Des pr\u00e9cisions diverses apparaissent sur ce qui devrait \u00eatre un plan de sauvetage \u00e9conomique, ou, si l’on veut des termes plus europ\u00e9ens, un plan de relance de l’\u00e9conomie US. Le parlementaire d\u00e9mocrate Barney Frank l’\u00e9voque dans l’interview dont nous parlons dans notre pr\u00e9c\u00e9dente note de ce jour<\/a>. Un article du chroniqueur Martin Walker, de UPI, ce 29 octobre<\/a>, donne des d\u00e9tails vari\u00e9s sur l’action de la future nouvelle administration d\u00e9mocrate, qui s’av\u00e8re d’ailleurs, si l’on se r\u00e9f\u00e8re aux d\u00e9claration de Barney Frank d\u00e9j\u00e0 cit\u00e9e, une action conjointe Congr\u00e8s (d\u00e9mocrate)-future administration Obama, o\u00f9 les parlementaires d\u00e9mocrates entendent prendre l’initiative.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tVoici quelques observations de Walker sur ce plan de relance, sans aucun doute diff\u00e9rent, et m\u00eame antagoniste dans l’esprit du plan Paulson. Il s’adresse \u00e0 l’\u00e9conomie r\u00e9elle tandis que Paulson s’adressait \u00e0 la finance; il concerne la population et les structures \u00e9conomiques des USA tandis que le plan Paulson concerne les structures capitalistes.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00ab[T]he Obama camp is not just confident of victory in next week’s presidential election. It already has teams of economists working hard on an infrastructure investment package. From off-the-record conversations with some of Sen. Barack Obama’s advisers, it looks as if it will come in two tranches worth a total of some $500 billion, to be deployed in the first two years of the new administration.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThe first tranche, worth around $150 billion, is likely to be presented and probably passed within the first 100 days. It includes an across-the-board extension of unemployment benefits, an increase in food stamps and the announcement of an immediate infrastructure investment in modernizing the creaking national electricity grid. The second tranche is focused on infrastructure, a sharp increase in alternative energy, science and medical research grants, and new federal money for higher education through Pell grants and targeted subsidies for science, engineering and language programs.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThe money, which will add to the budget deficit, will be justified under Obama’s phrase about \u00ab\u00a0the fierce urgency of now\u00a0\u00bb and by the glaring need for major investments in the dilapidated U.S. infrastructure. The Association of Civil Engineers has identified $1.6 trillion in urgent spending to repair bridges, roads, ports, airfields, sewage and water supplies, and the electric grid.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThere are two main difficulties. The first is the absorptive capacity of the U.S. economy, with likely shortages of skilled labor and engineering capabilities, and the inevitably slow process of getting the work program defined, agreed to and designed. Some priorities, like bridge and sewage repair, are pretty clear, and many states and municipalities have programs ready to go, but there are likely to be bottlenecks of specialist equipment and skilled workers. The kind of construction worker who can build a house is not necessarily equipped to lay transmission lines and build cofferdams for bridges or water-treatment plants.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n \t\u00bbThe second problem is the need for national-level strategic planning. Existing plans for port and railroad modernization suffer from the fact that a large proportion of freight rail traffic still has to pass through the bottleneck of Chicago. A problem with tricky political implications of neighborhood resistance to alternative routes that will take time to resolve, it also points to the need for a coherent and coordinated national transportation plan. That also will take time, particularly since it logically should be coordinated with the NAFTA partners, Canada and Mexico, who also have new ports and road and rail plans that will feed into the U.S. network.<\/em>\u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n \tDiverses autres consid\u00e9rations sont ajout\u00e9es sur les difficult\u00e9s techniques, y compris les difficult\u00e9s du c\u00f4t\u00e9 des parlementaires, avec la recherche d’avantages locaux pour leurs circonscriptions. Bref, de la cuisine politicienne, dans laquelle le plan rencontrera des obstacles nombreux.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n