Key Dem says higher gas tax should be on the table for highways

The Hill ^ | May 25, 2011 | Keith Laing

[Kaslin]

Increasing the federal gas tax should be considered to pay for a new transportation bill, a key Democrat said Tuesday.

Rep. Nick Rahall (W.Va.), the ranking Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said President Obama should be more specific about how he plans to fund a long-term transportation spending bill, and that raising the gas tax should be one of the options.

"We've not had an increase in the gas tax since 1993," Rahall said Tuesday during a speech at the Transportation Construction Coalition's 10th annual Washington fly-in.

"Cars are more efficient," Rahall said. "They get better mileage."

But with gas prices near $4 a gallon, Rahall also acknowledged the unlikelihood that the political will exists in Washington for any proposal to raise the gas tax to get serious traction.

"I know the political suicide, bludgeoning, any other other bad word you want to use" that would come from the proposal, he said to laughter at the Transportation Construction Coalition meeting.

Congress is gearing up to begin work on the so-called Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, or SAFETEA-LU. A current short-term version of the bill, which funds highways and public transportation, is in place until September, but transportation advocates want a longer six-year bill.

The Obama administration has proposed spending $556 billion on transportation over that period, but hasn't yet said how it expects to pay for that spending.

The GOP has criticized the Obama administration for not suggesting how it would pay for its proposed version of the SAFETEA-LU bill, and Rahall on Tuesday said he agreed the president should be more specific.

"We need the administration to come on board to help us with the financing issue," he said.

Republicans in both chambers have indicated that they do not want to spend as much as President Obama has proposed on the new transportation bill, regardless of how it's paid for.

One possibility, Rahall said, is indexing the gas tax to the inflation rate.

[WOBBLY BOB]

Repeal of Davis Bacon (pork for unions) won’t happen unless/until we have a conservative house,senate and prez.

[griswold3]

considering the massive taxes paid by just the transportation industry themselves our infrastructure should all be high tech.
2290, Universal Carrier Fees, Commercial Activity Taxes, license fees, 12% excise taxes on new equipment/tires/parts etc. The Fed puts Enron to shame.

[randita]

What’s Rahall smoking? He’s one of the top GOP targets in 2012. What could be his advantage in advocating this?

Contrast this with Joe Manchin who put a bullet through a copy of the Dem’s Cap and Tax bill last election cycle.

I guess without Byrd’s seniority anymore, WV’s not getting the lion’s share of federal transportation funds any longer. The roads must be getting pretty rough down there.

[Chode]

[Jack Hammer]

Hey, come on - haven’t Americans yet realized that EVERYTHING they thought belonged to them in fact belongs to the Marxists in Washington?

Let’s get with the program, America!

[kingu]

Their biggest profit centers are in lubricants; does the 8% number come from a extrapolation of a quarterly report? Chevron was extremely solid for a number of years for profit on gasoline - 2.5% net margin (or 10 cents at 4.00)

[getarope]

Hines Ward winning DWTS? (raise taxes)

[Wuli]

Well you are correct.

My figure represented their corporate net profit, not the net profit on gasoline by itself. I have never dug, as you did, deeper into their net income by the different lines of business. Thanks for setting that straight.

And, as correct as you are about that, it shows that even if they produced and sold LESS gasoline from oil, their net profit - as a % of revenue - might actually be higher.

[sergeantdave]

I’m not feeling especially generous tonight toward democrat fascists and commies. There should be a list of offenses that democrats are automatically hanged for.

This is one.

[businessprofessor]

“Someone smarter than you and I could make economic predictions about the price of gasoline based on what is known today. I can’t, and I don’t assume that if we just get more domestic oil production we will necessarily get a lower price in gasoline. I think getting more domestic production is worth doing regardless of the price of gasoline; if only to reduce imports and be more secure with regard to our energy sources.”

I agree with the general sense of your analysis but you are not clear about the volatility in oil and gasoline prices. Oil prices have been volatile for decades with periods of increased demand pushing up the price and then falling demand and increased supply pushing the price back down. The market is relatively tight so rather small changes in demand and supply can have non linear impact on prices.

Many individuals argue that increased domestic exploration will not impact prices or not impact prices much. If all producers behaved in this manner, world production would be stuck at 1980 levels. With 1980s level production, the worldwide economic activity would be sharply lower. Increased production has allowed increased demand, vital to increased economic activity. Thankfully, every country except the US allows its domestic oil industry to explore and produce more.

[Wuli]

Don’t get me wrong. I understand the cyclical ups and downs of oil prices, oil supply and oil demand over the last fifty years.

I also understand it is a world market, with respect to supply and demand. Therefor, I simply don’t presume to predict that increased U.S. domestic supply will not also be matched with much increased world demand when that supply comes online, and thus I have no assurance that that supply will depress, or lower a rise, in gasoline prices or not.

And, frankly I am not so concerned about that, the marketplace will take care of it. I am simply VERY MUCH in favor of more domestic exploration and production, for the sake of our domestic energy companies and resources as sufficiently good things in their own right.