Now, let me tell you, another thing we’ve done is to make long-overdue investments in upgrading our outdated, our inefficient national infrastructure. We’re talking roads. We’re talking bridges. We’re talking dams, levees. But we’re also talking a smart electric grid that can bring clean energy to new areas. We’re talking about broadband Internet so that everybody is plugged in. We’re talking about high-speed rail lines required to compete in a 21st century economy. 
With these words, the president segued into a plan that will commit another $50 billion to infrastructure improvements that he assured a crowd at an AFL-CIO sponsored event in Milwaukee would create jobs right now:
But the bottom line is this, Milwaukee — this will not only create jobs immediately, it’s also going to make our economy hum over the long haul. It’s a plan that history tells us can and should attract bipartisan support. 
Despite a surfeit of evidence that the president’s job creation guarantee was not true, Press Secretary Gibbs issued a release the same day to back up Mr. Obama’s claim, adding a cautionary “long-run” to the president’s statements:
To jumpstart job creation, this long-run policy front-loads – through a $50 billion up-front investment – a significant share of the new infrastructure resources. As with other long-run policies, the Administration is committed to working with Congress to fully pay for the plan. 
Infrastructure spending is key to this administration’s economic policies. The Recovery Act committed $60 billion to infrastructure. Given the inflexibility of our unemployment rate, it is difficult to envision how another $50 billion will suddenly “jumpstart” job creation. Infrastructure projects do create jobs, but not quickly, certainly not immediately, and they do not “jumpstart” anything because they take too long to implement.  We have already dedicated such a large sum to infrastructure spending that throwing more money at this type of economic stimulus will actually slow the rate at which we can spend more money on these types of projects:
Moreover, given the substantial increase in infrastructure funding provided by ARRA, achieving significant increases in outlays above the amounts funded by ARRA would probably take even longer. 
In September 2010, the Director of the Congressional Budget Office examined various proposals for increasing employment. The policies estimated to have the greatest effect on employment through 2011 involved lowering taxes or adding to income. Infrastructure investments tied for last place.  Despite the likelihood that his plans will fail to create the jobs we need now, the president is planning to nearly double the amount already committed to infrastructure with the Recovery Act. Meanwhile, administration officials are not applying the same job-creation yardstick to the infrastructure plan that they applied to raising taxes on the wealthy:
Recently, some have argued that extending the high-income cuts is necessary for the economy. This is simply wrong.
First, extending the high-income tax cuts would provide very little job creation in 2011. There is widespread agreement that the short-run economic benefits of high-income tax cuts are small. 
There is another downside to the president’s scheme. Not only will it divert resources to a plan that will fail to quickly stimulate job growth, it may cause a further loss of private sector jobs:
In the other direction, substantial government spending can cause a shift in resources (including employees) away from production in other businesses and sectors to government-funded projects. That indirect crowding-out effect could cause growth in employment among recipients of ARRA funding to be offset by declines in employment elsewhere in the economy. 
The president has maintained since January 2009 that recovery from the recession will be slow. His newest proposal for job creation adds to a list of bad ideas that are helping to make that prediction come true. What his infrastructure projects will do is pump billions into organized labor, providing ongoing funding for projects after the first round of stimulus spending is exhausted. The president is committing billions to union-friendly initiatives, even guaranteeing incomes for unionized public sector employees (see: No Money to Pay Police, Teachers, Firefighters and Nurses? Fire Them), while the private sector languishes in his business-hostile environment.
What is the ultimate goal, and who will benefit from the $50 billion infrastructure boost? You guessed right:
It was the labor movement that helped secure so much of what we take for granted today. (Applause.) The 40-hour work week, the minimum wage, family leave, health insurance, Social Security, Medicare, retirement plans. The cornerstones of the middle-class security all bear the union label. (Applause.) 
1..Remarks by the President at Laborfest in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. September 6, 2010.
2..Remarks by the President at Laborfest in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. September 6, 2010.
3..The White House. Office of the Press Secretary. September 6, 2010. President Obama to Announce Plan to Renew and Expand America’s Roads, Railways and Runways.
4..Congressional Budget Office. Policies for Increasing Economic Growth and Employment in 2010 and 2011. January 2010. p. 23.
5..Congressional Budget Office. Policies for Increasing Economic Growth and Employment in 2010 and 2011. January 2010. p. 23.
6..Congressional Budget Office. Douglas W. Elmendorf, Director. Fiscal Policy Choices in Uncertain Times. September 16, 2010. p. 11.
7..Council of Economic Advisers. Extending High-Income Tax Cuts is the Wrong Answer for the Recovery. Christina Romer. July 28, 2010.
8.Congressional Budget Office. Estimated Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act on Employment and Economic Output From April 2010 Through June 2010. August 2010. p. 5.
9..Remarks by the President at Laborfest in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. September 6, 2010.