[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 8]
[House]
[Page 10315]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                 REBUILDING OUR NATION'S INFRASTRUCTURE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from 
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. BLUMENAUER. Mr. Speaker, there has been a flurry of activity 
regarding infrastructure funding in recent days. We had the first 
hearing in the Ways and Means Committee in the 55 months since my 
Republican friends took over to deal with transportation finance. There 
have been press conferences and proposals, and actually, a few other 
hearings have been scheduled.
  Despite all the furor, there is only one solution which is broadly 
supported, which is easy to implement, and which does the job. That 
solution is raising the gas tax.
  Now, we heard at the hearing on Ways and Means the three basic 
arguments that are offered against that: that it is not politically 
possible, that there is really no time to do this so we have to extend 
it to the end of the year, and that this would somehow be a burden on 
families.
  Actually, that is not true. The notion that it is not politically 
possible is not remotely the case. There are 20 States in the last 2\1/
2\ years that have stepped up to raise their gas taxes.
  Ironically, information submitted by the American Road & 
Transportation Builders Association at our Ways and Means hearing 
pointed out that the legislators in those States who voted to increase 
the gas tax were reelected at an over 90 percent rate, and the 
legislators that voted for the gas tax in the States were reelected at 
a higher percentage than those who voted against it.
  If anybody needs more proof, just look at what has happened already 
this year where six very red States--Idaho; Utah; South Dakota; Iowa; 
Nebraska, overriding a Governor's veto; and Georgia--have all met their 
responsibilities raising the gas tax. It absolutely is something that 
can be done with a little political courage.
  The notion that somehow there is no time, that we have got to fuss 
around and it is going to take extensive hearings to come forward with 
the proposal--well, only if it is a complex, convoluted, untested, and 
controversial proposal. Raising the gas tax would take about 1 week's 
work, could be implemented quickly, and is the simplest and least 
expensive revenue measure to implement.
  What about this notion that somehow it is a burden on American 
families? Well, the proposal that I have introduced would cost less 
than 25 cents a day, and those families that would pay the increased 
user fees are suffering over $350 a year damage to their vehicles from 
poorly maintained roads. The American Society of Civil Engineers 
suggests that that cost per family is going to be over a $1,000 a year 
by 2020. And the American public is paying by being stuck in traffic, 
in congestion, costing $120 billion a year. It costs money to them--
money that could have been used for more productive purposes--and time 
away from their families.
  Imagine if we just came back from our July recess and dedicated the 
week of July 13 to solving the infrastructure crisis in this country 
where America is falling apart and falling behind. The people who were 
experts at the hearing that weren't heard from could have answered all 
those questions.
  Where else are we going to find something that is broadly supported 
by business and labor, by truckers and AAA, bicyclist, engineers, 
environmentalists, local governments? We would have all of those people 
before us supporting a solution to this important challenge. I can't 
think of any other issue that would bring all those people together and 
support congressional action.
  We could stop the slide of America falling apart and falling behind. 
We could put hundreds of thousands of people to work at family-wage 
jobs all across America while we strengthen our communities, make them 
more livable, and provide an economic boost for the future.
  Why don't we do that? Why can't we take ``yes'' for an answer, deal 
with the broadest coalition of support for any major issue, and have 
another victory like we did with the SGR? We can do it, and it is hard 
to think of something that would be more important.

                          ____________________