U.S. President Joe Biden arrives at Ellips Park near the White House after spending the weekend at the president’s villa, Camp David, on the 5th, and explains the infrastructure investment plan to reporters. Washington = EPA Yonhap News
Will the establishment of a high-speed data communication network, installation of electric vehicle charging stations, and support for caring for the elderly and the disabled fall into the category of’social infrastructure (infrastructure)’? After U.S. President Joe Biden’s $2.55 trillion (about 2,540 trillion won) super-large investment plan was unveiled, controversy about the’justice’ of infrastructure is arising in American society. The fundamental difference between the White House and the Republican Party’s view of infrastructure has not only foretold the path of thorns in the passage of the bill, but it is also an atmosphere of widespread debate over the’role theory’ over how far the government should intervene.
On the 5th (local time), when the foreign press is put together, the infrastructure investment plan of the Biden administration is full of rocks from the beginning. The plan to raise corporate tax (21→28%) to raise astronomical financial resources is confronting the Republican Party due to strong opposition and unexpected infrastructure definition issues.
The infrastructure support plan that President Biden proposed on the 31st of last month was △Rebuilding expressways and bridges and expanding eco-friendly transportation (702 trillion won) △Improving the residential environment such as supplying affordable housing (735 trillion won) △Research and development and support for SMEs (655 trillion won) △The elderly and It consists of support for caring for the disabled (452 trillion won). The White House said, “It is the largest job investment after World War II,” and was confident that 19 million new jobs could be created by the legislation.
The Republican Party immediately pulled out the issue of tax increases and rebounded. Republican Senator Roy Blunt pointed out in an interview with Fox News that “only 30% of the president’s plans fall under’traditional’ infrastructure, so the investment should be reduced to $615 billion.” Only narrow industrial infrastructures such as roads, bridges, and airports were viewed as infrastructure. The Republican Party is in a position that the public-private partnership should promote investment in areas that have recently emerged, such as eco-friendly electric vehicles, high-speed communication networks, and clean energy, rather than government finances.
The White House dismissed the Republican approach as “even.” As times have changed, the definition of infrastructure must be different. Cecilia Rauss, chairman of the Economic Advisory Committee (CEA), told CBS on the day that “investment (eco-friendly, etc.) is what the state needs right now.” It was paradoxical.
On the 5th, construction of highway 90 is in full swing in Chicago, Illinois, USA. Chicago = EPA Yonhap News
The controversy spread beyond politics to academia. Glenn Hubbard, a professor at Columbia University School of Business, who served as CEA chairman in the George W. Bush administration, mentioned that the plan includes’care support’ and said, “A lot of it is social expenditure, which can increase productivity and economic potential. It’s not infrastructure.” On the other hand, Sain Greenstein, a professor at Harvard Business School, said, “Even in the New Deal era in the 1930s, academia and policy makers debated whether electricity was a public infrastructure requiring universal access. I said. The New York Times of the US and Japan said, “The political and economic debate is dominated by philosophical questions.”
Further, there is a prospect that the movement of the Biden administration, which focuses on the expansion of active welfare through extra-large fiscal expenditures, will accelerate the decline of neo-liberalism that has supported the world political and economic order for the past 40 years. Neoliberalism, which gained power in the midst of the global recession in the 1970s, pointed out the evils of the government’s intervention in the market and aimed for a’small government’. However, after more than 70 days of inauguration, President Biden is striving to become a so-called’big government’ that resolves inequality, invests in infrastructure and implements active industrial policies. The Daily Washington Post analyzed that “President Biden’s actions after taking office reflect the new political spirit of the Western society.”
Heo Gyeongju reporter [email protected]
News directly edited by the Hankook Ilbo can also be viewed on Naver.
