Infrastructure bills like the “BUILD America 250 Act” typically build two things. One is physical: roads, bridges, ports, rail corridors, freight networks. The other is legal infrastructure that determines how safely, quickly, and affordably people and goods can move. For the latter, the act relies on the old political playbook — new layers of regulation without full regard for the old — and puts some of its goals at risk.

Having served as a senior economist at the Federal Railroad Administration, I do not view building infrastructure and improving efficiency and safety as competing goals. Far from it. But lawmakers must change the way they think.

How radical environmentalists turned your retirement account into climate collateral

How Morocco humiliated Europe’s weakest prime minister

Melania Trump got it right: Russia must return Ukraine’s stolen children

Regulations must be focused specifically on improving outcomes rather than dictating exactly how things are done, and they must replace, rather than add, costly layers of compliance. That distinction is especially important in freight transportation.

Virtually every product we purchase spends time on a plane, train, ship, or truck. When regulation makes that trip more expensive, costs ripple throughout the economy, from manufacturer to retailer to consumer.

My research focuses on the tendency for the overall stock of rules to grow over time. Policymakers evaluate new rules as if they will........

© Washington Examiner