Infrastructure Bill 2021

[Rothman]

Have some states actually released wishlists for what they would do with their money?

Not NY, I don't believe.

[KCRoadFan]

What does the KC region, where I live, want to do with the money? How about Missouri and Kansas in general? Have any state or local officials said anything regarding that?

[mvak36]

What does the KC region, where I live, want to do with the money? How about Missouri and Kansas in general? Have any state or local officials said anything regarding that?

I have been looking but I haven't seen anything so far.

I would guess most of the money will go to repairing roads and bridges, as it should. But I'm still curious to see what expansion/modernization projects they will use the money for.

My best guesses:
Missouri might use that money for some of their Tier 1 projects in their Unfunded Needs list.

Kansas might use it to move some of the IKE development projects to construction.

[hbelkins]

Kentucky's biggest priority will be the companion span for the Brent Spence Bridge (I-71/I-75) but I don't know if Ohio will share the same enthusiasm for it.

I wonder if this will allow the bridge to be built without tolls. Or if this will allow for the I-69 bridge to be a free crossing instead of a toll one?

[froggie]

^ The only thing preventing either the new Brent Spence or the I-69 bridges to be built as free bridges is the funding capacity of the respective states (KY/OH and KY/IN).  If the states want to plunk enough money down for each bridge to avoid tolls, there's nothing stopping them.  But that would also eat up a hefty chunk of each state's transportation budget.

[hbelkins]

^ The only thing preventing either the new Brent Spence or the I-69 bridges to be built as free bridges is the funding capacity of the respective states (KY/OH and KY/IN).  If the states want to plunk enough money down for each bridge to avoid tolls, there's nothing stopping them.  But that would also eat up a hefty chunk of each state's transportation budget.

There's a loud contingent in northern Kentucky that is dead-set against tolls. I'm sure they'll be screaming loudly, "we've got all these Biden Bucks (TM) now, so we don't need to toll it." This mindset is a bipartisan one. And Kentucky has a lot more pressing transportation needs for its residents than a bridge to Ohio. There are a whole lot of people who just don't realize that a new bridge isn't going to happen without tolls.

[Flint1979]

Not good at all.

[LM117]

According to this article, Biden will sign the bill Monday.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-hits-road-baltimore-port-stop-tout-infrastructure-win-n1283616

[Scott5114]

I've always thought that if I were President I'd be in the gallery whenever they were voting on an important bill, so I could go downstairs and sign it right there on the dais the moment the gavel dropped and the bill was declared passed.

[LM117]

I've always thought that if I were President I'd be in the gallery whenever they were voting on an important bill, so I could go downstairs and sign it right there on the dais the moment the gavel dropped and the bill was declared passed.

Yeah, if I were Biden, I'd be signing this ASAP, especially after my party just got done telling everyone that the delays in bringing the bills to a vote were a major factor in Democratic losses in VA last week.

On a side note, as someone living in VA, I can say firsthand that the bills were hardly a factor in the gubernatorial race. McAuliffe's campaign was a trainwreck, and once he made his infamous comment about parents and teachers during a debate, Youngkin took that soundbite and ran it all the way to the end zone. It was game over after that. The other losses downballot was collateral damage from McAuliffe's collapse, IMO.

[D-Dey65]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

[TheHighwayMan3561]

Maybe I-70 can be finished to I-95 and go to Baltimore.

[D-Dey65]

Maybe I-70 can be finished to I-95 and go to Baltimore.

You could say the same about I-83, but you know that's being thwarted too.

[HighwayStar]

Maybe I-70 can be finished to I-95 and go to Baltimore.

It would be wonderful, but my guess is building I-70 is racist so it won't happen.

[kernals12]

Maybe I-70 can be finished to I-95 and go to Baltimore.

It would be wonderful, but my guess is building I-70 is racist so it won't happen.

Aren't they planning to tear out the Franklin-Mulberry Expressway?

And I think it's understandable that building an interstate highway through a beloved city park would provoke controversy.

[Plutonic Panda]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

[kernals12]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

[Plutonic Panda]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

[kernals12]

YAY!! 

If this didn't include demolishing highways that are supposedly racist, I'd feel the same way as you.

Let's see what really gets torn down. Freeways like 375 in Detroit should go. Hopefully most of these funds can go to creating tunnels or park caps instead of all out removals.

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

Lol that's nothing. That wouldn't even cover half of the cost of the stupid I-81 removal project in Syracuse. Hell, just blow all the money on that shit and be done with it.

They should try using open pore asphalt like they have in Europe. It massively reduces noise. It also costs more, but for highways in extremely densely populated areas (think Cross-Bronx Expressway), it would be a gamechanger.

[Plutonic Panda]

^^^ I haven't ever heard of that. Thanks for sharing I'm going to search it up.

PS, here's a cool video from B1M about this bill.

[HighwayStar]

If anyone wanted proof that democracy is a failed system this is it. Paying to demolish infrastructure while the rest of the world is building it.

[Plutonic Panda]

If anyone wanted proof that democracy is a failed system this is it. Paying to demolish infrastructure while the rest of the world is building it.

Lol wut

[NoGoodNamesAvailable]

If anyone wanted proof that democracy is a failed system this is it. Paying to demolish infrastructure while the rest of the world is building it.

Lol wut

While china and other countries build roads, in america we've decided that highways are all racist, so we need to ruin our own cities to atone for it.

[hotdogPi]

I don't think this particular bill is removing any freeways.

[D-Dey65]

They're only allocating $1 billion. That's not going to buy a lot of removals.

If they're going to use that $1B for any road projects, it should be for building them up, not tearing them down.