Just over a week ago, I did a post about the impact of earmarks on the availability of funds to fix roads and bridges. (Short version: Earmarks have an effect, but fixing them won't fix the investment problem.)
For the piece, I relied on some 2004 numbers from the US Department of Transportation (USDoT). It turns out there are 2006 numbers available. As you might guess, the estimated costs are higher, so the new data doesn't affect my argument.
I updated the earlier post with the new numbers anyway. Growth & Justice wants to bring transparency and impartiality to the discussion, and using the newer information may help avoid confusion over dueling numbers somewhere down the line.
A look at the 2006 report reveals some interesting changes from the 2004 version. To quote the new report:
For this  report, the modeling procedures for estimating the highway investment scenarios have been modified to assume that the funding to support increases in highway and bridge investment above 2004 levels would be financed in a manner consistent with the current financing structure, which is primarily supported by user fees. A feedback loop has also been added to account for the impact that this change in thePosted in:
Post Your Comment