December 7, 2021 5:17PM # Shining Some Much-Needed Light on America’s Real Infrastructure Problems By [Scott Lincicome](https://www.cato.org/people/scott-lincicome) and Ilana Blumsack --- SHARE As our colleague David Boaz [notes](https://www.cato.org/blog/how-much-will-bidens-infrastructure-plan-eventually-cost-history-suggests-some-worrisome) in a recent blog post, it’s good to see the *New York Times* [catch on](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/28/us/infrastructure-megaprojects.html) to the longstanding systemic problems plaguing U.S. infrastructure projects – problems that an additional [$1.2 trillion](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/28/us/infrastructure-megaprojects.html) are unlikely to solve (and may even exacerbate). The article is a welcome (albeit late) overview of American infrastructure woes, but it only scratches the surface of the various local, state, and federal policies that burden these projects. For example, domestic steel prices are mentioned among the ballooning U.S. infrastructure construction costs (something we’ve [highlighted](https://www.cato.org/commentary/american-sclerosis#does-biden-get-any) at length), but the article neglects to mention how U.S. tariffs and “Buy America” requirements [restrict](https://www.cato.org/commentary/us-steel-ubiquitous-market-failure) supply, increase prices, and even lower quality. Indeed, while steel prices have generally increased around the world since last summer, these policies have helped [make](https://www.cato.org/blog/how-american-steel-protectionism-harms-american-manufacturers-one-simple-chart) the United States a uniquely costly locale. And prices have continued to climb here in recent months – recently surpassing $2,000 per metric ton of hot-rolled steel – while they’ve stagnated or even declined abroad. ![20211129_Lincicome_SteelPrices](https://infogram-thumbs-1024.s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/f9aac8d3-7c6c-4fbc-9a45-be4114232bcd.jpg) Unfortunately, this problem isn’t unique to steel (though it’s probably the biggest offender). In fact, as we’ve previously discussed, the United States currently imposes tariffs on [numerous](https://www.cato.org/blog/how-us-trade-policy-contributes-our-insane-construction-materials-costs) imported construction materials – tariffs that, as recent research from Lydia Cox of Harvard [shows](https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/lydiacox/files/cox_jmp_steel_tariffs.pdf), can impose long-term economic harms for industrial consumers even if the measures are quickly repealed. And the new infrastructure law contains [several Buy America restrictions](https://www.cato.org/blog/supply-chain-crisis-doesnt-demand-more-federal-infrastructure-spending) sure to inflate the prices of these and other critical materials even more. The *Times* also mentions how labor shortages affect domestic infrastructure projects but fails to note that, pandemic notwithstanding, federal “prevailing wage” requirements (aka Davis-Bacon Act) *already* [restrict](https://www.cato.org/blog/supply-chain-crisis-doesnt-demand-more-federal-infrastructure-spending) the supply of available workers for federal infrastructure projects, thus increasing costs. Additional regulations – such as inflexible trucking rules, shipping restrictions like the Jones Act, and immigration restrictions – also [increase](https://www.cato.org/commentary/american-sclerosis#does-biden-get-any) costs and complicate federal projects. On the other hand, the *Times* deserves credit for highlighting how byzantine National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA) reviews can put projects “on hold for years, while agencies review voluminous documents…, in part to defend against inevitable lawsuits.” In fact, Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) reviews in the U.S. [take an average](https://exponentsmag.org/2021/04/18/nepa-vehicle-of-vetocracy/) of 4.5 years to complete, and one quarter take over six years. [I](https://www.cato.org/white-paper/questioning-industrial-policy) and [several](https://www.cato.org/blog/removing-barriers-infrastructure-investment) of my [colleagues](https://www.cato.org/commentary/why-does-american-infrastructure-cost-more-take-longer-build-it-used) at Cato have [long](https://www.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/serials/files/regulation/1997/10/reg20n4_2.pdf) warned of the problems surrounding NEPA reviews, which significantly delay projects as all work and dissemination of funds [must be halted](https://www.cato.org/white-paper/questioning-industrial-policy#interaction-other-policiesdistortions) while a review is ongoing. And while it is [true](https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/28/us/infrastructure-megaprojects.html) that the recently signed infrastructure package [includes](https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/fast-41-environmental-review-and-7232992/) a few NEPA reforms, it’s [unclear](https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/fast-41-environmental-review-and-7232992/) how effective the reforms will be because most of them aren’t mandatory. In sum, it’s good to see a major publication like the *Times* highlight NEPA and some of the other systemic problems plaguing American infrastructure projects, and we hope they’ll dig into some of the other ones soon. It’s just a shame that, [echoing](https://www.cato.org/blog/how-much-will-bidens-infrastructure-plan-eventually-cost-history-suggests-some-worrisome) Boaz, this scrutiny didn’t begin *before* the latest infrastructure bill was passed. ##### Related Tags [Economics](https://www.cato.org/economics), [Trade Policy](https://www.cato.org/trade-policy) [![Creative Commons License](/build/cato_2020/images/creative-commons.svg)](http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/) This work is licensed under a [Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/).