Trump claims his infrastructure plan will boost our economy and lead to $1.5 trillion in new investment, but a new study shows it doesn’t even come close – his plan is estimated to spur even less new investment than the cost of the plan, and will have little to no benefit to our economy. It’s clear Trump’s infrastructure plan falls well short of his promises and addressing our nation’s infrastructure needs.
Total investment from Trump’s infrastructure plan is estimated to fall well short of the $1.5 trillion he promised, and will have “little to no impact on the economy.”
CNBC: “Trump infrastructure plan comes up $1 trillion short of its funding goal, analysis finds.”
CNBC: “As a result, the Penn Wharton analysis found, ‘investment across all levels of government would increase between $20 billion to $230 billion, including the $200 billion federal investment.’ At those spending levels, they estimated, the plan would have ‘little to no impact’ on gross domestic product.”
States across the country have confirmed that Trump’s infrastructure plan falls short of addressing our nation’s infrastructure needs.
Miami Herald: “Trump’s Infrastructure Plan Needs Lots Of Money From States. Florida May Not Have It.”
Los Angeles Times: “If Republicans Have Their Way, California Highways Stand To Lose Big Under Trump's Infrastructure Plan”
Arkansas Matters: “’I've had concerns about that all along and it's not a good deal for Arkansas,’ says Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-AR). Arkansas' Fourth District Congressman says the public-private partnership the president is calling for won't work in rural Arkansas where private enterprise is limited. ‘That's more for urban areas,’ he continues.”
Arkansas Matters: “But Westerman and other lawmakers are calling for a bigger commitments from the federal government, saying only that will provide the kind of boost rural American needs.”
Anniston Star: “Let’s call President Trump’s ballyhooed infrastructure plan what it is: a political sham […] Trump’s plan puts most of the monetary burden on states and counties, which essentially dooms any chance that his idea would work. As written, the plan calls for the feds to pay only 20 percent of the costs; the remaining 80 percent would come from the states and private sources. More truth from Sen. Shelby: ‘A lot of communities, a lot of the counties in this state have no money, let’s be honest.’”
Pittsburgh City Paper: “Cranberry Township manager Jerry Andree told CP the Butler County township has been working diligently to expand Freedom and Rochester roads, as a way to accommodate Cranberry’s booming population. Cranberry plans to allocate significant dollars to these projects, but even so, the township wouldn't come close to funding those projects under Trump’s proposal. ‘Local municipalities simply do not have that kind of local funding to help with transportation improvements on state highways,’ wrote Andree in an email to CP.”
Pittsburgh City Paper: “Peduto spokesperson Tim McNulty wrote in an email to CP that Pittsburgh needs to complete ‘all kinds of bridge, street, transportation and transit projects.’ But he doesn’t think Trump is really offering any help. ‘Under the president's proposal, the federal match for infrastructure projects would be boiled down to next than nothing,’ wrote McNulty.”