Feb 20, 2018 4 min read

President Trump has big plans to rebuild America’s infrastructure, and there’s little doubt that the country could use it.

In its most recent survey, the American Society of Civil Engineers gave the nation’s infrastructure an overall score of “D+,” with bridges being the only area that received a grade better than a “D,” mustering a so-so “C+.” Sure, it’s still winter and our roads have been hammered by plows, ice and salt, but few Pennsylvanians will be surprised that the commonwealth did not do any better than a “C-,” with one in four of our bridges being ranked structurally deficient, and Pennsylvania topping the list of states for most sewer overflows.

The need for infrastructure spending has long been apparent, but efforts by the Obama administration to get a bill through Congress were stymied by Republicans. It was a missed opportunity, considering that the economy was slowly healing from the Great Recession through much of Obama’s presidency, interest rates were at rock bottom, sidelined workers could have been employed, and the recovery could have been quickened.

How Trump’s $1.5 trillion proposal will fare remains to be seen, particularly with much of the onus being placed on state and local governments and private industry to come up with the money for it. A contentious election year might make it harder for big proposals to get through Congress, and any further revelations from the investigation into Russian election meddling could further divert the attention of lawmakers and the broader public.

A large-scale infrastructure plan also faces another hurdle: There might not be enough skilled workers out there to carry it out.

We sometimes romanticize the work of heavy-equipment operators, electricians and pipefitters, exalting those as bedrock American jobs. But there are fewer people filling those positions today. A survey last year by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the manufacturer USG Corp. found that two-thirds of contractors were planning on hiring new employees, but that most said they had a moderate to difficult time finding workers versed in the skilled trades. Potential employers are also facing an aging workforce, with some workers in the skilled trades having walked away almost a decade ago when the job market was moribund.

Why the aversion to jobs that pay $50,000 or beyond, particularly for young workers? Many who might have pursued those jobs go to college instead, while others might be willing to earn less while working in a climate-controlled warehouse, rather than in the elements. Also, as firms that work with the shale gas industry have reported, potential skilled tradesmen sometimes can’t get a foot in the door because they can’t pass a drug test.

“There are still a lot of parents who think you go into a technical career when you can’t go to college,” Richard Barcaskey, executive director of the Constructors Association of Western Pennsylvania, told the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. “When I talk to students, I always tell them the story of what happens when we have a class of heavy equipment operators. Six months after they start, the parking lot is full of brand new pickup trucks. Not many of their friends who go to college can say that.”

The Trump administration is not helping its own cause with the budget it submitted to Congress. It calls for cuts to job training programs, including a 20 percent decrease in funding to grants the Department of Education gives for technical and career education.

Remember the phrase, “I threw a party but nobody came?” Well, what if we assembled an infrastructure plan, got the funding together, but there was no one to build it? We shouldn’t let that happen.