Harm 1 – The public has lost its support in our infrastructure plans due to the previous failed infrastructure projects

http://www.bernardlschwartz.com/political-initiatives/Third_Way_Idea_Brief_-_A_National_Infrastructure_Bank-1.pdf

However, the public is fed up with massive deceits and cost overruns, and increasingly consider deceit reduction to be a bigger economic priority than infrastructure investment.2 They have lost confidence in government’s ability to choose infrastructure projects wisely, complete them, and bring them in on budget.

http://www.governing.com/topics/transportation-infrastructure/Harrisburgs-failed-infrastructure-project.html
In 2003, the Harrisburg Authority, a public entity charged with providing solid waste management services and whose board was handpicked by the mayor, approved a plan to retrofit Harrisburg’s incinerator for $120 million. Today Harrisburg, a city of about 49,000, owes more than $280 million on the project and has amassed a per capita debt burden more than three times the second most indebted city in the state, Philadelphia.
Harrisburg isn’t alone in piling up debt. Over the past five years, state and local governments have been on an epic borrowing binge, bringing outstanding debt to a formidable $2.4 trillion -- that’s a 35 percent increase since 2005

Disadvantage: The increase of infrastructure does not promise job opportunities; there are other solutions for job opportunities and economic income. http://wsdotfederalfunding.blogspot.com/2010/09/infrastructure-spending-as-stimulus.html "One is that infrastructure