JONATHAN CHAIT JANUARY 24, 2011
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
...David Frum has some pretty interesting ideas. A taste:
The right kind of focused, temporary government spending can also be a powerful job creator. Over the next generation, we desperately need to improve our road, air, and rail networks and to modernize our systems for distributing electricity. We should be doing as much as possible of this work now, to spur recovery.
Unfortunately, infrastructure investment has been a victim of our broken politics. The money does not go to the best projects. The money is earmarked by the most powerful politicians. We need a new tunnel under the Hudson. We get a bridge to nowhere.
I propose that all revenues from gasoline taxes, aviation fees, and other similar sources be placed in a fund directed by an independent infrastructure bank. The bank would be permitted to issue bonds up to a certain level, too. Instead of Congress writing a highway bill every five years, the bank would develop a list of priorities — no politics allowed. I'd suggest we have seven directors of the bank. Three would be nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate. Two would be nominated by a conference of the Republican state governors, two more by a conference of the Democratic state governors. The directors would serve fixed and overlapping terms. When we're balancing the budget, we can move slowly through the list of bank infrastructure priorities. In a year like 2011, when it's cheap to borrow and workers need jobs, we can bring projects forward faster. Congress would always have the last word, in an up-or-down vote. And Congress would decide whether to increase or reduce the flow of future tax revenues into the infrastructure bank.
Every American will have the reassurance that these new infrastructure projects are not pork barrel. They were not chosen to reach some political deal. The money you pay at the pump or at the airport or in future taxes on carbon dioxide and other pollutants will be reinvested toward faster travel, more advanced telecommunications, and cleaner water.
Sadly, the speech is probably all done. You know that if Bill Clinton were president, he'd just be getting around to spitballing the major themes right about now, and he might well just steal Frum's whole speech. Sigh.
4 comments
This demonstrates that Frum is not a modern conservative. He is actually making a constructive policy suggestion, and doing so in good faith in the hope that it will improve the quality of life for the American people. In doing so, he acknowledges the propriety of the role of the federal government in maintiaining our physical infrastructure. If he was a real modern conservative, he would demogogically rail against the evils of government while surreptitiously securing pork for his constituients. Our country would be a better place if there actually were a few good government conservatives.
- spd1955
January 24, 2011 at 12:27pm
David Frum is precisely a modern conservative, which distinguishes him from the legions of radicals who call themselves "conservative." Ross Douthat wrote recently that when you see your opponents as the fount of all evil and you perceive that all the good is on your side, then you are a utopian. Utopianism doesn't not sit well with actual conservatism.
- liberalref
January 24, 2011 at 1:03pm
Agreed, libref.
- ironyroad
January 24, 2011 at 1:32pm
The term modern conservative was intended to be ironic, or perhaps even sarcastic, to distinguish the conservative movement from any sort of traditonal conservatism. I nearly puke when I hear someone like George Will invoke Edmund Burke to support some form of reactionary garbage.
- spd1955
January 24, 2011 at 1:41pm