|
|
 |
|
The
views expressed
on this page are soley those of the author and do not
necessarily
represent the views of County News Online
|
 |
Good roads?-Of
course!... Pay for them?-Not!
It is an absolute certainty that working in a public service related to
infrastructure is at best challenging, and at worst totally frustrating.
I was reminded of this by reading the results of last month’s national
AP-GfK poll which revealed that a majority of Americans believe the
economic benefits of good transportation outweigh the cost to
taxpayers, but they cannot agree on how to pay for new highways or the
repairs of old ones.
Six of ten people surveyed said the benefits of good highways,
railroads and airports justify their costs. Sixty-two percent of those
who drive places multiple times per week, and fifty-five percent of
those who drive less than once a week or not at all, say the costs are
worthwhile.
In spite of this apparent consensus, most Americans bristle at the most
common, generally used, revenue-generating ideas from public officials
and industry.
Fifty-eight percent of respondents oppose raising federal gasoline
taxes to fund transportation projects such as the repair, replacement
or expansion of roads and bridges. Only fourteen percent support an
increase. And by a better than a 2-to-1 margin, Americans oppose having
private companies pay for the construction of new roads and bridges in
exchange for the right to charge tolls.
The proposition of a total usage assessment (vehicle-mile tax) based on
how many miles a vehicle drives also draws a huge negative — forty
percent oppose it, while twenty percent support it.
Support for shifting more of the responsibility for paying for federal
road projects to state and local government is a paltry 30 percent.
I guess it now becomes apparent why Congress has kept federal highway
and transit programs teetering on the edge of insolvency for years,
unable to find a politically acceptable, long-term source of funds.
Both they and the public cannot make up their minds on how to pay for
them.
It would not be a stretch to argue that, in this matter, Congress is
actually doing the will of the people. Americans want a good a
transportation program; and they do not want to pay for it.
Recently, Congress scraped together $10.8 billion (a moderate sum by
Washington standards) to temporarily keep transportation aid flowing to
states. They did it by changing how employers fund worker pension
programs, extending customs user fees and transferring money from a
fund to repair leaking underground fuel storage tanks. Lawmakers had to
make up a shortfall between aid promised to states and the revenue
raised by the federal 18.4 cents-per-gallon gas tax and the 24.4
cents-per-gallon diesel tax, which haven't been increased in more than
20 years.
A direct solution would have been to raise fuel taxes, which is what
three blue-ribbon federal commissions have recommended. But opposition
to a gas tax increase cuts across party lines, although Republicans are
more apt to oppose an increase (seventy percent), than Democrats
(fifty-two percent).
The current fix is only expected to cover the revenue gap through next
May, when Congress will be back where it started unless lawmakers act
sooner.
This makes the fifth time in the last six years that Congress has
patched a hole in the federal Highway Trust Fund that pays for highway
and transit aid. Each time it gets more difficult for lawmakers to find
the money without increasing the federal budget deficit. Critics
described the pension funding changes used this time as budget gimmicks
that would cost the government more in the long run and undermine
employee pension programs.
But federal highway funds generally are not used or available anywhere
below the state capital. Getting closer to home, while the federal
funding situation for interstate and state highways is bleak, it is
much worse for locals.
Here in Ohio, Columbus lawmakers have stripped previously-allocated
“Local Government” funds from County Commissioners, Township Trustees,
and City and Village Councils; a large portion of which had been used
for nearly forty years to maintain streets and roads. These groups now
face the dilemma of either raising local taxes or lessening the
maintenance and improvement of these facilities.
Everybody hates more taxes, probably even more than they hate hikes in
cable, internet, and cell-phone fees, in their children’s sports fees,
or the increasing prices of new and used vehicles and their repair and
maintenance.
Here in Ohio, we have entered new territory; a land where a portion of
our locally-paid, Columbus-bound tax dollars no longer return to help
us. The dollars have been essentially stolen to fund a superior
bureaucracy.
Getting back to the poll results, thirty-five percent said the quality
of the roads and bridges where they live is getting worse, while 25
percent think their roads and bridges are improving. About forty
percent say their local roads and bridges are neither improving nor
getting worse.
I have a suggestion for the forty percent. If not maintained, those
local roads and bridges will definitely get worse.
We Ohio locals can either choose to make up the shortfall, or merrily
dodge increasing potholes and closed bridges.
In this state, any future poll would do well to include a question such
as, “Are you happy to endure more potholes and deteriorating streets,
roads, and bridges for the ostensible sake of balancing the state
budget?”
|
|
|
|
