Distributional patterns and comparative insights from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act

Source abstract

This study examines the distribution of transportation discretionary grants under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) using state-level data from FYS 2021–2023. Using award data from the BILLaunchpad and applying negative binomial and multiple linear regression models, along with panel analysis of the popular RAISE (Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and Equity) program, the study evaluates the roles of political alignment, equity merit, prior application experience, and program engagement while controlling for state fiscal and physical resources. Results show that states with higher shares of historically low-income communities and greater application experience received more and higher-value awards; however, the negative interaction indicates a “capacity paradox,” whereby high-need applicants remain disadvantaged without sufficient technical capacity. In other words, the need for investment is insufficient for application success without the initial capacity required to build further experience. While overall allocations were comparable across political alignments, Republican-leaning states secured a greater number of smaller awards concentrated in aviation and rural/tribal connectivity, whereas Democrat-leaning states received fewer but larger awards in transit, rail, and sustainability programs. These findings suggest that IIJA advanced distributional objectives, thanks to program design and competitive processes, with discretionary awards principally merit-based and politically unbiased. This study offers practical guidance for bridging the competitiveness gap and aligning application strategies with federal program priorities.