If the bill goes to President Joe Biden’s office, California, Texas and New York are expected to massively cash a trillion-dollar infrastructure package.
But states with very small populations – like Montana and Alaska – will receive the most money per capita.
The administration said Californians should budget at least $ 44.56 billion for infrastructure, the highest amount of any state, including highways and public transportation, with a total of about 34, $ 8 billion.
Texas came in at No. 2 with an estimated allocation of $ 35.44 billion, between $ 26.9 billion in estimated road funding and $ 3.3 billion in estimated funding for public transportation. New York is estimated at $ 26.92 billion in third place.
Check out the full list of estimated allowances for each state at the bottom of this article.
CNBC’s analysis shows that Vermont, Montana, Wyoming and Alaska overestimate infrastructure spending per capita with an estimated minimum of $ 3,500 per capita. California’s estimated per capita allowance is less than $ 1,250 per capita.
The White House, hoping to deliver on Biden’s campaign promises ahead of the 2022 midterm election, has touted the plan as a generational investment. Earlier this month, the Senate strongly endorsed a $ 1 trillion infrastructure bill aimed at rebuilding the country’s crumbling roads and bridges and funding new climate resilience and building initiatives. broadband. The House aims to pass the bill by October.
The administration says the infrastructure plan will “grow the economy, improve our competitiveness, create good jobs” and improve many other parameters.
It is important to note that the White House estimates are summaries based on the allocation of funds in previous legislation. The current bill could change the formula that determines the factors that determine the amount of money a state or city receives.
Current White House estimates also exclude competing grant programs for specific, financially significant one-off projects. If the federal government determines that a particular bridge or tunnel has an increased economic impact on an area, localities can often use these grants to help fund a different project.
Any reform is likely to take place at the local level, in line with the Centre’s budget and political priorities, as states and municipalities are the managers of around 90% of non-defense public infrastructure assets and typically support 75% of their maintenance costs. . Eh. A progressive think tank.
Washington typically funds large surface infrastructure initiatives through the Department of Transportation, which provides grants to states. These grants can come from several funds, including the Highway Trust Fund, which generates a significant portion of its income from gasoline taxes.
The calculation that determines how much money one state receives versus another is defined by law and may vary slightly over time as lawmakers update spending models. However, some factors remain consistent, said Vikram Rai, head of Citi’s municipal bond strategy.
“Allocations are allocated to the transportation department and they decide how to allocate them to different states and localities,” Rai said. The number of factors that decide the size of a grant are many, but few are straightforward.
Rai explained that a state’s population generally depends on the amount it receives as a proportion of total funding. The idea is clear: the more people there are in a state, the more worn out the state’s roads, bridges and other transportation surfaces.
So, in part, it’s not surprising to see New York, Texas, and California on the funding list as the top three most populous states in the country.
Other factors that determine the amount of a grant can be a bit more complicated.
The subsidy can be larger or smaller depending on the number of major cities in a given state. Or, if the grant is marked for urban areas, the size is determined by the number of people living in a particular city.
In the 2015 FAST Act, an Obama-era transportation bill, subsidies to urban areas were determined based on whether a city had more than 200,000 residents.
These subsidies were then increased or decreased depending on other factors: the presence of a commuter train, for example, or the number of kilometers traveled by city buses on a given day.
These factors are evident in the current White House tally.
New York, New Jersey and Connecticut are expected to receive $ 15.2 billion for public transportation on a formula basis. That’s 24% of the total allocated to public transportation, although those states represent about 10% of the U.S. population, suggesting the administration believes the extensive public transportation infrastructure in these three states deserves special attention.
On the other hand, Louisiana, which is potentially at risk of billions of dollars in damage from Hurricane Ida, is expected to pay $ 1.01 billion for bridge replacement and repair, the sixth in all states and about 4 , 1% of the total dedicated to bridges. .
The American Society of Civil Engineers said in a recent report that Louisiana, which relies heavily on bridges to cross much of its low-lying area, ranks fourth in the country for total bridge area, but is structurally deficient. . Second in number of bridges. square feet.
The Federal Transit Administration, a division of the Department of Transportation that oversees financial assistance to local public transportation systems, has released flowcharts showing how sources of the FAST Act determine the amount of subsidies.
full list of states