It's a disgrace really. If I was living in another part of the country, I would care if my taxpayer money went to some road, airport, or railroad project because it wouldn't affect me. Some people on this forum don't understand as well as the president.
And that's been the trend lately among the Tea Party's constituency: cut taxes at all costs even if it means I get nothing because it certainly means they
get nothing. How many governors made a competitive sport out of returning federal rail funds? Eventually something will give: more things will start breaking and politicians (motivated by their constituents) will demand funding.
The problem is that Trump takes everything personally and the Northeastern senators, representatives, governors, and AGs are deliberately antagonizing him and aren't offering him anything. Trump's actually doing pretty well on delivering promises to his base: decreased regulation, conservative judges, travel bans, NAFTA renegotiation, tax cuts (which, unfortunately, had disproportionate impact on NY and NJ), etc. The one thing he hasn't delivered to his base is The Wall.
The NE pols need to start speaking Trump's language. How will they contain costs? I haven't heard any offers to throw the Sandhogs' Union under the bus. What about regulation changes? Why don't they propose some sensible regulation and law changes regarding the construction process? I won't say take an axe to NEPA but what if NIMBY and Sierra Club-backed lawsuits challenging projects were routed to a newly-created, "packed" Construction Court? What if Congress designated certain projects as "priority in the national interest" and waved certain NEPA rules? If we're talking about building it anyway, why consider a "no-build alternative" in the EIS? If it's in the national interest maybe a "Finding of No Significant Impact" can be replaced by a "Finding of Minimal Impact" or "acceptable" impact.