Recent projections by the Office of Management and Budget and
the Congressional Budget Office reveal that the highway trust fund
will run out of money during FY 2009. Unless the fund is
replenished soon, federal spending on highways could decline
significantly as the fund reverts to a spend-as-you-earn basis
until a permanent remedy is enacted. Until then, one solution is to
re-concentrate the fund's focus on highway investment and safety by
abandoning the many low priority and non-transportation diversions
that now encumber the federal program.[1]
A Funding "Crisis"?
The soon-to-be-empty trust fund is a direct consequence of
recent congressional overspending in excess of the fuel tax
revenues that replenish the fund as well as decades of
congressional mandates allowing non-highway interests access to the
highway trust fund. In FY 2008, these mandates are estimated to
have diverted approximately 38 percent of trust fund spending to
projects and programs of little value to the motorist's mobility
needs.
Despite the fund's depletion, some in Congress are advocating
that the next highway reauthorization bill (scheduled for October
2009) should include a very substantial increase in federal
transportation spending. Leaders of the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure want total spending raised from
the current $286 billion to nearly a half a trillion dollars.
Achieving this rate of spending would likely require a doubling of
the federal fuel tax from its current level of 18.3 cents per
gallon.
Those seeking more transportation spending justify the tax
increase as the necessary cost of resolving the nation's
infrastructure "crisis." But as this author noted in a recent piece
in the Wilson Quarterly, the so-called crisis seems
limited exclusively to the infrastructure managed by Congress, and
legislative mismanagement-not the level of funding-is a large part
of the problem.[2]
Raid on the Funds
Among the many reasons these congressional tax-and-spend schemes
will fail to relieve worsening traffic congestion and road
deterioration is that less than two-thirds of current federal
surface transportation spending is devoted to the general purpose
roads that the typical motorist or truck driver (who finances the
fund) use in the ordinary course of travel. The other third goes to
a growing collection of costly diversions that have little to do
with the mobility needs of the average motorist or to the
economically essential movement of freight.
In the last highway reauthorization bill (P.L. 109-59), the
largest diversion from the authorized $52 billion in total spending
from the highway trust fund (including $1.8 billion in general
revenues) for FY 2008 is the $9.7 billion in direct spending for
transit programs (trolleys, buses, commuter rail, etc.). Transit
riders are also the greatest beneficiary of the Congestion
Mitigation and Air Quality program, which absorbs $1.7 billion from
the trust fund. Although transit riders account for only 1.6
percent of surface travel passengers, they receive a subsidy from
the motorists amounting to approximately 20 percent of trust fund
spending.
Other fund diversions include the Enhancement program ($647
million), the Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC) ($470 million),
Recreational Trails ($80 million), and a transfer of $925 million
to the Department of Interior for roads in national parks and
forests. Altogether these leakages will absorb more than 26 percent
of fund spending in 2008.
The next largest series of diversions are the four major
earmarked programs: High Priority Projects, Projects of Regional
and National Significance, Transportation Projects (Section 1934 of
P.L. 109-59), and the National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement
Program. All are authorized to spend $4.5 billion, bringing the
diversion share to 35 percent.
About $155 million will be spent on scenic byways, ferry boats,
magnetic levitation and tax evasion deterrence, while $408 million
will be spent on administrative overhead. More than $570 million
will be spent on another twelve mandated programs, including
bicycles, racial profiling, historic covered bridges, community
preservation, innovative finance, and Safe Routes to Schools (which
also supports bicycles). Bringing up the rear are the federally
mandated Metropolitan Planning Organizations-whose focus is
increasingly directed to land use planning, transit and economic
development-which receive $302 million.
Motorists Ripped Off
Altogether, these diversions absorb an estimated $19.6 billion
in trust fund spending, or about 38 percent of the total spent from
the trust fund. As a consequence, motorists will receive only about
62 percent of what they have paid into the fund for general purpose
roads and safety programs. Redeploying these diverted funds back to
roads used by the motorists and truckers who fund the system would
yield the equivalent of a 50 percent increase in new spending for
road improvements and capacity increases.
Conversely, to achieve the same goal by increasing taxes would
require a tax increase of $1.67 for each dollar to be spent on
roads, since the extra $0.67 would be required by the existing
diversions, which traditionally share equally in any funding
increase. Thus, in order to return the lost $19.6 billion to roads,
fuel taxes would have to be increased by $32.7 billion. These
wasted funds are a key reason why the nation's roads are in such
bad shape and why congestion is getting worse.
Even More Diversions
Although the sensible policy response would be to pare back the
number and cost of the existing diversions, some in Congress have
already introduced legislation that would add even more diversions
to the depleted trust fund. In 2008, Senator Dick Durbin (D-Ill.)
introduced S.3360 to give Amtrak access to the highway trust fund
to purchase new railcars. Bill co-sponsor Senator Tom Carper
(D-Del.) claims that the legislation would divert $400 million each
year in motorist-paid gas taxes to Amtrak, which serves only one
half of 1 percent of intercity passenger travel.
Another potential major diversion could come from Representative
Jim Oberstar's (D-Minn.) H.R. 3246 (the Regional Economic and
Infrastructure Development Act of 2007), which would authorize
federal funding for five new regional commissions that would be
similar to the ARC, which has access to the highway trust fund.
Although the bill in its current form does not give these new
commissions such access, it is likely that its final version would
include that privilege in order to create regional parity and
because the Delta Regional Authority, which will be reconstituted
as a "commission" under H.R. 3246, already has access to the trust
fund (Section 1308).
States Know Best
Under the circumstances, the combination of existing diversions
and the new ones likely to be enacted over the coming year suggest
that the federal transportation program will become more costly and
less effective. As a consequence, proposals to shift transportation
responsibility and revenue sources back to the states are now even
more compelling. One such proposal-Senator Jim DeMint's (R-S.C.)
Transportation Empowerment Act (S.2823)-would do just that by
"turning back" the highway program and its source of revenues to
the states.
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
[1]
Ronald D. Utt, "No Taxpayer Bailout for the Earmarked Highway
Bill," Heritage Foundation WebMemo No. 2001, at http://www.heritage.org/Research/SmartGrowth/wm2001.cfm.
[2]
Ronald D. Utt, "Building Up," Wilson Quarterly,
Summer 2008, p.6.