Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In
Hillary Clinton

The Highs and Lows of Hillary’s Bland Infrastructure Plan

We're getting some insight into what White House transportation policy would look like in a Hillary Clinton administration, following the Democratic frontrunner's release of a 5-year, $275 billion infrastructure plan yesterday. It's not exactly a visionary plan, but despite its blandness it's still likely to be DOA if Republicans retain control of Congress as expected.

Photo: Wikipedia
Photo: Wikipedia
Photo: Wikipedia

Clinton's "briefing" calls for $275 billion in infrastructure spending over five years, on top of the $250 billion transportation bill being finalized right now in Washington. Echoing the Obama administration she says the proposal will be paid for by the vague notion of "business tax reform" -- not a gas tax increase or a fee on driving mileage.

The Clinton spending package is something of a grab bag of ideas for roads, transit, aviation, water, and internet infrastructure.

On the one hand, Clinton gestures toward reforming the way federal infrastructure dollars are spent, emphasizing "merit-based" project selection. This suggests the typical state DOT highway boondoggle would face greater scrutiny. She also recognizes the need to get more bang for the infrastructure buck, signals support for walking and biking infrastructure, and promises to target spending to address environmental degradation and social inequality. She devotes a paragraph to the need for more investment in transit, which she says is particularly important for low-income communities and communities of color.

Those are the good parts, sounding policy themes carried over from the Obama administration, whose TIGER program remains a rare example of what "merit-based" federal funding would look like.

On the other hand, the Clinton campaign repeats the Texas Transportation Institute's talking point about how Americans waste 42 hours in traffic annually -- a dubious claim used to beat the drum for more highway expansions. Clinton's proposal does not contain a reference to "fix it first" policy -- the idea that keeping existing roads in good shape should take precedence over building new ones. In fact, she wants to "fix and expand” roads and bridges, which sounds like business as usual -- squandering billions on highway projects the nation doesn't need.

There may be something for everyone in this plan, but there's no consistent vision for a safe, equitable, sustainable transportation system.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

The Missing Ingredients in America’s ‘Minimobility’ Revolution

Cargo trikes, GEMs, bike rickshaws, and other light electric vehicles could help wean America off cars — but a new grant that could help cities encourage their adoption is being paused by the Trump administration.

February 11, 2025

Who Benefits from Trump ‘Birthrate’ Funding Scheme? Wealthier, Whiter Drivers

This prioritization lacks evidence of how it will meet the memo’s stated purpose to “bolster the American economy and benefit the American people.”

February 11, 2025

Tuesday’s Headlines Man the Barricades

After the deadly New Year's Eve truck attack in New Orleans, how can cities better protect pedestrians from increasingly heavy and powerful vehicles?

February 11, 2025

Op-Ed: Amtrak Isn’t Profitable — And That’s Okay

"As a for-profit company, Amtrak fails ... spectacularly. As a government agency, created half a century ago to carry out a public purpose recognized in law and in Supreme Court rulings, it is a spectacular success worth celebrating, supporting, and building up."

February 10, 2025

Sustainable Transportation Research Is Snagged In Trump’s Anti-‘DEI’ Dragnet

President Trump's war on efforts to boost diversity, equity and inclusion is taking important mobility justice research down with it.

February 10, 2025
See all posts