Where the 2016 US presidential candidates stand on architectural issues
The choice is yours: Be informed
When it comes to architectural issues, where do the four US presidential candidates stand? On infrastructure:
Secretary Clinton's comprehensive infrastructure plan calls for an increase in federal infrastructure funding by $275 billion over a five-year period (with $250 billion of that total allocated to direct public investment and the other $25 billion going to a national infrastructure bank that would issue loans and other forms of credit enhancement).
Governor Johnson has said he opposes federal funding for mass transit, and that he supports increasing private investment in infrastructure. As governor of New Mexico, he supported increased use of public-private partnerships for numerous infrastructure projects.
Find out where the candidates stand on additional issues like taxes and energy in the AIA's full presidential profiles.
Dr. Stein has stated she supports investing more in green infrastructure and transportation. She has stated that she would focus on public transit, sustainable agriculture, conservation, and restoration of ecosystems.
In his book Crippled America, Mr. Trump stresses that inadequate infrastructure costs the American people “an estimated $200 billion a year in reduced productivity.” The candidate has also touted his background in the construction industry as an asset. Trump has said he would commit at least $500 billion to infrastructure spending over five years.
The election offers America’s architects an opportunity to have their voices heard. The goal of the AIA's presidential profiles is to help members make informed choices based on what the candidates have said about critical issues facing architects. Our presidential profiles provide details on where the four candidates stand on issues like taxes, energy, and small businesses, along with the AIA’s position as an organization.