President Bush's
proposal to fund federal highway and transit programs at $257
billion over the next six-year reauthorization period will ensure
that the impact of federal transportation spending on the deficit
is limited through FY2009. Congress should adopt the President's
plan, and reject the budget busting proposals now before it.
Innovative
Financing
By linking future
surface transportation spending closely to the fuel tax revenues
generated by the current gas tax rate - set at 18.4 cents per
gallon - the President's highway/transit program will spend about
$20 billion more than it receives in dedicated taxes.
Importantly,
though, the President's plan for the future of our highway system -
titled SAFETEA - endorses greater reliance on such innovative
finance mechanisms as interstate highway tolls, new capacity with
toll express lanes, partnerships with private sector investors, and
new forms of tax exempt financing. If passed by Congress, these
innovative tools could bring in tens of billions of dollars -
additional resources that would be targeted to America's most
congested roads.
Poor Alternatives
Among
Congressional plans, the proposal put forward in the House by
Chairman Don Young and ranking member James Oberstar, TEA-LU, would
spend $375 billion - or $119 billion more than the President - and
make up the difference by raising the federal fuel tax by 43
percent between now and 2009. Because the fuel tax is one of the
most regressive taxes levied by the federal government, the burden
of this increase will fall disproportionately on those with modest
incomes.
Significantly, the
current version of the House bill is largely silent on the
innovative transportation reforms endorsed by the President and
becoming increasingly common at the state level. Essential
innovations that Congress should support include more extensive use
of tolls, HOT lanes, toll express lanes, private/public
partnerships, and tax-exempt private activity bonds.
The highway
proposal now being discussed in the Senate proposes to spend $311
billion over the next six years - about $55 billion more than the
President's plan and about $70 to $80 billion more than federal
fuel taxes are estimated to provide over the period. Senate
supporters of the bill suggest that the difference will be made up
by redirecting several existing fuel-related taxes (such as those
paid on ethanol) to the highway trust fund and by tapping into
general funds. In effect, much of the $70 to $80 billion dollar
difference would be added to the already excessive federal budget
deficit.
Still, provisions
in the Senate's current plan would greatly improve urban mobility
by reducing spending on transit (to $33 billion instead of the
expected $57 billion) and shifting the savings to highways. Because
transit's share of ridership has been shrinking for more than forty
years while that for automobiles has been growing, this shift would
more closely match actual consumer preferences.
Although the
Senate's plan would spend more than the President proposes, its
proposal does include legislative language to allow for more
innovative financial tools to raise revenues for road building and
repair without raising taxes. These include proposals to toll
interstates under certain conditions and to build HOT lanes
financed by tolls, innovations similar to those proposed by the
President's budget.
Reforming Amtrak?
The President has
proposed that Amtrak's subsidy be limited to $900 million for FY
2005 - the same amount proposed last year but $300 million less
than the amount Congress ultimately provided this fiscal year.
Unfortunately, the President is proposing that this annual subsidy
to Amtrak be increased by $500 million, to $1.4 billion, in
subsequent years provided that Congress enacts legislation to force
a series of structural reforms on the passenger railroad. Given
Amtrak's poor financial track record, unfulfilled promises, and
opposition to fundamental reform, this proposed subsidy increase is
a frivolous luxury the country cannot afford when deficits are
reaching a half a trillion dollars per year.
Ronald D. Utt,
Ph.D., is Herbert and Joyce Morgan Senior Research Fellow in the
Thomas A. Roe Institute for Economic Policy Studies at The Heritage
Foundation.