One issue where I stand on the opposite side from my normal position is the fight over a second bridge over the Detroit river. I’m for it because in my opinion its a smart investment because Detroit is a bottleneck at the second busiest border crossing (truck freight)in the USA after Laredo.
The good it would do for Detroit would only be a side effect rather than a primary objective. Unlike high speed rail, the need is already be there and would be whether Detroit was there or not. Canada has been pushing for it for 30 years and even has their side of the river prepared with a highway extension and everything.
My issue with be with how to pay for it.
We recently had our governor here in NJ nix a third tunnel project under the Hudson River to NYC; people b!tched & moaned, stooping so low as to complain that people may need it to “see a Broadway show” (since our area lost so many jobs - especially financial jobs - there are a lot less people using ALL crossings into NYC, and since those jobs moved to Manila & Bangalore, they won’t be back anytime soon).
He said it simply didn’t make financial sense, and he was absolutely right; we can’t pretend it is 1990 anymore.