“Funding is the key,” said former DOT Secretary Norman Mineta. He should know.
Mineta spoke to an estimable eighty invited to UVA’s Miller Center of Public Affairs to discuss how significant reform in surface transportation policy might be achieved. He told them that funding is the prerequisite for the kind of major investment measure that all agreed is needed.
Noting the particular challenge, Mineta recalled how he brought to the Bush (43) White House a proposal to add two cents to the Federal fuel tax. The intent was to elevate road and transit program funding to level closer to actual system need. The Commander-in-Chief said no.
- On what bill did George W. Bush first exercise his power of the veto? (Softball.)
- Aside from a $8 Bn game-changing plan to jump-start high-speed passenger rail, which president ruled out any immediate action on a major transportation infrastructure program because he (that’s a hint) was not inclined toward a tax hike or other revenue measure? (But why just pick on presidents?)
- Is there a snowball’s chance in Haiti that Congress will pass the next full-fledged TEA bill anytime soon?
It’s not a stretch to suggest that it may take years for official Washington to approve a costly multi-year surface transportation bill. Certainly one that includes substantial reform (such as sustainable transportation and livable communities), new attention to freight gateways and corridors, and overall higher levels of capital investment in our declining public works. Hundreds of billions are needed over and above what is required to maintain what we already have. And a declining highway trust fund makes even maintaining the status quo a pressing challenge.
Josh Vorhees of Energy & Environment News wrote a good story carried by the NYT. The conferees at UVA know the timidity of the Electeds when it comes to approving new revenue increments to support this or that. When it comes to the partisan battlefield there is no distinguishing a user fee from a tax.
Some time ago, when a toll increase was being contemplated by staff of a public authority, the subject was referred to as “The Banana. ” The T-word was not uttered in internal discussions–lest others outside the agency get wind of it before the numbers were fully crunched and the rationale fully developed. “The Banana” was a calculated, albeit humorous, way to manage in the hyper-sensitive political world.
A some point–much sooner than later–the million reasons why a tax payer or system user should not be charged must be faced by our Electeds. At some point the fact will sink in that America’s competitiveness is declining as other nations are using this lousy global recession as reason to engage in major infrastructure improvements.
Mort Downey recounted last week at a freight-related event how over the years Washington has managed to extend or raise the vehicle fuel tax even when the economy was in distress. Somehow we survived. Pbea