When Clinton campaigend in 1992, one of his major promises (and the only one he didn't deliver on) was to spend lots of money on infrastructure. In the end, ending the deficits were more important so, sadly, it did not happen. It needs to - we need modernized roads, bridges and, most of all, rail. It also helps businesses - it helps them a lot. It gives them the necessary tools with which to operate. BUT, it helps them democratically, versus the subsidy approach that is based on how well you grease politicians. Further, it doesn't skew markets, the infraststructure is available to ALL businesses, including start-ups. It doesn't buffer shareholders from economic losses - a risk that is inherent and necessary for free markets to perform the services to the nation and consumers that they are intended. You subsidize one industry and what happens? It loses all incentives to produce superior products; it gives the favored industries a huge economic advantage over a fledging industry or producer who might have the superior product, but can't compete because the competitor is flush with government funds protecting it from any economic penalty that it should sustain from pushing an inferior product. End these idiotic subsidieds. REbuild this nation's infrastructure. Let the consumers, not the politicians, decide which products and companies are worthy of support.