Because apparently everybody loves an overpriced and overhyped idea, the Governator wants to do some more public-private partnerships for road maintenance and such:
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Wednesday proposed an expanded push for public-private partnerships and set a goal to add 20,000 new engineers to California's work force as part of his upcoming January budget plan.
The Schwarzenegger administration wants the state to expand the types of public projects that can be built with the financial might of private companies.Current law does not allow state government broad authority to use this type of contracting - known as a Performance Based Infrastructure - except in emergencies or through legislative approval. (SacBee 12.27.07)
The thing is, as both Robert and I have argued, they don't actually end up cheaper, or more efficient. Sure, they have success stories here and there, but overwhelmingly, what ends up happening is once the cameras disappear from the press conferences hyping these P3s, the bill gets higher as the owners of the corporation demand higher and higher profits. Oh, and they don't have the same labor standards as state agencies do.
So, yeah, let's line the pockets of investors with our state general fund. Sounds like a great plan.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signaled a major push today to engage private companies in the construction and management of state and local infrastructure, adopting a strategy employed in Canada, Britain and elsewhere...
The Schwarzenegger administration is contemplating a plan, probably requiring state legislation, to create a California agency to oversee state and local public-private partnerships, aides said. Modeled after one in British Columbia, it would be staffed by professional financiers and other experts who could oversee the structuring of deals by both state and local governments.
As Brian explained in his excellent Pat Brown is Rolling Over In His Grave post last month, this push is part of a broader assault on the public ownership and operation of our basic infrastructure. The LA Times does not quote a single opponent of privatization, instead casting opponents as merely greedy special interests wanting to protect their fief:
opposition from labor unions and from legislators reluctant to give up too much control over big spending projects.
One of Arnold's financial advisors, David Crane, is allowed to declare that this is about innovation and progress:
Whereas we're a very innovative state in many ways, when it comes to infrastructure we are less innovative, and the governor intends to bring public-private partnerships into our portfolio.
