Stop the National Infrastructure Development Bank

Senator Kerry's Act is Defective

2011-09-12T09:10:00.000-07:00

Senator John Kerry (D - Mass) has introduced a new version of the National Infrastructure Bank in Senate Bill 652. The 'short" title of the bill is "Building and Upgrading Infrastructure for Long Term Development" but the Senator from Massachusetts refers to it as the "Build Act".

The primary mechanism of this bill is the establishment of a government agency, euphemistically called a corporation, which is given the name "American Infrastructure Financing Authority." This agency is headed by a panel of seven presidential appointees (with the advice and consent of the U.S. Senate) not more than four of which can be from one political party. According to the text of the proposed legislation, five votes are necessary to approve funding for an infrastructure project. The purpose of this act is made clear on Senator Kerry's web page:

The BUILD Act is a bold solution that establishes an American Infrastructure Financing Authority (AIFA) - a type of infrastructure bank - to complement our existing infrastructure funding. This institution, which would provide loans and loan guarantees, would be both fiscally responsible and robust enough to address America’s needs. AIFA is independent of the political process.

Thus, Senator Kerry and his co-authors desire to short circuit the representative process set out in the constitution. The goal, get tax payers on the hook for money borrowed under the full faith and credit and doled out by this unelected panel. The bill authorizes this agency to spend $10 billion a year for the first two years, $20 billion a year for years 3 through 9, and $50 billion a year thereafter. Where is that money coming from?

Contact your Senator and ask them to stop Senate bill 652 dead in its tracks.

Obama Still Wants National Infrastructure Bank

2011-09-12T08:15:00.000-07:00

This morning President Barack Obama introduced something he calls the "The American Jobs Act". The applicable portion of which reads:

The President is calling for Congress to pass a National Infrastructure Bank capitalized with $10 billion, in order to leverage private and public capital and to invest in a broad range of infrastructure projects of nationaland regional significance, without earmarks or traditional political influence. The Bank would be based on the model Senators Kerry and Hutchison have championed while building on legislation by Senators Rockefeller and Lautenberg and the work of long-time infrastructure bank champions like Rosa DeLauro and the input of the President’s Jobs Council.

Now is the time for all people interested in preserving representative democracy to ACT! Contact your Senators and Congressional Representatives and urge them to defeat the National Infrastructure Bank.

President Obama Fails to Mention National Infrastructure Bank

2011-09-10T16:46:00.000-07:00

In what must be a significant blow to the Connecticut congressional delegation, and his old buddy Ex-Senator Chris Dodd, President Obama completely neglected the National Infrastructure Bank in his speech Thursday evening.

This is unlikely to mean that the measure will die in Congress, but let's hope vigilant citizens keep the press on their elected representatives to keep our Constitution promise. Our elected representatives represent our interest in Congress by deciding how, when, and where our tax money in spent. Not by delegating this responsibility to an unelected committee of bureaucrats.

PresidentObama Set to Resurrect National Infrastructure Bank

2011-09-08T07:43:00.000-07:00

Tonight, President Barack Obama will propose a "jobs" package that is sure to, among other things, urge passing of the National Infrastructure Bank by Congress. Why won't the President let this bad idea die?As discussed elsewhere on this blog, President Obama was oblivious to this so-called bank until in a few day span in the spring of 2008, Senator Chris Dodd dropped out of the presidential race, Candidate Obama endorsed the National Infrastructure Bank, and the next Monday then Senator Obama was listed as co-sponsor on this otherwise dead piece of legislation. Despite that backing, the Bank was not included in the President's stimulus plan nor could pass on its own merits. The reasons are clear:

* It will not be a bank, but rather a government agency staffed with bureaucrats and political appointees.

* It will issue debt backed by the full faith and credit and of the United States, meaning that's our money their spending.

* It will result in infrastructure spending be allocated by an unelected committee rather than by the votes of our Representatives.

Please contact your elected representatives today. Urge them to block passage of this bad idea. Tell them you expect infrastructure spending by the United States Government to voted on in Congress by your elected representatives.

Huffy Post Stooges for Unconstitutional Bank.

2010-09-12T20:54:00.000-07:00

Michael Likosky of the Huffington Post proves to be a cheerleader for President Obama and the National Infrastructure Development Bank. Writing in the Huffy Post, Dr. Likosky states:

...the Infrastructure Bank can relay the foundation of our economy through progressive long term projects that are synced up with a medium term business cycle - allowing firms to plan ahead, which is essential for retaining and creating good jobs. Investing in what will make America competitive, a job producer, a promoter of equal opportunity, and an ensurer of national security.

What an undisciplined argument this is. Platitudes without logical basis and specious cause and effect arguments. But it gets worse. Likosky continues:

On February 13, 2008, then-Senator Obama had first announced the Infrastructure Bank on the factory floor of the General Motors Assembly Plant in Janesville, Wisconsin as a campaign plank. The speech marked, at the time, a pivot by Obama away from the sole candidate to have opposed the Iraq War and toward positioning himself as the champion of America's economic recovery. In this landmark speech, Obama argued for redirecting our energies away from reconstructing Iraq and toward reinvesting in America.

This piece of revisionist history is beyond the pale. As reported elsewhere, this speech was a token gesture by then Candidate Obama in return for Senator Dodd (D - Connecticut) withdrawing from the Presidential Race. Soon after, then Senator Obama became an official sponsor of Senator Dodd's proposed legislation. The purpose of this bill should be obvious. It is an attempt by the delegation of Connecticut to get more funding for their very unpopular, federally subsidized railroad system. This was no landmark speech and the President was so committed to this proposal that his colossal stimulus bill, which contained nearly every other Democratic bill introduced since President Clinton left office, omitted the bank.

Don't believe intellectually dishonest people like Dr. Likosky. Urge your elected representatives to reject the unconstitutional National Infrastructure Development Bank.

President Obama Lights a Fire on Unconstitutional Bank

2010-09-12T20:33:00.001-07:00

As reported in the New York Times, President Obama's new infrastructure plan includes a call to establish the unconstitutional National Infrastructure Development Bank. The Times' article made clear the intent of establishing this entity:

Indeed, some leading proponents of such a bank — including Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, Republican of California; Gov. Ed Rendell, Democrat of Pennsylvania; and Michael R. Bloomberg, the independent mayor of New York — would like to see it finance a broader range of projects, including water and clean-energy projects. They say such a bank would spur innovation by allowing a panel of experts to approve projects on merit, rather than having lawmakers simply steer transportation money back home.

So, we need to establish this bank because our elected representatives cannot be trusted to spend the money in the way that big state governors and big city mayors approve of. But, the constitution makes it clear that spending our money is the job of our Representatives, and this duty cannot be delegated to an unelected committee.

Contact your Congressional and Senate delegation today and tell them to stop the unconstitutional National Infrastructure Development Bank.

DeLauro Makes Unconstitutional Intent Clear

2010-09-08T08:48:00.001-07:00

In her testimony before the House Ways and Means committee on May 13th 2010, U.S. Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut) outlined and summarized her plans for the National Infrastructure Development Bank. Read the prepared remarks here.

In her testimony, DeLauro highlights that the Bank would be capitalized by $25 billion in five annual $5 billion appropriations and "An additional $225 billion would be available at the call of the Treasury Secretary to meet bank obligations if necessary."

Oh, and don't be fooled, because Representative DeLauro certainly intends that it be necessary. In fact, she opined that "With a conservative leverage ratio of 2.5 to 1... ... the Bank could potentially issue up to $625 billion in bonds."

Conveniently, Representative DeLauro ignores the fact that this scheme delegates congress' duty to spend tax revenue by appropriations to an unelected committee who can pick and choose the projects to invest in.

Representative DeLauro also fails to draw the lessons of Fannie and Freddie. Similar schemes that have wreaked havoc on the economy and the government's budget.

Please contact Representative DeLauro, and the Representative for your congressional district, and urge that this unconstitutional bill be dropped from consideration.

Text of H.R. 2521 Reveals Deep Flaws

2009-06-19T18:45:00.000-07:00

The text of the proposed National Development Infrastructure Bank, H.R. 2521, became available online May 31, 2009. The proposed legislation deviates in substantive ways from its predecessor in the last Congress (H.R. 3401). Read the text of H.R. 2521 here or here.

Here is the distressing part:

1) POWERS- In order to carry out the purposes of the Bank as set forth in this Act, the Board shall be responsible for monitoring and overseeing infrastructure projects and have the following powers:
(A) To make senior and subordinated loans and purchase senior and subordinated debt securities ... the proceeds of which are to be used to finance or refinance the development of one or more infrastructure projects.
(B) To issue and sell debt securities of the Bank ...
(C) To issue public benefit bonds and to provide direct subsidies to infrastructure projects from amounts made available from the issuance of such bonds. ...
(F) To borrow on the global capital market and lend to regional, State, and local entities, and commercial banks for the purpose of funding infrastructure projects.

So this is new and not improved. This is still an unconstitutional attempt to siphon taxpayer dollars to spending projects with out Congress voting an appropriation. The clear text of Article 1, Section 9: "No Money shall be drawn from the Treasury, but in Consequence of Appropriations made by Law; and a regular Statement and Account of the Receipts and Expenditures of all public Money shall be published from time to time.

The principle here is that our elected representatives should be voting on how public funds are spent. Under our constitution the Congress may not delegate that task to a committee. As for me, I want my elected representatives to have a voice in when and where Federal tax dollars are spent on infrastructure projects.

Please HELP in defeating H.R. 2521.

Reason Unreasonable?

2009-05-27T18:07:00.000-07:00

A noted libertarian think tank, The Reason Foundation (based in Los Angeles), has apparently not read the texts of S. 1926 or H.R. 3431. Robert Poole, who is director of transportation policy and the Searle Freedom Trust Transportation Fellow at the Reason Foundation (a free market think tank he founded), published an essay on the reason.org website on Feb 3, 2009. You can read the entire essay here.
Mr. Poole wrote:

One of the hottest ideas in infrastructure politics these days is the proposal now in Congress for a National Infrastructure Bank. Presidential candidate Barack Obama, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, and many other big-city mayors have all endorsed the idea, as have a number of trade associations favoring increased infrastructure investment. The leading vehicle is S. 1926, introduced last summer by Sen. Chris Dodd (D, CT) and Chuck Hagel (R, NE).
In short, I'm persuaded that there is a niche that an NIB could fill, to help this country take advantage of the huge pool of investment funds seeking to invest in U.S. infrastructure. {emphasis added}

To Mr. Poole's credit he does recommend some significant modifications to the structure proposed in S. 1926. This blogger doubts these modifications would overcome the constitutional objections.

I hope that Mr. Poole and the Reason Foundation come to their senses.

Liberal Think Tank Slobbering over Pres. Obama's Bank

2009-05-27T17:54:00.000-07:00

A Washington D.C. progressive think tank inappropriately named the "Institute for America's Future" has gone in the bag for H.R. 2521 stating "The Campaign for America’s Future today cheered the introduction of the “National Infrastructure Development Bank Act of 2009,” by Reps. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., and Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn."

Apparently the constitution of the United States is not a barrier for Progressives.

The full text of H.R. 2521 is still not available on THOMAS.

NY Times Columnist in the Bag for H.R. 2521

2009-05-26T16:40:00.000-07:00

Today on the NY Times website, a column by Op_Ed Columnist Bob Herbert was posted. This column is a superficial puff-piece designed to garner support for H.R. 2521. Read the complete article here.

Interestingly, Mr. Herbert's rationale for supporting H.R. 2521 is the loss of jobs during this recession and the poor prospects for a rapid recovery. Mr. Herbert refers to this in dire terms such as:

"catastrophic job losses of this recession"

and

"disastrous beyond belief"

as well as

"ominous long-term implications for American families"

and the obligatory running down of our common country

"America has become self-destructively shortsighted in recent decades... a nation that is speeding toward second-class status on a range of important fronts... We can’t put our people to work. We can’t educate the young. We can’t keep the infrastructure in good repair. It’s hard to believe that this nation could be so dysfunctional at the end of the first decade of the 21st century. It’s tragic."

None of which is accurate nor reason to violate the constitution.
This isn't the first time Mr. Herbert has puffed this government agency masqueraded as a "Bank". Read his column of February 23rd, 2009 here. I found it interesting that Mr. Herbert recognized the deficiency of President Obama's stimulus package. It is unfathomable to me how Mr. Herbert used that error in judgment to reach the following conclusion:

"You might ask where that money would come from. Great question. How about an infrastructure bank?
The current economic crisis is the perfect time to decide that we need to change some of the tired old ways of doing the people’s business. Senator Chris Dodd of Connecticut has offered a bill that would create an infrastructure bank. It would be a bipartisan entity that would streamline the process of reviewing and authorizing major projects. It would provide federal investment capital for approved projects and use that money to leverage private investment."

Of course, the text of S. 1926 makes it clear that no private investment would be involved. Rather, the bill would create a committee that would borrow money from private investment markets (money that must be paid back by the taxpayers; i.e. you and me) and use it to supplement local and state government funding. Referring to this unconstitutional government agency as a "public private partnership" strains credulity.
This blogger wonders if Mr. Herbert has actually read the proposed legislation.

New Life for Infrastructure Bank

2009-05-26T16:22:00.001-07:00

Representative Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) has re-introduced President Obama's unconstitutional bank legislation into the current congress. Formerly identifed as H.R. 3401 The National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank, the current incarnation is H.R. 2521 currently titled: "To facilitate efficient investments and financing of infrastructure projects and new job creation through the establishment of a National Infrastructure Development Bank, and for other purposes."

The bill was introduced with 26 sponsors:
Rep Berkley, Shelley [NV-1] - 5/20/2009
Rep Blumenauer, Earl [OR-3] - 5/20/2009
Rep Bordallo, Madeleine Z. [GU] - 5/20/2009
Rep Courtney, Joe [CT-2] - 5/20/2009
Rep Delahunt, William D. [MA-10] - 5/20/2009
Rep Driehaus, Steve [OH-1] - 5/20/2009
Rep Ellison, Keith [MN-5] - 5/20/2009
Rep Etheridge, Bob [NC-2] - 5/20/2009
Rep Farr, Sam [CA-17] - 5/20/2009
Rep Fattah, Chaka [PA-2] - 5/20/2009
Rep Frank, Barney [MA-4] - 5/20/2009
Rep Hirono, Mazie K. [HI-2] - 5/20/2009
Rep Israel, Steve [NY-2] - 5/20/2009
Rep Larson, John B. [CT-1] - 5/20/2009
Rep Massa, Eric J. J. [NY-29] - 5/20/2009
Rep McDermott, Jim [WA-7] - 5/20/2009
Rep McGovern, James P. [MA-3] - 5/20/2009
Rep Moore, Gwen [WI-4] - 5/20/2009
Rep Ryan, Tim [OH-17] - 5/20/2009
Rep Schakowsky, Janice D. [IL-9] - 5/20/2009
Rep Sutton, Betty [OH-13] - 5/20/2009
Rep Van Hollen, Chris [MD-8] - 5/20/2009
Rep Weiner, Anthony D. [NY-9] - 5/20/2009
Rep Welch, Peter [VT] - 5/20/2009
Rep Woolsey, Lynn C. [CA-6] - 5/20/2009
Rep Yarmuth, John A. [KY-3] - 5/20/2009

Complete text of the proposed legislation is not yet available on THOMAS. The bill has been assigned to the Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment. Members of the subcommittee are:

For the Majority:
Eddie Bernice Johnson, Texas, Chairwoman
Thomas S. P. Perriello, Virginia
Jerry F. Costello, Illinois
Gene Taylor, Mississippi
Ellen O. Tauscher, California
Brian Baird, Washington
Timothy H. Bishop, New York
Russ Carnahan, Missouri
Steve Kagen, Wisconsin
Donna F. Edwards, Maryland
Solomon P. Ortiz, Texas
Phil Hare, Illinois
Dina Titus, Nevada
Harry Teague, New Mexico
Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia
Michael E. Capuano, Massachusetts
Grace F. Napolitano, California
Mazie K. Hirono, Hawaii
Harry E. Mitchell, Arizona
John J. Hall, New York
Parker Griffith, Alabama
Bob Filner, California
Corrine Brown, Florida
James L. Oberstar, Minnesota (ex officio)

For the Minority
John Boozman, Arkansas
Ranking Member
Don Young, Alaska
John J. Duncan, Jr., Tennessee
Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan
Frank A. LoBiondo, New Jersey
Gary G. Miller, California
Henry E. Brown, Jr., South Carolina
Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania
Bill Shuster, Pennsylvania
Mario Diaz-Balart, Florida
Connie Mack, Florida
Lynn A. Westmoreland, Georgia
Candice S. Miller, Michigan
Robert E. Latta, Ohio
Anh "Joseph" Cao, Louisiana
Pete Olson, Texas

Please Contact your Representative and ask them to stop this unconstitutional government agency.

House Clones S.1926

2008-11-08T17:57:00.000-08:00

The United States House of Representatives has a bill in process which is a clone of President Obama's pet project in the Senate.

The House bill is H.R. 3401. The bill was introduced into the House by Congressman Keith Ellison (D - MN 5th District) on August 2007. The bill is now co-sponsored by Rep Neil Abercrombie (D - HI 1st District], Rep Emanuel Cleaver, [D - MO 5th District] Rep Barney Frank, (D - MA 4th District).

The text of the bill is identical to the Senate version.

STOP THE BANK urges you to contact your congressional representative and urge defeat of this undemocratic and unconstitutional bill.

President Obama Adopts the "Bank"

2008-11-06T00:26:00.000-08:00

On Valentine's Day 2008, at the request of Mr. DODD, the name of the Senator from Illinois (Mr. OBAMA) was added as a cosponsor of S . 1926.

Then Senator Obama joined an auspicious group of Senators co-sponsoring the bill. According to information this blogger uncovered in the Congressional Record:

At the request of Mr. DODD, the names of the Senator from New York (Mrs. CLINTON), the Senator from Maryland (Ms. MIKULSKI), the Senator from North Dakota (Mr. DORGAN), the Senator from Illinois (Mr. DURBIN), the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. CASEY), the Senator from Maine (Ms. SNOWE), and the Senator from Ohio (Mr. BROWN) were added as cosponsors of S . 1926.

At the request of Mr. MENENDEZ, his name was added as a cosponsor of S . 1926.

At the request of Mr. LIEBERMAN, his name was added as a cosponsor of S . 1926

This bloggger notes that all of the co-sponsors are Democrats except for two Republicans: Senator Snowe of Maine and {former} Senator Hagel of Nebraska. These two have been called RINOs (Republicans in name only) in other places.

I urge everyone to contact President Obama and each of these Senators to voice your opposition to this undemocratic and unconstitutional "Bank".

Senator Dodd Pushes SB 1926 on the Senate Floor

2008-11-06T00:16:00.000-08:00

Senator Chris Dodd (D - Connecticut) used the bridge collapse in Minnesota as cover to introduce his proposed legislation regarding the National Infrastructure Reinvestment BanK (SB 1926). A year later the Senator, on July 31, 2008, gave a speech on the floor of the United States Senate urging the enactment of this so-called "bank". Here is an excerpt from his speech:

Mr. President, tomorrow is also the one-year anniversary of the introduction of the National Infrastructure Bank Act, by Senator Hagel and myself. The legislation has gained twelve co-sponsors over the year. The Infrastructure Bank would establish a unique and powerful public-private partnership to restore our nation’s infrastructure. Using limited Federal resources, it would leverage the significant resources and innovation of the private sector. It would tap the private sector’s financial and intellectual power to meet our nation’s largest and most critical structural needs.
The Banking Committee has held two hearings on the subject of infrastructure and we have heard strong support in favor of the Infrastructure Bank bill. We heard from a number of mayors, representing cities of various sizes from different regions of our country, as well as from individuals with expertise in public and private financing, civil engineering, labor, and business. They were unanimous in voicing compelling support for increased investment in our nation’s infrastructure and for the need to develop and implement alternative ways to finance this critically important investment in our nation’s future.
Some might say that our legislation is “too expensive”, or that “we can’t afford to implement such a policy”. I say we can’t afford not to implement it.

You can read the entire speech on Senator Dodd's website.

Please contact your elected Representatives and Senators to urge the defeat of this undemocratic and unconstitutional bill.

Dodd Trying to Push SB1926 through Committee

2008-11-05T18:32:00.000-08:00

The following was from Senator Dodd's introductory comments at the infrastructure hearing of the Senate Banking Comittee on June 12th, 2008:

We also cannot afford to delay. I believe the cost of meeting our infrastructure needs is great. But the cost of failing to meet them will be even greater. That is why I, along with my colleague Senator Hagel, have proposed creating a National Infrastructure Bank to help us meet these challenges. The Bank would mark the first federal effort to prioritize infrastructure projects across different modes of transportation and of water treatment. It would be the first federal program to rate these different infrastructure projects on the basis of merit and to invest in projects based on their merit. And by focusing on projects of regional and national significance, the Bank would help us meet some of the biggest challenges that we are confronted with. This proposal will not solve all of our problems, but we believe that it will go a long way in addressing many of the concerns that we will hear from our witnesses today and have heard at prior hearings.
I will continue to work with Senator Shelby and other members on the Committee to find common ground and I hope that we can and will be able to move this legislation forward. I do not know an exact timetable – you know we are very busy working on our legislation to address the housing crisis – but I do hope to move the bill through the Committee process in a timely fashion.

Read the entire text of Senator Dodd's comments here.

As Chairman of the Banking Committee, Senator Dodd is in a position to move this bill through to passage. Unless we the people stop him.

Contact Senator Dodd and tell him we do not want or need this unconstitutional and undemocratic legislation. You may contact him here.

Read the Original Text of Obama's Bank

2008-11-05T16:40:00.000-08:00

Obama's bank was originally introduced into the U.S. Senate by the President's pal Senator Chris Dodd (D - Connecticut). The original text is in Senate Bill 1926. President Obama adopted this bill during his primary campaign when, for example, he gave a speech in Ohio on February 24th, 2008, which contained the following text:

We can also invest in American jobs by investing in America, and rebuilding our roads and bridges. I've proposed a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank that will invest $60 billion over ten years. This will multiply into almost half a trillion dollars of additional infrastructure spending and generate nearly two million new jobs - many of them in the construction industry that's been hard hit by the housing crisis we're facing.

The abstracted version is:

An independent agency of the Federal government administratively similar to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). The "Bank" would have some strange banking powers: the ability to conduct hearings, issue subpoenas, obtain information from any other federal agency simply by asking (other agencies are required to comply), accept for funding any infrastructure project with a Federal price tag of $75 million or more (the list of possibilities goes on for two pages), unilateral authority to determine the appropriate Federal share of spending for every project accepted, to act as a centralized entity to provide financing for qualified infrastructure projects; to issue general purpose infrastructure bonds, and to provide direct subsidies to qualified infrastructure projects from amounts made available from the issuance of such bonds; to issue project-based infrastructure bonds for the financing of specific qualified infrastructure projects; to provide loan guarantees to State or local governments issuing debt to finance qualified infrastructure projects, under rules prescribed by the Board, in a manner similar to that described in chapter 6 of title 23, United States Code; to issue loans, at varying interest rates, including very low interest rates, to qualified project sponsors for qualified projects; to leverage resources and stimulate public and private investment in infrastructure; and to encourage States to create additional opportunities for the financing of infrastructure projects.

What you didn't read here is important: No votes by your elected U.S. Representatives, no votes by your elected U.S. Senators, No reconciliation of House and Senate draft legislation, no opportunity for the President of the United States to sign or veto the legislation. In short this Bank violates the U.S. Consitution by drawing money from the U.S. Treasury without an appropriation made by law.

Join me in doing every thing possible to STOP President Obama's Bank.

Blog Mission Statement

2008-11-05T16:29:00.000-08:00

This blog is dedicated to defeating President Obama's National Infrastructure Reconstruction Bank. This proposal is anti-thetical to American democracy and the Constitution of the United States.