Ramp up or crash down

Breaking levees, falling bridges, an 83-year-old steam pipe bursting in midtown Manhattan — how much proof do we need that America's infrastructure is in perilous shape?

Indeed, even the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which normally recoils at new tax proposals, now concedes the federal gas tax may have to rise in order to cope with an infrastructure crisis it says is "already costing us jobs, productivity, competitiveness, mobility, and most tragically, innocent American lives."

But imagine our politicians suddenly got up the courage to boost the gas tax a few pennies. Most of the $1.6 trillion national infrastructure deficit bill calculated by the American Society of Civil Engineers would still loom before us.

The consequences may even be worse than advertised so far. Inferior infrastructure even makes us more susceptible to terrorist attack like a "dirty" nuclear bomb, sneaked into the country through decrepit port facilities, says former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack. He made the remark to a Brookings Institution conference — "America's Infrastructure: Ramping Up or Crashing Down" — held in Washington this month.

So what's to be done in a nation where congressional "earmarking" of funds for legislators' pet home district projects generates taxpayer distrust of almost any new public investment? How can we turn around federal policy that seems to have valued rebuilding Iraqi infrastructure over our own roadways and bridges, our anemic passenger train system, our waterways and imperiled dams and levees?

Vilsack claims he cracked the code as governor of Iowa, by establishing a fact-based infrastructure-budgeting system for the state, tied to explicit goals — income growth through financial services and advanced manufacturing, power generation, renewable energy. Each step, he said, "required us to articulate specifically what every dollar for infrastructure is going to buy for us."

Iowa tapped both the gas tax and excess casino revenues for its capital budget. The federal government needs a capital budget too, said Vilsack, starting with an updated inventory of all federal assets and their condition, including risks of breakdown or loss. The account would be independent of the regular budget but tied to national economic-development goals.

If national infrastructure policy is to undergird and boost the national economy and U.S. global competitiveness, Brookings' Bruce Katz noted, it will have to place a high priority on updated, world-class infrastructure for the country's top 100 metropolitan areas. They're the dynamos of our national economy, with 65 percent of our population but with 74 percent of our gross national product and 76 percent of our knowledge jobs and patents.

But check the status quo. Most federal infrastructure outlays now get disbursed with scarcely any public discussion or requirements of states or localities to show need, economic potential, analysis of competing investments, or long-term maintenance funding for whatever does get built.

Couldn't these United States be smart enough to create capital budgets with meaningful funding and built-in incentives for responsible long-term investing that identifies risks, ranks goals, judges performance, shows the rippling benefits of key investments, and bolsters public confidence? And couldn't/shouldn't our national government take the lead?

Yes, says Vilsack, referring to taming of the earmarking craze: The Capitol Hill politicos must "give up power to get power. Trust me, if they develop a separate capital budget there'll still be plenty of opportunities to cut ribbons." But it will be a system people understand "and buy into." The result, Vilsack predicted: "to make us safer, more secure, better-paying jobs, more convenience, less travel time. We will be a happier nation — and in a happier nation, incumbents have a tendency to get re-elected."

And even anti-spending conservatives, he added, should like an accountable system and dealing with risk in advance, not waiting for bridges to fall or levees to fail.

Neal Peirce's column appears alternate Mondays on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is nrp@citistates.com