Texas Transit Association

Rep. Don Young, the brusque transportation honcho of the House, yesterday indirectly assailed the House leadership for pushing for tax cuts at the expense of an overhaul of the nation’s highway system that would create more jobs.

Young, who chairs the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, argued that his plan to increase highway funding significantly would act as an economic tonic.

Young blasts House chiefs on priorities
By Jonathan E. Kaplan, May 14. 2003 The Hill

In a brief exchange with reporters, the Alaska Republican cited reports that traffic jams cost commuters $1,160 a year. “And somebody is worried about a little money to try to boost the transportation system,” he said.

Young lamented that over 42,000 Americans die each year on the nation’s highways. Many of the roads, he asserted, are in bad repair. “And yet some people don’t want to improve the transportation system or understand the economic influence this bill provides,” he said.

When asked by The Hill about whom the “somebody” referred to, Young curtly replied, “You figure it out. You figure it out. I am not answering any more questions.”

Young has said he wants to spend $375 billion over the next six years. But some aides and lobbyists have said the only way for that plan to work is to grow the pot of money available to spend by raising taxes.

According to industry insiders, some committee members agree with Young that passing a transportation bill would yield more economic benefits more quickly than enacting a tax cut.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) told reporters yesterday that he had met with Young “in the past couple of weeks,” to review proposals to increase the size of the trust fund.

“Some were tax increases,” DeLay said. “I’m just not going to support,” tax increases. He added that Young was still working on ways to add new money for highway projects.

Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, Bush’s only Democratic cabinet member, who chaired the House Transportation panel as a California lawmaker, will testify Thursday before Young’s committee.

“He’ll be coming in at level below what the Senate and House are seeking for next six years,” said Steve Hansen, a committee spokesman.

The expected gulf in proposed funding levels might put some Republicans, many of whom represent suburban districts where traffic congestion is a hot-button political issue, in the position of favoring new fees or tax increases in order to build more roads.

Young apparently has room to maneuver a tax increase. Buried deep within the recently passed budget resolution is a provision that opens the door to tax increases to achieve the necessary funding for the nearly 4,500 projects favored by lawmakers.

The House-Senate conference agreement allows for an increase in “spending above the level in the budget resolution should new offsetting resources be made available…” The text continues, “Any spending increase will be constrained by the resources available to the highway trust fund.”

“Leadership has not agreed, but [they have] not said no,” a committee aide said.

Indexing the gas tax to the consumer price index is the one idea discounted the least quickly, said an aide and lobbyist. The gas tax, last raised to 18.4 cents per gallon in 1993, would rise with inflation.

Several lobbyists told The Hill that support is lukewarm and that nobody would step forward until something formal was proposed.

“I don’t conceive of a scenario where a House member loses his seat because he voted to index the gas tax,” said Stephen Sandherr, CEO of the Associated General Contractors of America.

Other ideas include reducing ethanol subsidy, returning interest earned from the highway trust fund to the trust fund rather than returning it to the Treasury, and spending down the trust fund.

Committee spokesperson Hansen said Young could introduce a bill by the end of June, allowing the House to act it before the August recess.

But that won’t be easy. In 1997, the sticking point to passing a bill was over whether to separate transportation funding or to dedicate all gas and other fuel taxes toward transportation spending.

Former Transportation Committee Chairman Bud Schuster (R-Pa.) won that protracted struggle.

While President Clinton and Schuster cobbled together more money for highways, the pot is now shrinking. Without new revenues, transportation spending will remain flat or even decline.

Some industry lobbyists question whether the House leadership even wants to see a bill passed while also doubting whether transportation improvements are a top priority in the Bush White House.

The politics of building highways and mass transit pit lawmakers against each other because some states receive more money from the highway trust fund than they pay into it.

Texas gets 90 cents back on the dollar. Alaska, on the other hand, receives more than it contributes to the fund. DeLay has introduced legislation to require all states to receive at least 95 cents on the dollar from the trust fund.

Young’s task of passing a bill with significant new spending is made even harder by the soft economy and by falling revenues from the federal tax on gasoline.

The fight is expected to be so contentious that lawmakers are considering extending TEA-21 for one year and reauthorizing the programs next year.