Minneapolis and NYC are Just Tips of the Iceberg (updated by See-Dub)

The bridge collapse in Minneapolis reminds us that infrastructure isn't free, and that our ongoing policy of underfunding infrastructure maintenance and improvements comes with dire consequences. Too often we treat infrastructure like a piggy bank for pet projects: collect the tax money, then spend it elsewhere. Because we build with large margins of safety, the risk is normally small enough that politicians don't realize that there's any risk at all.

But the recent steam explosion in NYC and the bridge collapse should be enough to show that underfunding infrastructure is a calculated risk, and that politicians are unqualified to make that sort of calculation.

The American Society for Civil Engineers (ASCE) puts out a report every two years on the state of America's infrastructure. Their latest report card was prepared in 2005. Here's what they said about bridges at that time:

As of 2003, 27.1% of the nation's bridges (160,570) were structurally deficient or functionally obsolete...The Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA's) strategic plan states that by 2008, less than 25% of the nation's bridges should be classified as deficient. If that goal were met, 1 in 4 bridges in the nation would still be deficient. There were 590,750 bridges in the United States in 2000; however, one in three urban bridges (31.2% or 43,189) was classified as structurally deficient or functionally obsolete, much higher than the national average.

According to the ASCE, we need $1.6 trillion over the next 5 years to "bring our infrastructure to good condition." Only $1 trillion is funded. And now the ASCE is starting to suspect that $1.6 trillion is too low.

Undertaking this rennovation of our infrastructure, which includes not only bridges, but roads, rail, drinking water, waste treatment, schools, waterways, energy, parks, aviation and mass transit, is good for safety, good for lifestyles, good for commerce, and good for the economy. Both political parties should support it on the federal, state, and local levels, and stop siphoning funds away from what seems to be a mundane and non-urgent program.

UPDATE by See-Dub: Used to be that a libertarian was someone who thought the legitimate role of government was limited to building roads and defending the borders. Economic libertarians have deep-sixed the second part of that maxim, and I wonder whether there is still support for the first.

It's not just government, BTW. Private industry imperils our collective safety and security when it defers basic maintenance. BP's failure to maintain its Alaska pipeline accomplished one of the terrorists' goals for them. Even without having to go through the morons in Congress it's difficult to get people to stop taking those risks.