Infrastructure Projects Should Be Saved From Budget Cuts

The amount of freight moving on the nation's roadways increases exponentially, each and every year. For example, according to the now-defunct National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Commission, the number of freight trucks in the United States increased from 5.8 million in 1980 to 7.9 million in 2002. During that same time period, the average distance traveled by commercial trucks climbed from 19,000 miles to 27,000 miles per truck. It has only grown further in the last decade.  The rail and air transport industries have seen similar increases during that time period as well.

Keeping up with growth like this means ensuring that the country's system of roads, rail lines and airports is maintained and improved on a regular basis. However, during these times of shrinking budgets and continuing financial concerns, infrastructure expenditures remain low, and are in danger of dipping even lower in the years to come. According to a report in the National Journal, the budget group Taxpayers for Common Sense proposed a $188 billion funding cut to transportation funding, and a $50 billion cut to the Airport and Airway Trust Fund. The group felt these projects could be adequately described as "inefficient, effective or wasteful use of taxpayer dollars."

It's hard to convince people that infrastructure is important, when we are also seeing education and social welfare programs at risk of funding cuts, but it is important to remember that infrastructure projects mean jobs. With an efficient network to distribute their goods, companies can lower costs and spend more money on hiring employees.  More jobs in a community mean more tax revenue for local governments to spend on local needs, such education, emergency services or social programs.  We shouldn't cut back on these vital projects in the name of jobs, as the cuts will likely have the opposite effect.