New Hampshire has kept it's roads and bridges in pretty good shape over the years. Much better shape than New York. Right around my place in Franconia, which is pretty rural, the state has replaced two smallish highway bridges on secondary roads for being really old. Aside from the stalled widening project on southern I93, the rest of the state is in quite passable shape. We haven't fallen into the railroad track black hole yet, despite the best efforts of some commuter rail enthusiasts.
And we have enriched a lot of road contractors over the years. I have been driving I93 from Boston to NH ski country since the road first got started. The first asphalt was put down in the 1950's, and they had it finished all the way to Cannon Mt by the late 1960's. It was built to the Interstate highway standards of the 50's and 60's, four lane divided highway, good for 70-80 mph. I drove up and down it for skiing for decades.
Then sometime in the 90's Interstate standards were tightened up. More clearance and longer sight distances required. And so, a lot of contractors got nice jobs blasting back all the rock cuts from the Mass border to Franconia notch, making the cuts wider. Did not make the road wider, just the rock cuts. And there are a LOT of rock cuts going thru the White Mountains The same rock cuts I had been driving thru, with no problems, for 30 years, were now wider, and a lot of contractors got richer, but it didn't make I93 any better for drivers. It did soak up quite a bit of infrastructure money.
And then the infrastructure spending folks decided that we needed huge electric signs, to show helpful messages like "Drive Safely", and "Snowfall expected, Plan ahead". Really essential those messages are. The signs probably cost $100,000 apiece and they put in half a dozen of 'em.
And then more infrastructure signage. We now have big, cute mileposts, every 0.2 miles. I drove I93 for 40 years without cute mile posts so close together that you can see one from where ever you are. I figure each sign cost a couple a hundred dollars, installed. I93 is about 100 miles long, that's 500 mileposts, and $100,000 for the lot. Really essential infrastructure that was.
I think we ought to dump federal infrastructure spending, the Highway Trust Fund. And drop the federal gasoline tax that finances it. Let the states decide what infrastucture is worth paying for, and let them raise the money for it. They can hike the state gas tax to raise the necessary money.
Anyhow Trump is talking up an infrastructure spending bill. All the road contractors and the state highway departments love the idea. Trump is thinking there is a chance that he can get the Democrats to vote for it. Faint that chance is. But "bipartisanship" is a many splendored thing.
Far as this taxpayer is concerned, we have plenty of infrastructure. All it needs is routine maintenance, plowing, mowing, culvert cleaning, and the like, and the states can handle that.
2 comments:
My only problem with dumping those funds into the state's Highway Fund is that the legislature will decide those funds will be better used elsewhere, much as they have done over the past couple of decades. That using highway funds for anything other than the highways is unconstitutional under the state constitution hasn't stopped our legislators from doing so. Until that problem is solved we shouldn't give them any more money to 'appropriate' for other uses.
I thought that was the legislature's job, to decide how much money is needed in all the things the state does. I think the legislature in Concord has a better idea of where money is needed in New Hampshire that the Federal Highway Administration. And Concord has a better idea of how much revenue must be squeezed out of us NH taxpayers than anyone in DC does. So far, we in NH have done a much better job than NY has in keeping our roads and bridges in good shape.
Post a Comment