[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 109 (Tuesday, July 14, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H5119-H5120]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
TRANSPORTATION FUNDING
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for 5 minutes.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, this is a big day on Capitol Hill. The
Iranian agreement has been signed. Hopefully, we will all have a chance
to study it and think through the implications of this historic event,
but the legislative clock is ticking down on another area. We have only
10 legislative days left this month before we face another
transportation funding cliff.
The expectation now is that there will be a 34th short-term
transportation extension that we have faced since our last, meaningful
6-year reauthorization. People are scrambling for another short-term
funding source to keep us going for the next few months that targets,
presumably, $8 billion to $11 billion to get us through the end of the
year.
This is actually worse than no solution at all because it perpetuates
the uncertainty, the crisis mentality, the inability of State and local
governments that rely on this Federal partnership to supply
approximately one-half of the capital expenditures for our surface
transportation.
This uncertainty comes at a time when our bridges, roads, and transit
systems are all in serious areas of disrepair. We are desperately in
need of bigger, longer-term projects.
It is a myth that somehow we can't afford to take action. The public
is paying now hundreds of dollars a year in damage to each of their
vehicles, costs far in excess of a few cents a day for a gas tax
increase.
American commuters and businesses are suffering over $120 billion a
year in costs related to congestion, costs directly related to
inadequate infrastructure. People are tying themselves in knots when
there is a simple, obvious solution.
As pointed out in a delightful op-ed in The Washington Post on July
9, we should simply follow Ronald Reagan's example and fill up
America's highway trust fund.
They ask how the famously tax-cutting conservative President raised
the Federal user fee--the gas tax--on motor fuels 125 percent. While he
was concerned about general taxation, he was absolutely comfortable
with having user fees cover specific costs like the fuel tax for
aviation or inland waterway fees.
He worked with Republicans in Congress, who demonstrated significant
support for user fee increases. He then gave his Secretary of
Transportation, Drew Lewis, free hand to lay the groundwork.
Finally, when he decided to support a gas tax increase, his
Department of Transportation swung into action, as did Ronald Reagan
himself. He gave an eloquent speech November 29, 1982, on
[[Page H5120]]
Thanksgiving Day, calling on Congress to come back into session and
approve the gas tax increase.
We have the opportunity for such leadership today. My proposed gas
tax increase, H.R. 680, is supported by all the major interest groups:
unions, the Chamber of Commerce, truckers, AAA, transit, local
government, environmentalists, engineers, and contractors.
The same approach has been used in 20 States since 2012 to raise
transportation revenues. Six States have raised the gas tax already
this year, six red Republican States. It is simple. My bill would
provide the money necessary to actually pass a 6-year bill. It would be
sustainable so we wouldn't be back in the same pickle in a year, 2
years, or 5 years.
Finally, it is dedicated so people can count upon it to implement the
steps necessary to rebuild and renew America's infrastructure.
It is time to stop temporizing, and it is time to act. Filling the
highway trust fund with borrowed money inadequate to do the job but
enough to avoid responsibility is not a solution that we can be proud
of, especially when America is ready and Ronald Reagan pointed the way.
____________________