Partisanship and Permanence: How Congress Contested the Origins of the Interstate Highway System and the Future of American Infrastructure

Q2 Arts and Humanities Modern American History Pub Date : 2022-03-01 DOI:10.1017/mah.2022.4
Teal Arcadi
{"title":"Partisanship and Permanence: How Congress Contested the Origins of the Interstate Highway System and the Future of American Infrastructure","authors":"Teal Arcadi","doi":"10.1017/mah.2022.4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the mid-1950s, the Eisenhower administration and Congress erupted in a sharp partisan debate over how to pay for the novel National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, slated to become the most expensive and expansive public works project in United States history. Republicans advocated for interest-bearing bonded debt borrowed from banks, while Democrats preferred to avoid debt service costs and apply a direct tax-and-pave approach to the enormous state building project. The chosen fiduciary practices promised to be as permanent as the physical infrastructure they paid to construct and maintain. Consequently, the fraught episode saw the two parties contest not only transportation infrastructure and the capital supply upon which it depended, but indeed the very nature and future of American political economy. When the tax-and-pave approach prevailed, it saved taxpayers interest costs, but came with its own perilous consequences as it set near-limitless development in motion.","PeriodicalId":36673,"journal":{"name":"Modern American History","volume":"46 1","pages":"53 - 77"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Modern American History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/mah.2022.4","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In the mid-1950s, the Eisenhower administration and Congress erupted in a sharp partisan debate over how to pay for the novel National System of Interstate and Defense Highways, slated to become the most expensive and expansive public works project in United States history. Republicans advocated for interest-bearing bonded debt borrowed from banks, while Democrats preferred to avoid debt service costs and apply a direct tax-and-pave approach to the enormous state building project. The chosen fiduciary practices promised to be as permanent as the physical infrastructure they paid to construct and maintain. Consequently, the fraught episode saw the two parties contest not only transportation infrastructure and the capital supply upon which it depended, but indeed the very nature and future of American political economy. When the tax-and-pave approach prevailed, it saved taxpayers interest costs, but came with its own perilous consequences as it set near-limitless development in motion.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
党派之争和持久性:国会如何争论州际公路系统的起源和美国基础设施的未来
在20世纪50年代中期,艾森豪威尔政府和国会爆发了一场激烈的党派辩论,争论的焦点是如何支付新型的国家州际和国防高速公路系统的费用,该系统预计将成为美国历史上最昂贵、规模最大的公共工程项目。共和党人主张从银行借入有息债券,而民主党人则倾向于避免偿债成本,并对庞大的国家建设项目采用直接的税收和铺路方式。所选择的信托实践承诺像他们花钱建造和维护的实体基础设施一样永久。因此,在这段令人担忧的插曲中,两党不仅争夺交通基础设施及其所依赖的资本供应,而且还争夺美国政治经济的本质和未来。当税收和铺路的方法盛行时,它节省了纳税人的利息成本,但也带来了危险的后果,因为它推动了近乎无限的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Modern American History
Modern American History Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
19
期刊最新文献
F. A. Hayek, Libertarianism, and the Denationalization of Money The “Other” Pro-Israel Lobby: The AFL-CIO and Israel (1952–1960) Normalizing Relations from the Cold War to the Present: Continuing War, Pursuing Peace, and Building Empire The Global Jukebox and the Celestial Monochord: Alan Lomax and Harry Smith Compute Folk Music in Cold War America Bringing “The Plant” to Life: Imagining Community Revitalization in the Neoliberal Era
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1