Jim Gluch: Scrutinizing Pa.'s stake in infrastructure deal

The local politics of the bipartisan infrastructure bill is worthy of scrutiny as we contend with our 21st-century issues and endeavor to make that future happen.

The breakdown of Pennsylvania’s stake in the so-called BID (Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal) was made after its passage in the Senate this summer. It bears repeating here: Nearly $19 billion for bridges, roads and more: Here’s what Pa. could get in Senate infrastructure bill.

The short of it, as the article delineates, is as follows:

• $11.3 billion for federal-aid highway programs and an additional $1.6 billion for bridge replacement and repairs over five years.

• $2.8 billion to improve the state’s public transportation systems. The bill would also finance thousands of electric school buses nationwide.

• $100 million to improve Pennsylvania’s broadband coverage.

• $3 billion to help reclaim abandoned mines. The bill would also provide additional money to plug and remediate orphaned wells.

• $171 million to bolster the state’s clean energy options, such as expanding the network of charging stations for electric vehicles and other efforts to address climate change.

• Funding to replace the nation’s lead water pipes and service lines.

Sen. Bob Casey voted for this bill and, in justification for these expenditures, Casey’s office reported the following Pennsylvania statistics:

• More than 3,300 bridges and over 7,540 miles of highway are in poor condition.

• More than 390,000 people in Pennsylvania don’t have broadband access.

• Pennsylvania has about 160,000 lead service lines.

It is a matter of congressional record that Casey voted for the bill while Sen. Pat Toomey voted nay. About that vote, Casey said, “Today, the Senate came together and made a substantial investment in our communities and our future.” Among other things, Toomey said. “But this legislation is too expensive, too expansive, too unpaid for and too threatening to the innovative cryptocurrency economy.” The cryptocurrency economy, Senator? Ah, that’s a good one! Ha ha. Anybody else laughing? Please let me know and, more to the point, let Toomey know. By all means, go on the late-night shows and repeat that aloud and on stage. “Too expensive and too expansive”? By way of comparison, the Defense budget is on the order of $700 billion annually. That would be about $7 trillion over 10 years.

I’d be willing to guess that most Pennsylvania voters, like myself, don’t know much about cryptocurrency or care about it, let alone have any. On the other hand, I would bet that every single one of us depends daily on transportation, whether roads, bridges, trains or buses. Who among us votes to keep those pipes lethal and leaded? And, if you are reading this online, I rest my case on the broadband issue.

More recently, the House gave its thumbs up to the issue. Nevertheless, two notable congressional exceptions in Southwestern Pennsylvania deserve special attention. Allow me to continue, using this as my source of information: Pennsylvania Representatives React After Infrastructure Bill Passes House (CBS Pittsburgh).

The report states that “U.S. Representative Glenn Thompson and Guy Reschenthaler, representing Pennsylvania’s 15th and 14th Districts, voted against the bill and criticized House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.”

Thompson said: “There was an opportunity to come together and draft a bipartisan, bicameral bill to address America’s aging infrastructure. Rather, House Democrats boldly linked infrastructure to a spending bill that is full of budget gimmicks and will cost American taxpayers trillions of dollars.”

Firstly, the cost was pared down in the Senate and passed with bipartisan support there. My recollection is that there was much input from the so-called “Problem Solvers Caucus” which is bicameral. By the way, you were not voting on the whole of the Build Back Better agenda. Only the aging physical stuff. Worry not though, Congressman, your fate is in the hands of 15th District constituents, of which I am not one.

But, let’s move on to District 14 of which, I am a resident.

“I strongly support investment in our nation’s physical infrastructure, including upgrading our aging locks and dams, and believe we must reform our burdensome permitting process. Unfortunately, it is shameful that Democrats used a bipartisan issue to advance their radical, socialist goals,” Reschenthaler said.

Shameful, Congressman? So all I have to say is that if you support physical infrastructure spending as strongly as you “claim” and then proceed to vote against the once-in-a-generation bill addressing those very issues, what good are ye?

As a concerned Pennsylvanian, I would like to propose the following to my fellow voters. Yes, there will be as many takes on this as there are voters. And yes, we will always haggle over the price tag — it’s in our genes. I simply recommend that everyone ask one question before they next step into the polling booth or sit down with a mail-in ballot ( I’ll risk showing my age here because it is a direct quote from the long-retired TV series, “Kojak”): “Who loves ya, baby?”

Jim Gluch is a concerned citizen and retiree who lives in Belle Vernon.