GOP Budget Would Slash Transpo Spending, Entrench Oil Dependence

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan's plan would slash transportation spending and prioritize highways. Photo: ##http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0405/Medicare-How-Paul-Ryan-s-budget-would-change-it##Christian Science Monitor.##

With the release of House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan’s budget proposal yesterday, right wing calls for massive cuts to transportation spending are now enshrined in the GOP leadership’s fiscal plan. Ryan singled out transportation as an area particularly ripe for cuts, criticized the use of gas tax revenues for projects that aren’t highways, and called for transportation spending levels to barely cover half of what President Obama requested in February.

Ryan’s budget calls for $704 billion to be spent on transportation over the next decade. That’s $318 billion less than if current spending levels were simply extended forward, according to House Transportation Committee Ranking Member Nick Rahall’s office, and $633 billion less than what Obama requested.

The proposal would also radically shift the balance of federal transportation spending toward highways. It promises to eliminate all new intercity rail projects unless they can be established as profitable private enterprises, for example. It also blames the highway trust fund’s deficits on non-highway spending, with “bike trails” specifically singled out. Of course, the real cause of the trust fund shortfall isn’t the minuscule amount spent on bikeways but the declining revenues from a gas tax that hasn’t even been adjusted for inflation since 1993.

The unwillingness to raise the gas tax or add any additional revenue to the Highway Trust Fund is a major underlying reason for the major cuts in Ryan’s plan. By ruling out either increasing the gas tax or spending some general fund revenue on surface transportation, as has become the practice since 2008, the Ryan budget would essentially lock in major transportation cuts. (In contrast, the bi-partisan deficit reduction commission led by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson recommended raising the federal gas tax by 15 cents per gallon.)

Ryan’s budget also leaves billions in potential revenue untapped by leaving in place the substantial subsidies for the fossil fuel industry embedded in the nation’s tax code.

The GOP budget document is an opening gambit from the House leadership, and it’s hard to know at this point how Ryan’s proposals will affect either ongoing budget negotiations or House Transportation Committee John Mica’s efforts to pass a transportation reauthorization bill. For now, though, it seems that the segment of the Republican Party itching to cut government spending wherever possible is winning the fight over the party’s transportation policy.

The two short sections of Ryan’s plan that deal with transportation are copied below:

This budget draws inspiration from the GAO’s recommendations in many areas, one of which is the Highway Trust Fund. Over the past decade, highway spending has mostly exceeded the gas-tax revenues that finance the fund, because gas-tax levels leveled off while spending grew. Spending, meanwhile, has increasingly been diverted to non-highway projects, such as bike trails and museums, and politicized through earmarks such as the Bridge to Nowhere mentioned above.

To make up for funding shortfalls, the trust fund has required three large transfusions of taxpayer dollars from general revenues, totaling $35 billion since 2008. Without reform, another infusion will be necessary in 2013. This budget anticipates that Congress can keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent without additional general fund transfers or increases in the gasoline tax by consolidating dozens of separate highway programs that GAO has identified as duplicative. This will help focus every dollar on pursuing a targeted and cohesive national transportation policy.

While no federal department is free of inefficiency, the Department of Transportation offered a number of areas where spending could be cut back responsibly

Since 2008, funding for the Department of Transportation has grown by 24 percent – and that doesn’t count the stimulus spike, which nearly doubled transportation spending in one year. The mechanisms of federal highway and transit spending have become distorted, leading to imprudent, irresponsible, and often downright wasteful spending. Further, however worthy some highway projects might be, their capacity as job creators has been vastly oversold, as demonstrated by the extravagant but unfulfilled promises that accompanied the 2009 stimulus bill, particularly with regard to high-speed rail.

In the wake of these failures, and with the federal government’s fiscal challenges making long-term subsidization infeasible, high-speed rail and other new intercity rail projects should be pursued only if they can be established as self-supporting commercial services. The threat of large, endless subsidies is precisely the reason governors across the country are rejecting federally-funded high-speed rail projects. This budget eliminates these projects, which have failed numerous and clear cost-benefit analyses.

  • Charles_Siegel

    And he would reduce the maximum income tax rate from 35% to 25% – proving that his real goal is not to reduce the deficit but to advance the Republican anti-government ideology.

    Why should the government spend money on transportation? The very rich can use their tax savings to pay for privately constructed toll roads. And, of course, we only care about the very rich.

  • J:Lai

    I wish highways were held to the standard of being “self-supporting commercial services” in order to get government funding.

  • :(

    Sometimes I think that the sooner China takes this place over, the better

  • HamTech87

    I can’t believe people are calling Ryan “courageous.” Given that it will accelerate climate change, he is making it courageous to live in a low-lying coastal area. It takes courage to live underwater.

  • Ty

    If there’s climate change, it’s God’s plan. It has nothing to do with burning oil or using enormous amounts of the Earth’s resources to power our lives. (Or something like that.)

  • Larry Littlefield

    Paul Ryan is only right wing for those age 54 and under, who might be around to use the infrastructure he doesn’t want to invest in and will be facing poverty in old age after earning less than those who came before them increasingly so with each age cohort) during their working lives.

    When it comes to those age 55 and over, Ryan is a communist.

  • i welcome conservatives stepping up calling for fiscal responsibility, but don’t understand how they write off cheap, efficient ideas like biking and mass transit yet are okay with heavily subsidizing the motor vehicle, the most inefficient means of travel… especially in any moderately sized city!

  • Eric McClure

    Yeah, let’s pull ourselves up by our boot straps by increasing our dependence on foreign oil. Or by more drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. That worked out well. But of course that won’t happen again after we reduce government oversight.

  • Eric in Seattle

    Perhaps they should also halt all highway building unless they can be “established as profitable private enterprises”

  • Bolwerk

    You realize GOP means “Gas/Oil/Petroleum,” right? And yes, it is redundant.

  • j.Almarine

    Oh nevermind that Romney’s plan perpetuates endless auto-centric “endless subsidies.” heaven forbid the government develop transit networks that are in the public interest.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

GOP Budget Would Cut Transpo to the Bone

|
Wednesday night, the House Budget Committee narrowly passed — by one vote — the 2013 federal budget proposed by chairman Paul Ryan. It calls for all kinds of spending cuts, casts aside the bargains struck during last year’s budget debacle, and asserts that by 2050, all federal spending outside of entitlement programs (Medicare, Medicaid) should only equal […]

GOP Targets Transportation, Housing For the Deepest Cuts

|
The House Appropriations Committee yesterday gave a glimpse into their plans to cut spending as promised. Chair Hal Rogers (R-KY) set spending ceilings each of the 12 Appropriations subcommittees, cutting the budget for the Transportation and HUD Subcommittee by 17 percent, or $11.6 billion. It is, by far, the most dramatic of all the cuts. […]

The Ryan Budget: Doing the Same Thing, Expecting a Different Result

|
The House GOP had its big moment earlier this week. Amidst skyrocketing oil prices, deteriorating infrastructure and slumping transportation budgets, Republicans had their chance to lay out a bold new policy framework to help America recover from a brutal recession and reaffirm its place as a world leader. Instead, as we reported yesterday, Paul Ryan’s […]

Mica, GOP Leadership Looking to Raise Transportation Spending Levels in Bill

|
According to yet another great report from Jeff Davis at Transportation Weekly, House Republican leadership has given House Transportation Committee Chair John Mica permission to seek additional revenues to fund the transportation reauthorization at levels $15 billion higher than initially proposed. One Republican source, quoted in Transportation Weekly, said that given the persistently high unemployment rates, […]