The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act delivers $550 billion of funding to improve our nation鈥檚 infrastructure, and the construction industry stands ready to deliver on the law鈥檚 promised revitalization of America鈥檚 roads, schools, bridges, utilities, and transportation systems.

Unfortunately, this investment could not happen at a worse time for taxpayers. The construction industry currently faces听,听unprecedented materials cost inflation,听declining investment in structures听and a skilled听听of 650,000 people in 2022.听To make matters worse, the Biden administration听听in March that will needlessly increase construction costs and discourage small businesses from bidding on taxpayer-funded projects.

A Department of Labor听听released on听March 18 purports to 鈥渦pdate and modernize鈥� existing Davis-Bacon Act regulations requiring contractors performing work on most federal and federally assisted projects to pay construction workers a government-determined hourly wage and benefit rate reflecting local 鈥減revailing鈥� rates of compensation.

Since its passage in 1931, construction trade unions颅颅颅颅 and their allies in the federal government颅颅颅 have fiercely defended the DBA鈥攁nd expanded its reach to federally assisted construction projects procured by state and local government via 71 Related Acts. That鈥檚 despite complaints by government watchdogs, taxpayers and small-business advocates that DBA regulations and prevailing wage requirements听,听, undermine productivity, unfairly steer contracts to unionized firms and听discourage competition from small businesses.

At the heart of the DBA policy debate are two key arguments. The first is that the DOL has failed to provide clarity to contractors about the various bureaucratic interpretations of DBA regulations. This exposes contractors to added compliance costs, fines, and litigation and ultimately undermines government programs seeking to award more contracts to small, minority, and disadvantaged businesses.

The second is the perception that lawmakers and regulators鈥攃ollaborating with the construction trade-union lobby鈥攈ave rigged the government鈥檚 regulatory and enforcement bureaucracy to ensure that, as much as possible, the DOL requires that contractors pay inflated, nonmarket union rates to construction workers. Since听, it is improbable for union rates to be adopted as 鈥減revailing鈥� as much as they actually are.

Likewise, for decades, the听听and the听听have called for reforms to the DOL鈥檚, yet the DOL has done little to improve it.

Together, these two regulatory deficiencies help unionized contractors win more government contracts. This is a key reason why the DBA is supported by Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh颅,听, and President Biden, who has said, 鈥淚 intend to be the most pro-union president leading the most pro-union administration in American history.鈥�

So, it鈥檚 no surprise that the DOL鈥檚 proposal turned out to be more pork for unions rather than meaningful reforms. It rescinds modest reforms enacted by the Reagan administration in the early 1980s, overturns decades of legal decisions unfavorable to unions, expands the scope of the DBA to new types of construction-related activity and new industries such as manufacturing, trucking, and surveying, and fails to fix the DOL鈥檚 broken and convoluted wage determination process, which a new released by the Beacon Hill Institute increases the price tag of DBA construction projects by at least 7.2% and costs taxpayers an extra $21 billion a year.听

In total, there are more than 50 significant changes to DBA regulations in the proposed rule鈥檚 432 pages of text, which the DOL claims will take just 90 minutes 鈥溾�� to review and implement, at a cost of $79 in its first year for each of the 192,000 contractors it estimates will be affected by this rule. The regulations will likely cost regulated businesses hundreds of millions of dollars to implement, and the DOL does not account for additional costs to taxpayers as a result of the adoption of inflated nonmarket rates and reduced competition from small businesses.

The DOL has given just 60 days for taxpayers and industry stakeholders to provide thoughtful and comprehensive comments on these sweeping changes that apply to an estimated听.听

Meaningful Davis-Bacon Act regulatory reform will foster robust competition from all members of the construction industry on federally funded contracts听and deliver communities the high-quality infrastructure they deserve while providing the best possible value for taxpayers.

Ben Brubeck is vice president of regulatory, labor and state affairs for Associated Builders and Contractors.

The was published by National Review on May 17.