Senators outline long-term transportation spending plan
On Wednesday, a bipartisan group of senators announced that they had come to an agreement on a long-term transportation spending bill; since 2008, highway and transit construction programs have had an uncertain fate, but the proposed bill would allocate roughly $56 billion a year to highway and transit construction; it is unclear what the final bill will look like as the Senate, House, and executive branch each have diverging views on highway funding; funding the transportation bill will be no small feat; a two year Senate bill would require $12 billion in additional fuel tax revenues and a six year bill would require an addition $70 billion
On Wednesday, a bipartisan group of senators announced that they had come to an agreement on a long-term transportation spending bill ending a three year stalemate.
Since 2008, highway and transit construction programs have had an uncertain fate, but the proposed bill would allocate roughly $56 billion a year to highway and transit construction.
The bill has the support Senator Barbara Boxer (D – California), the chairwoman of the Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee, as well as Senator James Inhofe (R – Oklahoma), the committee’s ranking Republican.
In addition, Senator Max Baucus (D –Montana), the chairman of the highway subcommittee, andSenator David Vitter (R-Louisiana), the senior Republican of the subcommittee, both support the bill.
Senators are still currently debating whether it will be a two year bill or a six year bill.
Senator Boxer is pushing for a six year bill, but Senator Baucus, also the head of the Finance Committee, believes that a two year bill would be easier to pass.
It is unclear what the final bill will look like as the Senate, House, and executive branch each have diverging views on highway funding.
The proposed senate bill would authorize roughly the same amount of spending per year adjusted for inflation as the previous long-term transportation bill, which was passed in 2005 and expire in 2009.
In contrast,House Republicans are proposing to cut highway spending by as much as 30 percent, while President Obama has been pushing for a significant boost in transportation infrastructure spending requesting $500 billion over six years.
Given the current fiscal environment, funding the transportation bill will be no small feat. A two year Senate bill would require $12 billion in additional fuel –tax revenues and a six year bill would require an addition $70 billion.
“We said to them (the administration), if you can show us the money, we’re happy to look at [their plan],” Boxer said. “But right now there isn’t any, so we’re going with what we think we can get through the United States Senate.”
The transportation bill has primarily been funded by a gas tax, but revenues have declined as Americans drive fewer miles or purchase cars with better miles and lawmakers have been hesitant to raise the tax.
Meanwhile, local and state governments are struggling to fund highway repair projects and say that until there is long-term certainty with federal aid, they will not be able to attract private financing for major construction projects.
