Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush, Conservatives Balk at Highway Bill
News Journal ^ | 2/10/2004 | JIM ABRAMS

Posted on 02/10/2004 6:13:19 PM PST by yonif

WASHINGTON (AP)--President Bush and some Senate conservatives are balking at the price tag of a major highway bill, dimming prospects for legislation that normally is embraced by Congress because it brings money and jobs to every corner of America.

The Senate's six-year, $318 billion highway and mass transit bill, in its second week on the Senate floor, faces a Republican filibuster and White House opposition over its cost.

``I'm increasingly concerned we're not going to get a highway bill this year,'' said Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle, whose party, widely supportive of the legislation, has stood aside while Republicans battle over the size of the bill and who gets the money.

The legislation would replace a six-year, $218 billion highway program that expired last year but has been temporarily extended until the end of this month. The administration, citing tough financial times, has recommended a $256 billion package, while the Senate plan calls for about $318 billion: $255 billion for highways, $56.5 billion for mass transit and $6 billion for safety programs.

The House Transportation Committee wants $375 billion, but has proposed paying for the increase by raising the federal tax, now 18.4 cents a gallon, that drivers pay at the gas pump. That idea has hit a dead end with House GOP leaders. The House bill will be ``way below'' the $375 billion figure, Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, said Tuesday.

Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn., who met with the president Monday evening, said he would support slimming the Senate bill to $290 billion, the actual money to be spent over the six-year period, but even that was too high for the president. The Senate bill is substantially higher than the president wants, ``and he made that pretty clear,'' Frist said.

With little chance of quick resolution, the House plans to act this week to extend the current program another four months. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., suggested a one-year extension. ``I think that would probably be of benefit to the taxpayers of America who are deeply concerned about our overspending.''

One other possible complication for the highway bill was removed Tuesday when Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M., chairman of the Energy Committee, said he would try not to attach to the bill a revised version of a major energy bill that failed to get through the Senate last year.

Frist scheduled a Thursday vote, with 60 senators needed to overcome the Republican-led filibuster and advance the bill toward passage.

Senate conservatives, led by Sen. Judd Gregg, R-N.H., have effectively blocked movement on the bill, arguing that it is extravagant in an age of half-trillion-dollar deficits and, on a somewhat different tack, that it shortchanges their home states.

Gregg said the Senate bill is being paid for through illusory accounting mechanisms and warned that if it passed in its current form, ``we will be dramatically adding to the deficit.''

Sen. Jon Kyl, R-Ariz., said it was both too expensive and unfair to his state. ``We will be darned if we are willing to continue to send our money to Washington to be spent by other states when we have such large needs here.''

Federal highway construction money is supposed to come entirely from the highway trust fund, paid for by the gasoline tax. How that money is divided up among the states is a constant source of contention.

In the past, some states received as little as 70 cents for every dollar they paid into the fund. This time, said Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, every state will get back at least 95 cents by the end of the program in 2009.

But McCain, an opponent of the bill, said the number of donor states--those that pay more than they get back--will rise from the current 28 to 31. One of the new donor states will be Gregg's New Hampshire.

``The people of California are being asked to send almost $2 billion to Washington, D.C., so that it can be redistributed through some arcane funding scheme to the lucky 19 states that would get back more than they put in,'' McCain said.

The two Republican managers of the bill, Inhofe and Sen. Christopher Bond, R-Mo., are both fiscal conservatives who argue it would not add to the deficit.

They defended the Senate Finance Committee, which came up with an additional $35 billion through various budgetary maneuvers that increase revenues for the trust fund.

The administration has threatened a veto of any bill that increases taxes or takes money from the general Treasury fund, but Inhofe said it was a ``moral issue'' that all gas tax money go into highway building. The Finance Committee, he said, was acting to ``retrieve a previous raid on the highway trust fund'' by the general fund.

Supporters argued that the bill would add anywhere from 1 million to 2 million jobs to the jobless economic recovery, help reduce the $70 billion annual cost to the nation from highway congestion and reduce the number of highway deaths.

``There are white crosses all along the roads'' in Missouri, Bond said. ``We kill people because our roads are inadequate.''

___

The bill is S. 1072.


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: conservatives; highway; highwaybill; s1072; transportation

1 posted on 02/10/2004 6:13:20 PM PST by yonif
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: yonif
This would be the Longview (TX) News-Journal.

Wilmington, DE's newspaper is also called the News Journal (only sans hyphen).

Back to the topic. Being something of a road guy myself, but uninterested in the nuts and bolts of highway funding, this should be an interesting thread. :-)

foreverfree

2 posted on 02/10/2004 6:57:02 PM PST by foreverfree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Glad to see the GOP is beginning to get the message from conservatives. The lesson here is that holding our elected representatives' feet to the fire works. We need to be encouraging more of it - not less.
3 posted on 02/10/2004 6:59:48 PM PST by NittanyLion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Daschle wants this bill passed, he needs it to get re-elected. However the day GWB signs it the Dems will say he is spending them into bankruptcy with his highway bill.
4 posted on 02/10/2004 7:17:14 PM PST by sgtbono2002 (I aint wrong, I aint sorry , and I am probably going to do it again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
``There are white crosses all along the roads'' in Missouri, Bond said. ``We kill people because our roads are inadequate.''

No, we kill people because they don't know how to drive. Roads don't kill people by themselves. Almost every traffic accident can be attributed to human error.

5 posted on 02/10/2004 7:18:46 PM PST by rllngrk33 (Liberals are guilty of everything they accuse Conservatives of.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rllngrk33
Thank you. Bond and Daschele are both blowing smoke out of their 4th points of contact. Tom DeLay would do us all a big favor if he delayed this pork monster of a bill indefinitely.
6 posted on 02/10/2004 7:45:48 PM PST by .cnI redruM (Vae victis! - [woe to the vanquished].)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Veto. At this point, it really doesn't matter what is in a particular bill; Bush needs to veto something to make a point about spending to congress, shore up conservative support, and deflect Democrat attacks on Deficits.

Veto this bill. Or the next one, but do it soon!

7 posted on 02/10/2004 8:02:37 PM PST by Uncle Miltie (Mullahs swinging from lamp posts.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Bush has not vetoed ONE spending bill yet. It is highly doubtful that he will veto this one.
8 posted on 02/10/2004 8:28:07 PM PST by nonliberal (Graduate: Curtis E. LeMay School of International Relations)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: yonif
As we've learned here in Michigan, there are two seasons: summer and construction. All the money in the world won't save the highways in Michigan. Wasted money, IMO.
9 posted on 02/10/2004 8:30:29 PM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rintense
I've driven into Michigan. (I live in Indiana). I could drive with my eyes closed and know EXACTLY when I crossed the state line. Your roads are TERRIBLE.
10 posted on 02/10/2004 9:44:24 PM PST by SendShaqtoIraq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: SendShaqtoIraq
Yep. There was talk for a while about making various highways toll roads (like 94) so they could raise more money for road repair, but I think everyone pretty much agreed it was a lost cause.

The problem for us is winter. We get so much snow that salt, sand, and plows just ruin any good roads we may have. You know its bad when ducks are using potholes to swim in.

11 posted on 02/11/2004 5:23:15 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: yonif
Works for me. Anything to take the federal government out of where it constitutionally doesn't belong is a step in the right direction.
12 posted on 02/11/2004 9:53:35 AM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rintense
The problem for us is winter. We get so much snow that salt, sand, and plows just ruin any good roads we may have.

Maybe you could invest in snowmobiles instead? ;-)

13 posted on 02/11/2004 9:55:26 AM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: inquest
A great many Michiganders would LOVE that. Bike trails could become snowmobile trails in the winter.
14 posted on 02/11/2004 10:36:14 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: nonliberal
The administration has threatened a veto of any bill that increases taxes




ROTFLMAOPMP Yeah, like Jorge Would veto a spending bill.
HA!
15 posted on 02/11/2004 10:43:14 AM PST by Area51 (RINO Hunter, Big Time.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rintense
I was thinking bigger - like highways. Instead of plowing them and throwing salt on them... well...

Hey, now there'd be an invention: a hybrid automobile/snowmobile, for all-season purposes. And seeing how you guys have Detroit right there...

16 posted on 02/11/2004 10:46:03 AM PST by inquest (The only problem with partisanship is that it leads to bipartisanship)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: inquest
Nah, I'm sure the environmental lobby would get to them before plans are drawn up. You know, snowmobiles would bother the wildlife that generally would get killed by cars on the highway. We couldn't allow potential road kill to be disturbed, now can we?
17 posted on 02/11/2004 10:53:04 AM PST by rintense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: yonif
The federal gasoline tax should be reduced by 75% and the state's gasiline taxes increased by a similar amount. The federal government's involvement in highway construction should be limited to the Interstate system and the old U.S. highway numbered routes. Most people probably don't realize that the federal government is involved in providing funds and controlling the design of many roads that serve only a local function. Reducing the federal take would eliminate a lot of unnecessary bureaucracy, paperwork, red tape and delay. More miles of roadway could be constructed with the same amount of money.
18 posted on 02/11/2004 12:00:00 PM PST by Edmund Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson