Trump asks Democrats to negotiate on infrastructure plan

[webfact]

Trump asks Democrats to negotiate on infrastructure plan

By David Shepardson

 

U.S. President Donald Trump in Washington, U.S., February 13, 2018. REUTERS/Leah Millis

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump urged congressional Democrats on Tuesday to make a deal to modernize the country's infrastructure after his plan received critical reviews as lacking enough federal funding, but said he was open to changes.

 

"I actually think that we can go bipartisan on infrastructure," Trump told a meeting of lawmakers at the White House. "We put in our bid. Come back with a proposal. We have a lot of people that are great Republicans that want something to happen. We have to rebuild our country."

 

The White House wants to use $200 billion in federal funding to try to encourage $1.5 trillion in improvements over 10 years by relying on state and local governments and the private sector. It also wants to eliminate environmental hurdles to projects and sell off federal assets.

 

Democratic Senator Ed Markey said the plan "expects cash-strapped states to drive most of the progress on 1/8th of a tank of gas. We need $1 trillion in direct federal spending to rebuild our infrastructure."

 

Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao said the plan would "empower decision-making at the state and the local level, because state and local officials know best the infrastructure needs of their communities."

 

Chao will appear at a March 1 Senate hearing on the plan.

 

Fitch Ratings said in a research note on Tuesday it could be "challenging" for states and local governments to come up with funding. The plan "includes limited additional federal funding and lacks a long-term solution for the federal highway trust fund, which serves as the primary source of existing federal infrastructure funding," Fitch said. 

 

Democrats want $1 trillion in new federal spending and say the government must find new revenue sources to pay for crumbling roads. The U.S. gas tax has not been raised since 1993 and Congress has shifted more than $130 billion to shore up the highway trust fund since 2008.

 

Auditors say the trust fund will need an additional $107 billion through 2026 to keep pace with current spending.

 

Chao said on Tuesday the administration was weighing a range of options to fund public infrastructure projects, including a higher tax on gasoline.

 

Republican Senator John Kennedy said any improvements must be paid for. "I need to know where the money's going to come from," adding he did not want "to borrow more money from China."

 

(Reporting by David Shepardson; Editing by Peter Cooney)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2018-02-14

[spidermike007]

The people ask Trump to negotiate on the infrastructure bill. Please spend less on bombs, warplanes and the military, and please spend more money helping your people. It is estimated that the national infrastructure needs at least 4 trillion dollars, to bring it up to date. Mr. Deflector in chief. Please stop your constant deflection for a nano second, and actually do something that helps your people. Not your lobbyists or your corporations. Your people. Your supporters. Remember them? The lobbyists, who you have sold your soul to, are not your people. Drain the swamp? How about re-populate it with your own whores?

 

Passing the buck on to the states, cities and private individuals is not a solution. It is not a "deal". It is passing the buck. It is a non solution. 

 

President Trump. The art of I cannot make a deal to save my life. 

[ALLSEEINGEYE]

What a hypocrite!!! 

[Srikcir]

10 hours ago, webfact said:

We need $1 trillion in direct federal spending to rebuild our infrastructure."

Trump had that $1 trillion but he and the Republican congress blew it away on tax cuts for corporations and the wealthy. In doing so he and Republicans ignored bipartisan legislation.

Now he wants the states to make up the shortfall for his infrastructure plan! And that includes states that were hard hit with loss of deduction for state taxes in federal tax returns. 

10 hours ago, webfact said:

"We put in our bid. Come back with a proposal.

That's not required. US Congress sets the budgets, not the President. Presidential budget plans are typically ignored as "wish lists."

[mrwebb8825]

On 2/14/2018 at 6:55 PM, Srikcir said:

And that includes states that were hard hit with loss of deduction for state taxes in federal tax returns. 

How exactly did that affect the states that collect state taxes? 

[Srikcir]

16 minutes ago, mrwebb8825 said:

How exactly did that affect the states that collect state taxes? 

No point to your question? Do you have a specific concern?

 

Loss of federal funding for infrastructure in states that will be caused by Trump's infrastructure plan requires either states to increase state taxes (typically through income taxes as other taxes immediately affect businesses) and/or reduce state spending, typically on social programs. Or the state must prioritize its infrastructure needs that basically places it in a status quo - no overall improvement. Remember that states must have balanced budgets, unlike the federal government.

 

Some would say "no big deal" - states just raise or initiate (Florida and Texas have no state income tax vs. Washington, California and New York that have high state income taxes) income taxes to pay for state's share of Trump's infrastructure plan. However, as state taxpayers cannot now deduct their state income taxes from their federal income tax returns, they are placed in a more sever economic situation to meet additional or new income state taxes.

 

Maybe state taxpayers will agree to higher or new state taxes that can generate adequate funding to meet the state's infrastructure needs. But that has proven an unreasonable expectation historically and counter intuitive to the whole public relations campaign to promote Trump's tax legislation - return more money to taxpayers to increase consumer spending and create more employment.

 

Trump's infrastructure plan essentially negates the personal tax benefits of his new tax legislation! If Trump's new tax legislation didn't "save" $1 trillion, those funds could have been used to meet his infrastructure plan without any burden to the states.

 

 

[mrwebb8825]

28 minutes ago, Srikcir said:

Some would say "no big deal" - states just raise or initiate (Florida and Texas have no state income tax vs. Washington, California and New York that have high state income taxes)

You need some updated information:

"Seven U.S. states currently don't have an income tax: Alaska, Florida, Nevada, South Dakota, Texas, Washington and Wyoming. And residents of New Hampshire and Tennessee are also spared from handing over an extra chunk of their paycheck on April 15, though they do pay tax on dividends and income from investments."

 

As for generating revenue (none of which has been lost due to the new tax structure) they could legalize marijuana, start a state lottery, raise state cigarette and alcohol taxes, etc. taking advantage of vices rather than broad stroke taxing everyone for everything.