[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 24 (Friday, February 28, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1795-S1796]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HIGHWAY TRUST FUND AND THE GAS TAX
Mr. BYRD. Mr. President, back on June 5, 1996, I sent a letter to all
Senators signaling my intention to offer an amendment to the next
available tax bill to place into the Highway Trust Fund the 4.3 cent
gas tax that is currently used for deficit reduction.
Senators will recall that, back in May and June of last year, there
was much debate on this 4.3 cent gas tax, which was first imposed by
the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1993. During this past summer,
I deferred offering this amendment on two occasions at the request of
both the Majority and Minority Leaders. Unfortunately, another
opportunity to offer the amendment did not arise.
My purpose in proposing that the 4.3 cent gas tax be placed into the
Highway Trust Fund is to better enable the Congress to reverse the very
destructive trend of federal disinvestment in our nation's
transportation infrastructure. By increasing the revenue stream to the
Highway Trust Fund, it would be my hope and expectation to leverage
additional resources for our Federal-Aid Highway program in order to
stem the deterioration of our nation's highways.
Our federal investment in infrastructure as a percentage of the total
federal budget has declined significantly since 1980. Few economists
would disagree that adequate long term investment in infrastructure is
critical to a nation's economic well-being. Only through investment
here at home, investment to maintain and renew our own physical plant,
can our economy grow and generate healthy wages for its citizens.
Even so, our nation's investment in infrastructure as a percentage of
our Gross Domestic Product has almost been cut in half since 1980. As a
nation, we continue to invest an absolutely paltry percentage of our
Gross Domestic Product in infrastructure--a percentage considerably
less than our chief economic competitors in Europe and Asia.
Nowhere do we pay a greater price for inadequate infrastructure
investment than in our nation's highways. Our national highway system
carries nearly 80 percent of U.S. interstate commerce and nearly 80
percent of intercity passenger and tourist traffic. The construction of
our national interstate system represents perhaps the greatest public
works achievement of the modern era. However, we have allowed segments
our National Highway System to fall into serious disrepair.
The Department of Transportation has released its most recent report
on the condition of the nation's highways. Its findings are even more
disturbing than earlier reports. DOT currently classifies less than
half of the mileage on our interstate system as being in good condition
and only 39 percent of our entire national highway system is rated in
good condition. Fully 61 percent of our nation's highways are rated in
either fair or poor condition. Almost one in four of our nation's
highways' bridges are now categorized as either structurally deficient
or functionally obsolete. This is not the highway infrastructure that
will help our country and its citizens continue to prosper into the
twenty first century. If we allow this decay to continue, it will
constrict the lifelines of our nation.
According to the DOT, our investment in our nation's highways is a
full $15 billion short each year just to maintain these current
inadequate conditions. Put another way, we would have to increase our
national highway investment by more than $15 billion a year to make the
least bit of improvement in the status of our national highway network
each year.
It is critical to point out that, while our highway infrastructure
continues to deteriorate, highway use is on the rise. Indeed, it is
growing at a very rapid pace. The number of vehicle miles traveled has
grown by roughly 40 percent in just the last decade. As a result, we
are witnessing new highs in the amount of congestion, causing delays in
the movement of goods and people that are very costly to our national
economy.
Mr. President, it is clear that the requirements we place on our
national highway system are growing while our investment continues to
decline. We are simply digging ourselves into a deeper and deeper hole.
Six years ago, in 1991, it was estimated that an investment of $47.5
billion dollars would be necessary on an annual basis to ensure that
highway conditions would not deteriorate any further than they existed
in that year. By 1993, that figure grew to $51.6 billion. And two years
ago, that figure grew to $54.8 billion. The longer we delay making
federal highway spending a priority, the more expensive it gets to
reverse this destructive trend.
In the coming months, the Senate will take up legislation to
reauthorize the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, or
ISTEA. Many members, including myself, have come to the Floor to
introduce legislation to address specific transportation needs in their
states and regions. Also, many members have spoken to the need for
formula changes to bring about what they perceive to be a more
equitable distribution of funds from the highway program. Just
yesterday, our new Transportation Secretary, Rodney Slater, testified
before the Environment and Public Works Committee on the broad outlines
of the Administration's proposed ISTEA reauthorization bill. There are
many fine initiatives in the Administration's bill just as there have
been many fine initiatives introduced by Members from all regions of
the country.
However, we must face the fact that, absent a determined effort by
the Congress and the Administration to substantially increase the
current level of spending on our highway program, we are not going to
stem the deterioration of our highway infrastructure. Similarly, it is
unlikely that, as we reauthorize ISTEA, we will be able to accommodate
new initiatives and address substantial formula changes.
Just last month, I was pleased to join with 55 of my colleagues in
writing to the distinguished Chairman of the Budget Committee, Senator
Domenici, asking that the upcoming Budget Resolution allocate
sufficient budget authority to the Environment and Public Works
Committee to allow for a robust ISTEA reauthorization bill. But it must
be recognized that the ISTEA reauthorization bill is just that--an
authorization bill. And while ISTEA does allocate some direct funding
from the Highway Trust Fund outside of the appropriations process, the
vast majority of funds distributed under the Federal-Aid Highway
Program are controlled by annual obligation limitations set by the
Appropriations Committee.
The Administration's budget proposal assumes that there will be
increased contract authority provided for several meritorious programs
under the Federal-Aid Highway Program over the next six years. But the
unfortunate fact is that the Administration's budget simultaneously
assumes that the annual obligation limitation set by the Appropriations
Committee will be frozen at the current year's level for the entire
life of the next authorization bill. Put another way, under the
Administration's proposal, states will not be allowed to obligate one
additional penny in any of the next six years above the current year's
level.
Mr. President, I appreciate that we can have a reasonable debate as
to whether the solution to this problem is depositing an additional 4.3
cents into the Highway Trust Fund. The Highway Trust Fund currently has
some sizable unobligated balances. Moreover, income to the Highway
Trust Fund has been steadily rising as a result of increased gas
consumption and the fact that an additional 2.5 cents has been
deposited in the Highway Trust Fund since the beginning of Fiscal Year
1996. However, one thing that cannot be denied is the fact that
substantially increased funds are necessary to stem the
[[Page S1796]]
deterioration of our federal highway system. A mechanism must be
developed to ensure that, even while we strive to eliminate our annual
budget deficit, we begin to stem the tide of federal disinvestment in
our transportation infrastructure.
Toward that end, I look forward to working with Chairman Domenici of
the Budget Committee and its Ranking Member, Senator Lautenberg, along
with the Chairmen and Ranking Members of the Environment and Public
Works Committee and the Transportation Appropriations Subcommittee to
seek a way to ensure substantially increased authorizations and
obligational authority for our federal highway responsibilities. We
cannot be responsible stewards of federal tax dollars and, at the same
time, pass a steadily deteriorating transportation infrastructure on to
our children and grandchildren.
Now Mr. President, I did not seek to hold up consideration of H.R.
668 yesterday evening by proposing amendments to address our highway
infrastructure needs. I recognized the urgency of renewing the aviation
ticket tax. The Airport and Airways Trust Fund is on the verge of
bankruptcy and, absent the renewal of the ticket tax, our nation's
airport construction enterprise, as well as the procurement of
critically needed air traffic control equipment, will be at risk.
Indeed, airports are also a critical element of our transportation
infrastructure. And, as in the case of highways, our airport
infrastructure needs continue to grow while federal investment
continues to fall precipitously. The current funding level for the
Airport Improvement Program has fallen more than 30 percent in just the
last five years. And the president's budget for the coming fiscal year
asks us to cut the program an additional 32 percent. The last thing I
wanted to do yesterday evening was endanger necessary investments in
our aviation infrastructure in the hopes of addressing the needs of our
highway infrastructure.
However, I rise today to state my intention and commitment to work
with the Senate leadership as well as the leadership of all the
relevant committees to ensure that we put policies in place this year
to adequately address the need for increased highway investment. I
invite all members to join me in this cause.
____________________