That was the debate that shaped the Republican Party’s attack on Biden’s plan.
WASHINGTON-The initial political and economic debate about President Biden’s $2 trillion US Jobs plan is being dominated by a philosophical question: What does the term infrastructure really mean?
Are the traditional ideas of building roads, bridges and financing other tangible projects included? Or in a developing economy, will it expand to include investment in broadband, charging stations for electric vehicles, and taking care of elderly Americans and disabled people?
It was a debate that was shaping the Republicans’ attack on Biden’s plan, believing that it would allocate only a small portion of the funds to “actual” infrastructure, and that the spending pipelines for solving housing, electric cars, and even water problems would not Counted.
Biden fired back on Monday, saying that after years of calling for investment in infrastructure, Republicans have shortened the definition to exclude key components of their plans, which include transportation lines, internet cables, and plans other than transportation.
The president told reporters on Monday: “When Republicans came up with infrastructure plans, they considered everything from broadband to handling everything else, which is very interesting.” “His definition of infrastructure has changed.”
Biden defended his $2 trillion package, saying it broadly marked the infrastructure and included the goal of ensuring that elementary school children drink clean water, building high-speed rail lines, and making federal buildings more energy efficient.