Posted on 05/09/2019 12:59:55 PM PDT by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
For some people, Nevada Rep. Susie Lee said, the opportunity to drive on repaved highways, cross repaired bridges and fly out of modernized airports isn’t worth the political implications of a major infrastructure bill.
“I’ve been told, ‘You don’t want to give Donald Trump a win on this,’” Lee, a Democrat, told an audience this morning at the Four Seasons Hotel Las Vegas.
But even though the passage of a major bill would give Trump a stump point for the 2020 election, Lee said, the need for infrastructure spending outweighs partisan politics.
“This isn’t a Republican-Democrat thing. This is an American people issue,” she said.
Amid news that congressional Democratic leaders were scheduled to meet with Trump next week to discuss an infrastructure bill, Lee said she believed the issue was one where the parties could work together.
Toward that end, Lee joined the House problem solvers caucus, a group of about 50 representatives equally split between Republicans and Democrats. The caucus operates on a “Noah’s Ark rule” in which prospective members must be accompanied by a partner from the other party to enter the group.
Speaking to local business, political and community leaders during a breakfast meeting of the Las Vegas Metro Chamber of Commerce, Lee said her infrastructure-related priorities included landing funding for construction of Interstate 11 between Phoenix and Las Vegas. Nevada completed a 15-mile section of the highway last year, but the 280-mile stretch in Arizona has run into turbulence over environmental concerns.
“We need to work, obviously, with Arizona,” Lee said. “We’ve got to do a more regional approach.”
(Excerpt) Read more at lasvegassun.com ...
I hope they do a reasonably large infrastructure package. Not 2 trillion, but 400 bn over 5 years would benefit the country. Fund half of it with gas taxes.
PING!
“This isn’t a Republican-Democrat thing. This is an American people issue,” she said.”
Change parties and then lets talk.
To me, infrastructure and defense are the only two things the federal government should be involved in, so I don’t have an issue with Trump outlining spending on infrastructure, providing some of it involves more border protection.
Have we paid for the last one yet? I would be okay with this if it weren’t a blue state union bailout. If one hundred miles of pavement in CA, NY, et al received the same tax dollars as a hundred miles in Mississippi and Arkansas.
We saw a literal dam crisis in CA caused by tax dollars being directed to blie areas of the state.
I guess there won’t be any shovel ready memes on FR this time, wonder what the difference is? #PrinciplesNotPolitics
Build the wall where it is most needed and easiest to protect, which is not necessarily going to be where it’s easiest to construct..
Actually it’s a “We want our hands on a bunch of money to blow on other things other than what it was intended” kind of thing.
Unless “infrastructure” includes a border wall, I’d say f* it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.