Transport Debate Still Stalled As Oberstar Decries “Lack of Political Will”

Halfway through the extra month that Congress gave itself to resolve a long-simmering dispute over funding the nation’s transportation system, Democratic leaders remain deadlocked over whether — and how long — to wait before debating a broad reform of federal infrastructure policy.

lahood_large.jpgThe transportation secretary and the president have a stalemate on their hands. Photo: NYT

In one corner: House transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN), who has enlisted most of his colleagues in the lower chamber in a push to pass new legislation replacing the outmoded 2005 infrastructure bill — "a paean to the individual motorist," as Wired put it today.

But Oberstar’s enthusiasm has not yet been met with action by the panel he needs most, the Ways and Means Committee.

Why is Ways and Means so important? The panel controls the funding source for transportation legislation, and chairman Charles Rangel has yet to see enthusiasm for his colleagues for making tough choices about raising revenue for infrastructure. Rangel told CQ this week:

Everyone is
excited about a robust transportation bill. The enthusiasm
is out there. We have not concluded that everyone
is willing to pay for it and call it an emergency. 

Oberstar has done his part to rally the troops, publishing an op-ed in The Hill today that laments the "lack of political will" to tend to the nation’s aging infrastructure, but little progress can be made until Ways and Means shows an appetite for diving into the funding question.

How much needs to be raised to pay for a new bill? There is an estimated $140 billion gap between expected grosses for the nation’s highway trust fund, which pays for federal spending on transit as well as roads, and the investments envisioned in Oberstar’s $450 billion measure.

That gap could be closed by a 10-cent per-gallon increase in the gas tax or by other means, though the former has pitfalls both political (Democrats have not worked on a counter-message to GOP pummeling on the issue) and practical (as Americans drive less in more efficient cars, the tax’s value is waning).

In response to the dilemma, both parties have gotten creative. Rep. John Larson (CT), a Ways and Means member who also chairs the House Democratic caucus, has proposed taking unused money from the government’s financial bailout for transportation. Rep. Aaron Schock (R-IL) spoke for a sizable group in his party today by suggesting that unused cash from the stimulus law go to infrastructure.

But both of those concepts would be little more than Band-Aids, given that congressional budget writers must rely on a steady source of funding when setting the "baseline" that governs the price tag of future federal transport bills. If the bailout or the stimulus were tapped this year, when the next long-term bill rolls around, the baseline would likely be low enough to cause serious havoc.

On the whole, the gas tax remains the only funding source that has attracted serious consideration, most recently from the No. 2 Democrat in the Senate. The Obama administration, however, remains flatly opposed to an increase during the current recession. Speaking of the administration …

In the other corner: Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who back in June called for an 18-month delay in taking up a new infrastructure plan. The rationale for such a postponement is twofold; it would provide time for the economy to recover, possibly creating political space for a gas tax increase, and it would allow the new Obama team to get its sea legs in anticipation of a policy reform fight that’s likely to be intense.

LaHood has key Senate Democrats on his side, including environment committee chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA), but not every member of the upper chamber of Congress is convinced of the wisdom of an 18-month delay. Still, LaHood continues to state that while he and the president share Oberstar’s goals, there is no possibility of the administration budging on its 18-month extension.

Where does Washington, not to mention a nation full of roads, transit, and trail users, go from here? As talk of a possible "second stimulus" heats up on the Hill, some lawmakers are urging an extra shot of infrastructure spending to help boost flagging employment.

Oberstar has long contended that his transportation bill would effectively act as that "second stimulus," but he told CQ this week that he would be disinclined to accept an 18-month extension of the 2005 legislation that included more money but kept the same U.S. DOT policies in place.

Yet Oberstar spokesman Jim Berard said in an interview that the chairman would be opposed to a transportation-centric stimulus only if it were treated as a substitute or placeholder for a long-term bill, thus leaving the door open for infrastructure to remain in the mix as Congress weighs new economic recovery plans.

  • Rep. Rangel: “We have not concluded that everyone is willing to pay for it and call it an emergency.”

    Hey Charlie. I live in your district and voted for you. I consider it an emergency. How pathetic is it when a guy from Minnesota is more interested in transportation reform than a congressman from Manhattan?

    What the hell is the point of having you chair the Ways and Means Committee if you don’t use it to help your own constituents? If your committee doesn’t seem inclined the right way, it’s up to you to change their minds. That’s called leadership.

    A more carefully worded of the above will be emailed to Rangel’s office immediately.

  • paco

    Mark, great comments. It motivated me to send him an email too. I don’t live in his district and have no faith I’ll get any response (if I do it’ll be months from now), but still…. every phone call and email counts.

    Congressman Rangel,
    I’m very interested in transportation and very strongly believe it effects all of our daily lives, especially your constituents in NYC. I know you are chair of the Ways and Means Committee which has yet to support Jim Oberstar’s Transportation bill and I ask you to take action. The bill would begin to address a basic funding problem that mass transit has nationwide.

    I read a quote of yours stating the following; “Everyone is excited about a robust transportation bill. The enthusiasm is out there. We have not concluded that everyone is willing to pay for it and call it an emergency.”

    I agree with you. Many people would not call it an emergency and not support it. However, I think they are largely the ones who are only looking at the short term. If you consider the thousands of jobs, and transportation to jobs, that depend on a strong funding stream for transit, I think you would admit that the current situation is indeed a crisis. And if perhaps you disagree on that, you’ll at least concur that it will become a crisis down the road. So, how about Congress takes the initiative to act on it before it becomes too big a problem down the road?

    I look forward to your response and diligence on this urgent matter.

    Sincerely,
    Dave ‘Paco’ Abraham

  • Shemp

    The 18 month delay is calibrated to avoid the pain of raising new revenue before the 2010 election. There is some political wisdom to that but they had better have it teed up for action right after that, or else they start thinking of it as a liability for 2012.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Lawmakers Pitch Transport Funding Ideas, From VMT to Freight Taxes

|
Leaders of the House transportation committee, doggedly pursuing a six-year, $450 billion infrastructure bill this year, pressed their case this morning before Ways and Means Committee colleagues who must approve a new funding mechanism for their massive legislation. On transport funding, a question looms: Whither Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-NY)? (Photo: BusinessWeek) […]

A Make-or-Break Week for Transportation Begins on the Hill

|
After weeks of uncertainty and tension, the congressional impasse over long-term transportation funding is headed for resolution this week — but the reprieve may be temporary. A decisive week lies ahead for House transport chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN). (Photo: Capitol Chatter) When we last left House transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN), he was calling […]

Oberstar Stands Firm on Transportation Bill, Gets Industry Backup

|
In case any doubts remained about his willingness to challenge the White House and the Senate on prompt passage of a long-term infrastructure bill, House transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar’s (D-MN) op-ed in the Politico Monday should clear them up: House transport committee chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN). Photo: Capitol Chatter Unfortunately, the administration and some […]

Senate Agrees on $26.8 Billion Highway Trust Fund Rescue

|
The Senate took a major step forward last night in its battle with the House over transportation funding, releasing a plan to give $26.8 billion to the dwindling highway trust fund and — perhaps most importantly, for the long term — to restore the fund’s ability to keep the interest it earns. Senate Finance Committee […]

Oberstar’s New Transportation Bill: Get the Highlights

|
Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-MN), the House transportation committee chairman, is set to brief reporters this afternoon on his $450 billion, six-year federal transportation bill — which he plans to pursue regardless of the Obama administration’s push for an 18-month extension of existing law. House Transportation Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) has a brewing battle with […]