What Happened to John Mica, Pro-Transit Republican?

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee ranking member John Mica knew the value of good transit.

As chairman of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, John Mica hasn't looked like much of a "transit fan." Photo: C-SPAN

“I became a mass transit fan because it’s so much more cost effective than building a highway,” he told PBS in 2009. “Also, it’s good for energy, it’s good for the environment – and that’s why I like it.”

Flash forward to February 2012. Mica is now chair of the committee, and he and his colleagues in the House have delivered a transportation bill that is bad for the environment and very bad for transit. Instead of receiving a dedicated share of the federal gas tax, as has been the case for three decades, transit would be expected to survive with an infusion from the treasury — with no guarantee of anything after that.

Mica defended the proposal vigorously. “The transit community, who has no source of revenue, is demanding that they stay and get a share of the trust fund, which, one, they don’t contribute to, and two, the trust fund is not going anywhere,” Mica told reporters. “If anything, it’s going to go down in its revenue as vehicles switch out to alternative fuels.”

Sure doesn’t sound like the words of a “transit fan.”

Mica used to be the premier pro-transit Republican in the House. Not anymore. That title now belongs to Ohio’s Steve LaTourette or Illinois’s Robert Dold, who have voiced the most resistance within their party to anti-transit measures in the House transportation bill. So how did ranking member Mica, who was one of his Democratic Chairman’s closest allies and biggest supporters, turn into Chairman Mica, enemy of transit?

We approached Mica’s office for this story and have yet to hear back. But it’s easy to see how the shifting landscape of transportation politics would affect a pro-transit Republican in a leadership position, like Mica. The T & I chair is now stuck between a rock (the intransigent GOP base) and a hard place (the declining power of the federal gas tax).

Taking a charitable view, H.R. 7’s attack on transit could be seen as an attempt to compromise on Mica’s part. He knew that gas tax revenues would be insufficient to fund transportation programs at current levels for much more than two years. But he also knew that the conservative wing of his own party would block any new taxes or expanded tolling.

In the end, the product that came out of Mica’s committee — funding transit from general taxes — spent too much to win over the Tea Party, and wreaked too much havoc with transit systems to win over moderates in his own party (not to mention every Democrat and plenty of influential lobbies).

That pro-transit positions are apparently now untenable for a Republican T&I chair is troubling, to say the least. Even as more Americans come to rely on transit, agencies are struggling to hold the line on fares and service even without the threat of funding disruptions from Washington. They are already hurting for cash, and transit riders are suffering from cutbacks and fare hikes.

Larry Hanley, president of the Amalgamated Transit Union, put it well when he told Politico this week that this is simply a tax increase by another name, handed down from a supposedly tax-averse Congress: “We have this one beleaguered group of taxpayers called transit riders who have been held exempt from the no tax increase promises in Washington.”

  • Eric McClure

    “The transit community, who has no source of revenue, is demanding that they stay and get a share of the trust fund, which, one, they don’t contribute to, and two, the trust fund is not going anywhere.”
    Then give me a box I can check at the gas pump to indicate that I want my “contribution” to go to transit.

  • Mark S

    Mica says,  

    The transit community, who has no source of revenue, is demanding that they stay and get a share of the trust fund, which, one, they don’t contribute to…

    Mass transit is not some kind of gift to one group of people at the expense of others. In the right circumstances, it is, as Mica once said, more cost-effective than building highways. And in so many places, it is the right thing to do for our long term sustainability.

    Mica also knows that the Federal government funds at most 50% of transit projects but 80% of highway projects, so riders (and local governments) in fact do have to cough up a big chunk of the expense. Meanwhile, transit projects benefit all of society by cutting pollution and allowing for more sustainable development, and they specifically benefit drivers by reducing competition for road space.

  • Ian

    The idea that taxes be spend only on those who paid the taxes makes no sense in a civilized society.  Motorists don’t pay the full costs and externalities of motor vehicle use; society subsidizes them.  For example, who pays to plow the snow off the street?  Besides public subsidies for motorists, there are also private ones.  Pedestrians and transit users pay the same for groceries as motorists, but all customers pay for the grocery stores’ parking lot.  Why should non-motorists subside motorists through their food budget? 

  • Bolwerk

    “If anything, it’s going to go down in its revenue as vehicles switch out to alternative fuels.”

    This kind of says it all.  They must know that the only way to bring up revenue is to raise fuel taxes or increase tolling, and they don’t want to do either. But it’s easy to soak big city transit users to cover some of the shortfall – or at least it was for most of the past two generations.

    Then they can pretend to represent the Galtian overmen who keep our economy afloat with great ideas and fresh capital. They actually believe these backwards memes. Really, is anybody surprised the so-called “conservatives” have been shown, in study after study, to have impaired cognitive abilities?

  • Sandcity50

    Do you know that every truck and trailer you see on the road pays approx $550 a year in highway taxes each August.  This truck and trailer also pays tax on every drop of fuel, and each car also pays fuel taxes.  Each new truck on the road pays federal excise tax.  When I bought a truck in 2006, it was $12,000,    You pay federal excise tax on every tire purchased whether for truck or passenger car,  construction equipment, etc.  Everyone who owns property residentail or commercial pay road taxes.  Several of the states  have high tolls roads and trucks and trailer pay up to 10 times more cars also there are tag fees title transfers and it keeps going.  This country does not need more toll roads or subsidized mass transit

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Mica: “The Focus of the Bill Is on the National Highway System”

|
First, to recap: The transportation reauthorization proposal that House Transportation Committee Chair John Mica unveiled yesterday (sans legislative text) calls for $230 billion over six years, cutting 33 percent out of current spending levels. The plan maintains the current 80/20 split between highways and transit funding, supports state infrastructure banks in lieu of a national […]

Mica Presses for Policy Ideas at Vancouver Hearing on Next Transpo Bill

|
Cross-posted from BikePortland At the outset of the “listening session” on the next long-term transportation bill in Vancouver yesterday, House Transportation and Infrastructure committee chair John Mica tried to make it clear that he wanted to talk about crafting legislation, not specific projects. Unfortunately not everyone got the message. In his opening remarks, Mica told […]