For generations, communities across the United States have dealt with infrastructure that exacerbates poverty and environmental issues. The problem is contrary to the basic notion that infrastructure is meant to help the communities it serves.

Though the U.S. is the wealthiest nation in the world, this is the state of its infrastructure in 2020:

• More than two million Americans lack running water, wastewater services or indoor plumbing.
• Nearly five in 10 Americans (about 45.8%) face toxic air quality.
• Nearly half of Americans (45%) lack access to public transportation.
• Nearly one-third of Americans (31%) face energy insecurity.

In the poorest communities in the U.S., local infrastructure fails to give footing to its own citizens, lowers living quality and divides communities instead of uniting them. Solving this issue clearly requires investments in better suited infrastructure and more accessible renewable energy.

However, outdated infrastructure has not served in the past as a catalyst for improvements. Instead, federal investments and programs designed to encourage better infrastructure have found themselves intertwined in a political quagmire of deflective responsibility between local and national authorities for decades. Despite this history, legislators can address these issues sustainably by rebuilding communities across the country.

Major bills have passed through the New York State Legislature this summer to continue ambitious greenhouse gas reductions and in the United States House of Representatives to address the economic fallout of months of quarantine. Both pivot on the role of efficient infrastructure within American communities.

New York state is granting $10.6 million in funds to help low-income communities afford reliable solar energy. The funding is a result of the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act, which seeks to achieve net zero emissions in the state by 2040. This act highlights the idea that addressing the issue of energy insecurity will help further climate goals.

Legislators in the House passed on July 1 the Moving Forward Act, a $1.5 trillion bill with the intention to “rebuild American infrastructure.” The bill addresses 10 sectors of U.S. infrastructure in need of funding. For example, the bill would invest in clean energy across the U.S. by making renewables and zero-emission vehicles more accessible through tax incentives.

Renewables have been declining in cost for decades, but millions of residents still lack access to them. The bill answers the problem of clean energy being accessible only to communities with greater resources.

Weeks have passed since the Moving Forward Act was initially voted on in the House. The bill has now been deemed dead in the Senate, as Majority Leader Mitch McConnell touted “this nonsense is not going anywhere” before going on recess.

Though the bill is dead, it represents the growing reality that existing infrastructure may serve as a barrier to community growth. Addressing the issue, as the bill shows, is both a path forward to correcting previous climate wrongdoings and a step toward helping the poorest communities in the U.S.

In Syracuse, one of the poorest cities in the nation, the Interstate 81 corridor has for decades plagued residents with a loss of economic activity and with poorer air quality than that of neighboring towns. Upon environmental and economic review, the New York State Department of Transportation agreed on a “community grid” replacement of the highway.

The grid would replace the downtown section of highway with a boulevard with bicycle lanes and pedestrian walkways. As a result of the project, neighborhoods that were divided by the highway would again be within walking distance of each other.

Investing in this infrastructure would be a step toward upward mobility for those in Syracuse who lack sufficient public transportation and connection to other parts of the city. Better infrastructure in the transportation sector also improves air quality and reduces greenhouse gas emissions around main routes, advantages that are pivotal to fighting climate change on a national level.

By the end of the year, the U.S. will be officially removed from the 2016 Paris Climate Agreement, meaning the federal government will soon ignore goals for reducing carbon emissions. Meanwhile, entities originally tasked with minimizing greenhouse gas emissions have been reduced to shells of policy. For example, the Clean Power Plan, created to reduce emissions from power plants, was repealed in 2017.

The Trump administration has missed the opportunity to push sustainable infrastructure into the future, leaving states to decide their own climate and environmental goals. For New York state, the Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act serves in place of federal guidance on climate goals, which directly intersect with infrastructure improvements. Addressing one is a step toward fixing the other.

Though states are fulfilling their own climate goals, the Paris Climate Agreement is a direct example of federal versus state responsibility in infrastructure requirements. The juxtaposition of a dead climate agreement and subsequent growth of an act in New York state highlights the responsibility struggle America faces and must figure out.

Pollution transcends state borders. Additionally, economic activity is dependent on intrastate travel and trade. Clearly, there needs to be a standard in place to address at a national level infrastructure in both an economic and environmental perspective.

Today, the nation is left with the question: who is responsible for America’s infrastructure?

In New York state, investing in clean energy will address the climate crisis and help break barriers low-income communities face in affording clean and reliable power. More sustainable infrastructure policies quell the economic insecurities Americans have faced for decades. In turn, investments in better infrastructure will allow for projects to help the communities they serve.

Every American faces the indirect effects of climate change, but millions face the direct economic and health effects of the infrastructure they live with. To build a better future, federal and local authorities must acknowledge the interconnectedness of sustainability, poverty and infrastructure.

Published on July 30, 2020 at 6:01 pm