Slashdot Mirror


Trump's New Infrastructure Plan Calls For Selling Off Two Airports (politico.com)

The Trump administration has released an infrastructure plan on Monday that proposes that the federal government considers selling off Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport and Washington Dulles International Airport. According to Trump's blueprint, the administration wants to allow federal agencies to divest assets if they "can demonstrate an increase in value from the sale would optimize the taxpayer value for federal assets." It also includes the George Washington and Baltimore Washington parkways, the Washington Aqueduct and the transmission assets of the Tennessee Valley Authority and Bonneville Power Administration on the list for "potential divesture." Politico reports: State and local agencies or the private sector may be better at managing assets currently owned by the federal government, the administration argues, and federal agencies should be able to "identify appropriate conditions under which sales would be made." They should also "delineate how proceeds would be spent." Under the administration's proposal, federal agencies would have to complete an analysis demonstrating an "increase in value from divestiture." Though technically owned by the federal government, both airports are operated by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority under a long-term lease agreement. The 53-page infrastructure plan lays out a vision to turn $200 billion in federal money into $1.5 trillion for fixing America's infrastructure by leveraging local and state dollars and private investment. "The White House says its plan will create $1.5 trillion for repairing and upgrading America's infrastructure," reports CNNMoney. "Only $200 billion of that, however, would come from direct federal spending. The rest is supposed to come from state and local governments, which are expected to match any federal allocation by at least a four-to-one ratio. States have gradually assumed more of the responsibility for funding infrastructure in recent years, and the White House says it wants to accelerate that trend."

As for how the money would be split up, the plan says that half of the new federal money, $100 billion, "would be parceled out as incentives to local government entities," reports CNNMoney. "An additional $20 billion would go toward 'projects of national significance' that can 'lift the American spirit,'" while another $50 billion will be designated "for rural block grants, most of which will be given to states according to a formula based on the miles of rural roads and the rural population they have," reports CNNMoney. "The rest of the money would support other infrastructure-related undertakings..."

10 of 406 comments (clear)

  1. Private ownership of public infrastructure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I can't wait for the "de-platforming" trolls to find out that "they own it, so you have to do what they say" becomes incredibly problematic in real world contexts.

    1. Re:Private ownership of public infrastructure by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Airports are unsuitable for private ownership because there is little meaningful competition. It's not like a rival can open their own competing airport nearby.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
  2. User Fees by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    The private sector KNOWS how to run things. We just need a few user fees.

    -Parking garage entrance fee
    -Parking garage exit fee
    -Airport entrance fee
    -Airport exit fee
    -Airport Security Fee
    -Fee payment Fee
    -Fee payment fee recovery fee
    -Fee payment fee recovery fee surcharge
    -Fee payment fee recovery fee surcharge levy
    -Fee payment fee recovery fee surcharge levy premium

    They should charge for WiFi bandwidth by the byte, say the same as a text message fee, but with a premium.

    -Stuff at the airport is too cheap, as proof, even the poors can afford to fly. Poors should have to take the bus everywhere, or at least need a loan to fly.

    -Passport fees should also increase.

    1. Re:User Fees by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You misunderstand your own example. What brings costs down is competition. A lot of big pieces of infrastructure like airports do not have head-to-head competition. If you hate your local airport and need to fly cross country for business, are you going to take a train? If the major freeways around your home are privately owned, are you going to walk?

      I know that it is fashionable to pretend that government is bad at everything and private enterprise is better, but it is simply not true in the real world.

  3. In other words... by Sarten-X · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In other words, government agencies are now expected to put a dollar value on their historic icons, landmark infrastructure, and carefully-controlled limited-development areas, and sell them to the highest bidders, then turn around and give that money to the federal government to cover tax cuts for the companies who just bought our society.

    --
    You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
    1. Re:In other words... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Conservatism has been redefined as taking what is owned by the public and giving it to multinational corporations for kickbacks and contributions. That's literally all they care to do now. They love uneducated voters. Nuff said.

    2. Re:In other words... by hdyoung · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What Trump says he will do in the future is always going to be better than what Obama's real accomplishments. On paper. Maybe. If all those discredited assumptions and flat-out fabrications actually come to pass. Which they will. Totally. Trust him. Only he can fix our problems. It'll be yuge.

  4. Fiscal conservativism by PopeRatzo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Trump could do anything. Especially run up bills on the joint's credit. And why not? Nobody's gonna pay for it anyway. And as soon as the deliveries are made in the front door, you move the stuff out the back and sell it at a discount. You take a two hundred dollar case of booze and you sell it for a hundred. It doesn't matter. It's all profit. And then finally, when there's nothing left, when you can't borrow another buck from the bank or buy another case of booze, you bust the joint out. You light a match.

    Fuck you, pay me.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  5. In other words ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The 53-page infrastructure plan lays out a vision to turn $200 billion in federal money into $1.5 trillion for fixing America's infrastructure by leveraging local and state dollars and private investment

    In other words, Trump isn't doing a goddamned thing, is doing his standard trick of making other people spend their money and take the risk while he puts his name on it, and is going to transfer public assets into private assets. This is pretty much how he built all of his other failed ventures.

    This is such a bullshit 'plan' it defies belief ... because Trump is a crook and thief who apparently can't do math.

    But in the mean time he'll be sure people are dying in the streets because they have no healthcare, but his rich asshole friends all get tax breaks.

    I swear, the economics trotted out by Republicans is a complete fantasy most of the time.

  6. Private airports are usually 'nicer', but... by Cimexus · · Score: 5, Interesting

    As an Australian that moved to the US a few years ago and does a lot of flying for work, I'm on the fence when it comes to airport privatisation proposals. One of the interesting differences between the US and Australia is that, despite the fact that the US is generally more in favour of private sector delivery of services (think healthcare etc.), it has overwhelmingly kept its airports publically owned. Most major airports in the US are publically owned, whereas I think every major Australian airport was privatised many years ago.

    On the one hand Australian airports are wayyyy nicer than US airports. More modern and up to date, cleaner, more spacious, better and more facilities etc. Nicer places to be in by a long shot. US airports, especially some of the major ones (Newark and O'Hare spring to mind) are very overcrowded at peak times, straining at the seams and generally just more unpleasant places to be in (e.g. what's with those disgusting old seats and claustrophobically low ceilings in Concourses E/F at ORD?)

    But why are they so much nicer? Because they charge a lot more and thus have a lot more money to pump into improvements. US airport parking fees, even in a major city, are a small fraction of what they are in Australia for instance. I could park at Chicago for a week for what it could cost for a few hours at SYD or MEL. Australian airports no doubt also charge the airlines more than their US counterparts too (landing fees etc.), which indirectly affects ticket prices etc.

    So in terms of user experience, private airports seem nicer, but in terms of equity of accessibility to travel itself, publicly owned is the way to go. Prices go through the roof when airports are privatised, if Australia is anything to go by. Travel should not be only for the wealthy.