You need some form of a "stop ship" where inspectors get some number of "no way, close this entirely" that they can use without repercussions or something.
I feel like this thought process leads to the "worst possible category" containing 42k bridges. The construction of the categories was based around whether the bridge is safe, and this category says "the bridge is not safe." It's when you put it off long enough, and let the infrastructure deteriorate long enough, that you start going "which is the most unsafe though?" Or, "is a safety factor even necessary? They are by definition a >1.0 factor applied to what we think is safe." Then, "one in a hundred year events" or "once in a decade events." Eventually it's "hasn't collapsed yet!"
The fact that the list got that big means our problem isn't prioritization, our problem is failing to repair bridges. Commit to and budget for repairing 42k bridges, then prioritize where you start.
We need to hold road infrastructure to the same consideration as we do transit and rail. If we didn’t give it unlimited funding, then it would already be doing this.
We are wasting trillions and losing so much economic growth by doubling down on a bad investment year after year for decades. Imagine if this money was put into education or healthcare or transit. We’d actually have a net benefit!
Based on the evidence, it's hard to imagine that lack of money is the problem with those three things.
K-12 education in particular has seen more and more money spent over the decades while the number of students, teachers, and student outcomes have stayed more or less constant (the extra money mostly goes to administrators to administrate the extra money). Higher ed has gotten famously more expensive while delivering a poorer product, with grade inflation and recently a focus on worthless social activism diluting what it means to have a college degree at all.
On healthcare, the US already spends close to one-fifth of its GDP on it. Its per capita spend is over 50% higher than the next-highest country, Switzerland. And what do we have to show for this, other than an obesity rate exceeding one-third the population and diminishing life expectancies? I don't know how more money could possibly help this situation.
Transit only makes sense in a few cities (largely due to idiotic zoning that prevents the kind of densities that would enable transit) and even then, if you look at things like NYC's East Side Access project, it would be hard-pressed for a public works project to spend taxpayer money less efficiently. And to truly improve the transit experience would require a concomitant improvement in the social fabric, which is its own set of problems.
Local roads often don't qualify, but state and federal highways do.
And it can be done in a way that there isn't a bus on the bridge when it collapses.