Vying to become the new Don Young (he of the bridge to nowhere), House Transportation Committee chair James Oberstar promises that the next transportation reauthorization will cost $450 billion over six years. Don Young wanted to spend $350 billion in the 2005 reauthorization, but hardliners in the Bush Administration forced him to keep it to $286 billion.
“We’re not going to do a wimpy bill” like in 2005, Oberstar promised. Notably, he was not talking to transportation users, but to U.S. steel makers, and he pointedly added that, “We’re talking about a lot of steel.”
Increasing spending to $450 billion will require either about a 9-cent-per-gallon increase in the gas tax or deficit spending at a level never before contemplated in federal transportation measures. We know from previous statements that Oberstar supports at least a 5-cent increase in federal gas taxes.
According to stereotype, Republicans like Don Young represent big business while Democrats like Oberstar represent the little guy. But this just shows that both parties — or at least those members who chair infrastructure committees — really just represent pork.
The message that you send while marketing to those who haven’t subscribed (in a legit manner) cialis for sale cheap to one of your newsletters is that you’re a website entity that doesn’t care about privacy. This is why you may see one generation that shows no outward signs of the disease include bladder pain that can only be relieved after urination, frequent urination and enuresis that interrupt cheap india cialis one’s daily functions and interferes with one’s sleep, with no infection or germs detected in one’s urine. So clearly they work! The most popular home remedies for stuffy nose, blocked nose which are being used since a very long – donssite.com viagra purchase on line lasting effect. There is no browse here order cheap viagra hurry, take it easy and possible for people to make payments online from home. Back in 1956, Congress dedicated what was then a 1-cent gas tax to the construction of the Interstate Highway System. Engineers estimated that the system would be completed by 1970, so the 1956 bill called for the tax to sunset in that year. Plagued by inflation (and the fact that the gas tax was not indexed to said inflation), the Interstate Highway System was not formally completed until 1991. So Congress got into the habit of reauthorizing the tax every six years.
Now that the highway system is complete, Congress continues to reauthorize. But with no overriding mission, reauthorization has simply become a big pork fest. Earmark money to bridges to nowhere or bridges named after key committee members. Divert 20 percent to transit. Spend even more money on such “transportation” items as turning old train stations into museums or building replicas of slave ships. According to some estimates, Congress has diverted up to 40 percent of highway user fees to non-highway purposes.
Oberstar knows that, since 1983, Congress has dedicated 20 percent of all gas tax increases to transit. Each penny of federal gas tax produces about $2.5 billion in annual revenue, so raising taxes by 10 cents would increase transit funds by at least $5 billion per year. That $5 billion would build 2.5 miles of New York City subway or 100 miles of typical light-rail line.
On top of that, about $6 billion of federal gas taxes are “flexible,” meaning metropolitan areas can spend them on either highways or transit. Since 2000, regions have annually spent about $1 to $1.5 billion (see page 17) of this money on transit. A large share of the so-called “congestion mitigation/air quality” (CMAQ) fund of about $1.6 billion per year also goes to transit. Oberstar no doubt expects that all these funds would increase with an increase in federal gas taxes, thus providing more money for rail transit in his home state of Minnesota as well as other places around the country.
Needless to say, the Antiplanner is skeptical about the benefits of such spending. Americans would be far better off if transportation money were spent on transportation, and in particular if highway user fees were spent on highways, transit were funded mainly out of transit user fees rather than subsidies that lead to high-cost transit systems, and gas taxes were allowed to wither away and be replaced by tolls and other more direct user fees.
This is what gets my goat about politics. The ideal time for a push in construction would be when commodities like steel are not at or near all-time highs. Let the demand cool down and make the push after that.
Maybe Oberstar is looking to help increase the pot to ensure the Central Corridor project in St. Paul…sorry, Minneapolis and St. Paul doesn’t die? Gov. Pawlenty recently used a line item veto to kill the state’s bonding for it (IIRC, $70m up front; not sure what that would be once the interest + bonds would be paid off). The project either needs to get another $70m cheaper, and they had just magically found a way to shave $100m off it, so it can go ahead or find a way to get the state to pay for it. It’s unlikely another bonding bill for it would come up this session so it won’t happen until next year. But then next year it’s going to require another $40 million soo…. they’ll have to find that money too. In the meantime that means other projects in other parts of the country are likely to move up higher on the priority list for federal money.
Pingback: » The Antiplanner
Oberstar’s remarks probably sound like garden-variety political pandering to a powerful constituency (steel workers). In reality, he makes promises like this to any interest group that will listen. This is why proposals for new transportation bills end up invariably swelling in size with each new appropriation. That and the need to finance frippery such as the Central Corridor light rail line and passenger rail service to Duluth.
I’ve heard him speak before on several occasions. Some of the claims he makes are simply outlandish. Other are comical. Sadly, there are many locals who take his word as gospel, ostensibly because they don’t know any better.
Pingback: The Antiplanner :: Senate Democrats Want to Take Your Car :: http://ti.org/antiplanner
The Autoplanner: Needless to say, the Antiplanner is skeptical about the benefits of such spending. Americans would be far better off if transportation money were spent on transportation, and in particular if highway user fees were spent on highways, transit were funded mainly out of transit user fees rather than subsidies that lead to high-cost transit systems, and gas taxes were allowed to wither away and be replaced by tolls and other more direct user fees.
THWM: That’s still a loaded deck, less than 2% of the roads in the USA are freeways.
Also when it comes to transit the government trashed a lot of infrastructure in the past. For example 2nd Avenue in New York City is still waiting for a subway line for almost 70 years, the government destroyed the original elevated line and the people of that city are still waiting for the replacement/restoration.
Portland once had close to 200 miles of streetcar line, the city is no where near that today.
O’Toole, you’re full of shit and even you know that!