuclear power. Finally, we propose $425 billion to strengthen the Affordable Care Act (ACA) by giving coverage to working families who don’t already have it and pairing that with other measures to control health-care costs.

Read the full piece in the Washington Post.

PPI Unveils Radically Pragmatic Blueprint for Reconciliation

Posted on October 5, 2021 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Today, the Progressive Policy Institute’s Center for Funding America’s Future released a focused blueprint for delivering on President Biden’s promise to Build Back Better while addressing the concerns of moderates who cannot support $3.5 trillion of new spending. The report is titled “Reconciling with Reality: The top priorities for building back better,” and is authored by Ben Ritz, Director of the Center for Funding America’s Future.

Rather than cutting corners and using gimmicks to cram the entire progressive wish list into a smaller bill, PPI believes the party’s goal should be a more focused and disciplined reconciliation bill that sets clear priorities and accomplishes a few big objectives well. Specifically, this report outlines a bold plan to deliver on three urgent priorities of the Democratic party within the confines of a roughly $2 trillion bill: supporting working families, combating climate change, and expanding access to affordable health care for those in need.

“Despite the drama last week, President Biden and Democrats in Congress can still deliver the historic economic and social investments they promised during the campaign — but they need to spend smarter, not just bigger. Our blueprint is a reality-based approach to crafting the reconciliation bill, which will allow for an enormous advance of progressive government. Now is the time for the party to come together and show America they can govern,” said Ben Ritz, Director of the Center for Funding America’s Future.

“We urge Democrats to compromise around a set of urgent priorities the American people can understand, develop a consensus plan to fully pay for it, and work in a radically pragmatic spirit to get this big progressive win across the finish line. That’s the best way to help President Biden and their party deliver for the American people,” said Will Marshall, President of the Progressive Policy Institute.

The bipartisan infrastructure bill passed by the U.S. Senate in August remains snagged by internal disagreements among Congressional Democrats about the size and cost of the follow-on social investment package party leaders hope to pass with reconciliation rules that are not subject to a Republican filibuster. Democrats will likely need to reach a compromise on the reconciliation package by October 31st so they can pass the infrastructure bill before funding for the nation’s highway program expires.

Read the blueprint here:

Launched in 2018, PPI’s Center for Funding America’s Future works to promote a fiscally responsible public investment agenda that fosters robust and inclusive economic growth. We tackle issues of public finance in the United States and offer innovative proposals to strengthen the foundation of our economy and build shared prosperity.

Follow the Progressive Policy Institute.

###

Media Contact: Aaron White – awhite@ppionline.org

Reconciling With Reality: The top priorities for building back better

Posted on October 5, 2021December 16, 2024 by The Progressive Policy Institute

Introduction

The White House and Congressional Democrats are at a pivotal moment in their long-running effort to turn President Biden’s ambitious “Build Back Better” vision into law. The bipartisan infrastructure bill passed by the U.S. Senate in August remains snagged by internal disagreements among Congressional Democrats about the size and cost of the follow-on social investment package party leaders hope to pass with reconciliation rules that are not subject to a Republican filibuster. Democrats will likely need to reach a compromise on the reconciliation package by October 31^st so they can pass the infrastructure bill before funding for the nation’s highway program expires.

Though cast as a power struggle between the progressive left and the pragmatic center, what’s happening on Capitol Hill is actually a reconciliation with legislative reality. Democrats can only afford to lose three votes in the House of Representatives and have no margin of error in the Senate, where at least two Members, Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W. Va., and Kyrsten Sinema, D-Ariz., already have made it clear they won’t support a $3.5 trillion bill. Many Democrats in the House have concerns as well. Accordingly, President Biden says negotiators are now aiming for a final package that will likely cost between $1.9 trillion and $2.3 trillion.

Some progressives are trying to make their whole wish list fit within this budget constraint by setting arbitrary dates for programs to expire, as Republicans did to disguise the true cost of their 2001, 2003, and 2017 tax cut bills. For example, rather than spend $225 billion every year in the 10-year window, the package envisioned by the left might spend $450 billion each year for five years before abruptly expiring.

But this approach would be deeply problematic. As Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wisc., noted in a recent op-ed, “funding programs for two to three years at a time only creates uncertainty and unnecessary fiscal cliffs.” In the worst-case scenario, a Republican Congress could allow programs to expire, which would upend the Biden legacy while pulling the rug out from people who planned their lives around new benefits.

Rep. Suzan DelBene, D-Wa., chair of the moderate New Democrat Coalition in the House, further explained why such a package wouldn’t alleviate the fiscal concerns of many pragmatic Democrats: “If you assume that you’re going to do something short term just to make it look like it’s going to fit in a particular budget window, for a particular piece of legislation, but you assume it’s going to be renewed later, then you aren’t really being honest about what your long-term budget goals are.”

Fortunately, Democrats can still deliver historic economic and social investments that the country needs by spending smarter, not just bigger. The goal should be a more focused and disciplined reconciliation bill that sets clear priorities and accomplishes a few big objectives well instead of haphazardly trying to do everything at once. Specifically, PPI believes that lawmakers should focus on delivering three urgent priorities effectively: supporting working families, combating climate change, and expanding access to affordable health care for those in need. As President Biden has promised, the package should also be fully paid-for with credible offsets.

There can be no doubt that a bill along these lines would constitute an enormous advance for progressive government. When combined with the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan and the $550 billion bipartisan infrastructure bill, this package would represent the third pillar of the largest and most progressive public investment since the Great Society over 50 years ago. These landmark legislative accomplishments would constitute a clear and indisputable victory for President Biden’s vision and a win for Democrats of all stripes.

Here’s what a roughly $2 trillion package should include:

Supporting Working Families ($975 billion)

The American Rescue Plan increased the value of the Child Tax Credit and made the full value of the credit available to low-income families for the first time ever. This policy change has helped cut child poverty in half for 2021 and directly empowered parents to support their children without having to rely on siloed and difficult-to-access welfare bureaucracies. PPI has previously proposed a framework for making the full expansion permanent that would cost just over $800 billion. However, Congress could adopt a smaller expansion of the CTC and redirect the funds for other programs that support working families. This approach is sensible because making the CTC fully available to low-income families both does more to reduce poverty and costs less than increasing the CTC’s total value.

In addition to permanently expanding the CTC, Democrats should invest in our children’s education by making preschool, which is shown to dramatically increase a child’s lifetime earnings, universally available to three- and four-year olds. The cost of universal preschool should be reduced by either means-testing it or requiring high-income school districts to help cover the cost of this program.

PPI also believes Washington should stop underinvesting in non-college workers by creating multiple pathways to middle-class jobs, including new investments in apprenticeships and “last mile” job training initiatives. Finally, lawmakers could offer new parents a flat paid parental leave benefit that future Congresses could expand into a full paid family and medical leave program if they are willing to consider a broader menu of offsets to pay for it.

Combating the Climate Crisis ($600 billion)

The bipartisan infrastructure bill that passed the Senate in August offered a strong down payment on tackling the climate crisis, including funding for public transit, energy grid modernization, and carbon capture demonstration projects, but far more needs to be done. The follow-up bill should include a package of well-designed tax credits similar to the one produced by the Senate Finance Committee that would encourage the adoption of affordable electric vehicles and other green technologies. It should also fund meaningful climate resilience projects and additional investments in breakthrough technologies such as carbon capture, hydrogen energy, geothermal energy, and advanced nuclear power.

Another top priority is the Clean Energy Payment Program (CEPP) that would provide subsidies for electric utilities that increase the share of clean energy they produce by 4% each year while charging smaller penalties for those that do not. These provisions could be responsible for almost two-thirds of the emissions reductions sought by President Biden. However, the CEPP has run into concerns from Sen. Manchin and it may run afoul of the Byrd rule that governs what policies can be passed through the reconciliation process that allows Democrats to circumvent a Republican filibuster.

Climate change poses a large and growing threat to our economy, so even if the CEPP cannot be included in the package, it must be replaced by another policy to accomplish the same objective. PPI has long advocated for a carbon tax, possibly paired with rebates to mitigate the burden on low- and middle-income families. Some portion of the revenue could also be earmarked for funding additional investments in research and development to promote innovation and technology growth.

Strengthening the Affordable Care Act ($425 billion)

Some progressives in Congress, led by Sen. Sanders (I-Vt.), insist that America’s top health care priority should be expanding Medicare to cover dental, hearing, and vision benefits, which would cost more than $800 billion in the 10-year period after being fully phased-in. But it hardly seems “progressive” to provide more generous coverage for Medicare beneficiaries when millions of Americans have no health coverage at all — especially considering that the majority of seniors already have coverage for these services through Medicare Advantage or supplemental Medigap plans.

Instead, PPI believes Democrats should back Speaker Pelosi’s call for building on the Affordable Care Act by making some share of the American Rescue Plan’s expansion of insurance subsidies for middle-income households permanent and by providing coverage to the more than 2.2 million uninsured people who should be eligible for Medicaid in the 12 states that have yet to expand the program. These provisions to expand coverage should also be paired with policies to address the out-of-control growth of health care costs, such as price caps or a national public option, to both reduce the net cost of these provisions and make health care more affordable for all Americans. Any expansion of Medicare should be fully financed by income-based premiums or dropped altogether so it does not draw critical resources away from the other priorities in this package.

Conclusion

In addition to the Sanders Medicare expansion, PPI’s reconciliation framework omits some major elements of Biden’s original Build Back Better blueprint, including more public support for child and elder care, community colleges, and more. Their absence here doesn’t necessarily mean these priorities are unworthy of Democrats’ support, but rather reflects the political imperative of fashioning a compromise package that can unite the party’s diverse coalition. It is also critical that lawmakers avoid the temptation to waste limited funds on other parochial priorities, such as cutting taxes for their rich constituents by weakening or repealing the SALT cap, when so many more-worthy priorities are left unfulfilled.

Passing both the infrastructure and social investment bills has become a critical test of Democrats’ ability to govern. We urge Democrats to compromise around a set of urgent priorities the American people can understand, develop a consensus plan to pay for it, and work in a radically pragmatic spirit to get this big progressive win across the finish line. That’s the best way to help President Biden and their party deliver for the American people.

Download the Report:

About the Author:

Ben Ritz is the Director of PPI’s Center for Funding America’s Future. He previously staffed the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Economic Policy Project and served as Legislative Outreach Director for The Concord Coalition. Ben earned his Master’s of Public Policy Analysis and a Graduate Certificate of Public Finance from American University, where he also previously completed his undergraduate education. Follow him on Twitter: @BudgetBen

About the PPI Center for Funding America’s Future:

The PPI Center for Funding America’s Future works to promote a fiscally responsible public investment agenda that fosters robust and inclusive economic growth. We tackle issues of public finance in the United States and offer innovative proposals to strengthen the foundation of our economy and build shared prosperity.