Hitchhiking in search of stimulus funds
An analysis of over 5,000 transportation-related stimulus projects released today indicates that less than half of the funds are slated for investment in metropolitan areas. The analysis, conducted by the New York Times, suggests that these transportation investments have been selected based on formula as opposed to what the American economy of today looks like.
The nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas:
Minnesota has distinguished itself in the past with policy that recognizes our common interests across the state, and I do not present these findings to mean that outstate Minnesota does not deserve effective, quality infrastructure – it does. Some readers will also note that the seven-county metro area contains just 12% of the state’s total lane miles. So doesn’t it make sense that stimulus funds reflect lane miles?
In its most succinct form, the answer may well be no. Here’s why: The federal stimulus legislation will provide capital grants to build, renovate, and replace transportation infrastructure – but it does not fundamentally address how state and local governments will pay for maintenance and operations. Over 87% of Minnesota’s total lane miles are county, township and city streets, paid for from limited state and local sources. Overbuilding may create long-term costs that will stifle prosperity in greater Minnesota, not the reverse.
In metropolitan areas, the higher concentration of economic activity will allow for the funding of ongoing maintenance of road, rail and other systems, which will in turn bolster the metro economy as well as the statewide economy. Future stimulus funding, and the coming debate about a new federal transportation bill, ought to be designed in this light.
The nation’s 100 largest metropolitan areas:
Use only 12% of the U.S. land area;
House and employ 65% of our population;
Generate 78% of patent filings; and
Create 75% of total U.S. economic activity.The report shows that the Minneapolis-St. Paul metropolitan area, while producing 1.36% of the country’s economic activity, is the location of 0.72% of the transportation-related stimulus projects authorized.
Minnesota has distinguished itself in the past with policy that recognizes our common interests across the state, and I do not present these findings to mean that outstate Minnesota does not deserve effective, quality infrastructure – it does. Some readers will also note that the seven-county metro area contains just 12% of the state’s total lane miles. So doesn’t it make sense that stimulus funds reflect lane miles?
In its most succinct form, the answer may well be no. Here’s why: The federal stimulus legislation will provide capital grants to build, renovate, and replace transportation infrastructure – but it does not fundamentally address how state and local governments will pay for maintenance and operations. Over 87% of Minnesota’s total lane miles are county, township and city streets, paid for from limited state and local sources. Overbuilding may create long-term costs that will stifle prosperity in greater Minnesota, not the reverse.
In metropolitan areas, the higher concentration of economic activity will allow for the funding of ongoing maintenance of road, rail and other systems, which will in turn bolster the metro economy as well as the statewide economy. Future stimulus funding, and the coming debate about a new federal transportation bill, ought to be designed in this light.
© 2009 Star Tribune. All rights reserved.