There has been some bad blood between the Sanders and Clinton camps, and — obviously — the Clinton camp has won ultimate crowing rights. But we should put aside intramural rivalries to recognize at least one big, uncontroversial policy that Sanders clearly got right and Clinton would be negligent not to adopt . . . Bernie’s infrastructure spending plan.
Before delving into this scintillating topic, let me note one interesting piece of historical trivia. Modern Republicans’ bizarre antipathy to infrastructure spending is not entirely new. Weirdly, when the Confederate states set up their new constitution, they largely, with minimal exceptions, tracked the existing U.S. Constitution (except, of course, for legalizing and preserving slavery). Yet, of the very few changes that the Confederacy made in their new constitution, one of them was to ban nearly all “federal” spending on infrastructure. It’s true. And, bizarrely, to this day Republican opposition to infrastructure spending is a weird Southern dog-whistle. (Further proof that this is smart federal policy.)
OK. Hillary did put forth an increased infrastructure plan, but it was woefully timid politically and inadequate to our actual needs as well. Hillary’s plan is here, and it essentially calls for a five year, $275 billion investment that barely scratches the country’s actual needs and does too little to stimulate working class jobs.
By contrast, Mr. Sanders’ plan not only recognized that we needed this stimulus for job growth, but also recognized the dire straits of today’s infrastructure spending. We need new roads, schools, ports, dams, bridges, tunnels, airports, railway, fiber optics, Wi-Fi, levees, electrical grid, water treatment plants, etc. And Mr. Sanders did not flinch from addressing the costs (and benefits) of such projects. Rather, Mr. Sanders’ infrastructure plan called for $1 trillion over five years. Indeed, Mr. Sanders’ plan is so superior that I quote from it below:
While the economy has improved significantly since the worst days of the recession, our nation still faces a major jobs crisis. We need to create millions of decent paying jobs, and we need to create them now. And infrastructure spending is one of the best ways to do just that.
The Rebuild America Act would put more than thirteen million Americans to work in decent-paying jobs. These are jobs in sectors of the economy that haven’t fully recovered from the recession, like construction, and they are jobs that cannot be shipped offshore or outsourced overseas.
Moreover, each and every project will require equipment, supplies and services – from architects, engineers, and building materials and supply companies. Thirteen million Americans will spend their hard-earned salaries in their communities, supporting restaurants and local stores.
It is no wonder groups from across the political spectrum – from organized labor to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce – agree that investing in infrastructure makes sound economic sense. When spending goes up, both GDP and household incomes grow. Even the International Monetary Fund – long a proponent of economic austerity – now says that well-designed infrastructure projects spur almost $3 in economic output for each dollar spent.
This is a no-brainer, and we have the money — if for no reason other than the money inevitably has to be spent anyway. (Infrastructure costs don’t go away; they just pile up.) Plus, we have to have the political will to push through such basic public policy.
As we look to unify the party, and pursue smart policy, there is no easier and better path than to recognize and admit when your once rival had a better plan than yours.
Ms. Clinton, as you start your national campaign, and try to bring all Democrats aboard, please take one obvious and smart step — adopt Bernie’s infrastructure plan.
You, and we, won't regret it.