The Analysis of a Pothole

A potential pothole in Trumps infrastructure plan by Cory Schouten contains an

interesting argument. It was published exactly three weeks after the 2016 election day, the day

when Donald Trump won the presidency of the United States. It was published by CBS, a liberal

news company, in their Money Watch section which discusses economic issues, primarily

relating to the stock market. The article was originally published online and has not been

transferred to any other formats. This article was written for the average American to

understand, as opposed to an expert in a field, and even encourages its readers to comment or

send out a tweet with a link to the article.

In Schoutens article, he argues that Trumps infrastructure plan does not create better

infrastructure, but rather improves the situation for the private sector. The main source of this

criticism is the fact that a large portion of the funds for this project will come from private

developers. He describes the problem with this setup in three ways. First, he argues that the

developers could emphasize the areas where they could greatly profit as opposed to the areas that

need infrastructure repair. Secondly, he argues that developers would only choose to undertake

projects where there is a perceived profit, but not necessarily where it is needed. Thirdly, he

argues that economists would say that Trumps infrastructure plan is unlikely to do much to

increase the GDP.

Schoutens anti-Trump message appears to be in accordance with the type of audience he

is writing for. Since CBS is a liberal news station, his conclusion attracts a liberal audience. In

his article, Schouten speaks very critically of Trumps plan, which seems to be in accord with the

political alignment of both the news source and his audience. Even though his message is pro-
liberal, he is generous in so far that he lets his audience know the political associations of all of

his sources.

In this article, Schouten has some valid claims and concerns. Private companies and

corporations tend to seek their own interests, because they exist to make a profit for themselves

and their employees. Despite this, Schouten never gives credence to any opposing arguments.

He never discusses any possible alternate views to his theory, not even within the context of

objections and replies. For example, a potential objection to this argument would be what

economist Adam Smith describes as the invisible hand, wherein when business seek their own

benefit, they end up benefitting society. Although Mason B. Williams of The Atlantic echoes

many of Schoutens concerns, he gives some credence to Adam Smiths invisible hand.

Williams states that cities are having much difficulty with maintaining their infrastructure, due to

a lack of funds. Williams goes on to argue that including the private sector could provide the

proper funds as well as build better infrastructure, because private infrastructure tends to be of

higher quality than publicly paid infrastructure. Williams argues that because the private sector

wants to show how well they design and manage projects, they will often construct higher

quality projects, at a lower price, ahead of schedule, than their public funds counterparts.

Schouten does cite credible sources with the majority of his arguments. For his first

argument, he vaguely gives credit to critics which lacks a definite credible source. However,

for his second and third arguments, he cites the Economic Policy Institute and the Capital

Economics respectively, which are credible sources. Not only are they credible sources, but they

are sources from both sides of the political spectrum. In his article, Schout states that the

Economic Policy Institute is a liberal organization, and that Capital Economics is conservative.

Through this, greater credibility is lent towards Schoutens argument because people from both
sides of the debate agree with him. Schouten does not rely on appeals to emotion in his article,

but rather heavily relies upon the ethos and credibility of his sources. To conclude, I believe that

Cory Schouten made an effective and reasonable objection to Trumps Infrastructure plan, that

would require research and investigation to refute any of his three arguments.

This article contains no pictures, and uses a standard font. Therefore any visual appeals

that this article contain are minimal. The only visual appeal in this article would be the CBS

logo located at the top of the page. This logo is used to create ethos for the contents of the paper.

When a reader sees the CBS logo, the reader identifies this article as coming from a reliable and

credible source.

Throughout the duration of the article, the author remains very straightforward. He

refrains from using rhetorical tools such as sarcasm or humor in his paper. This creates an effect

that ultimately aids his ethos. Not using sarcasm or humor makes his article appear more

professional, which lends greater credibility to his arguments.

To conclude, Schouten creates a strong and well thought out argument for his audience.

It is an argument that appeals to his audience, but is still logical and is in most cases supported

by the opinions of experts. Although his arguments are logical, they are able to be disputed and

can be objected to, by other credible sources. This is definitely not a closed topic; there is still

room for plenty of discussion and debate. I will use this article in my paper for several reasons.

First, it provides insight into many of the arguments against Trumps infrastructure plan.

Secondly, through demonstrating the benefits of government funded projects, he is providing an

argument in support of the Democrats infrastructure plan. Lastly, I will include this source in

my essay because the arguments he provide can be disputed. It will allow for me to weigh the
pros and cons on every side of the issue, and to bring in the opinions of other rhetors who have

spoken on this topic to create a well-educated conclusion.

Works Cited:

A. Smith. The Wealth of Nations. New York City, NY: Bantam Classics, 2003.

C. Schouten. (2016, November 29). A potential pothole in Trumps infrastructure plan (1st

Edition) [Online]. Available: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/donald-trumps-infrastructure-plan-

has-a-potential-pothole/

M. B. Williams. (2017, January 17). Would Trumps Infrastructure Plan Fix Americas Cities?

(1st Edition) [Online]. Available: https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/trump-

infrastructure-cities/512432/