Recently, Congress acted to extend the 18.4
cent Federal gasoline tax to the end of March, 2013. The fact that extending the tax was
contentious is a sad commentary on the lack of both planning and wisdom that
characterizes our national legislative process.
The tax, which has not been raised since
1983, is clearly inadequate. In 2008, the Highway Trust fund – which is the
fund intended to support transportation improvements in the U. S. – ran out of
money. Spending from the Trust Fund has exceeded
revenues since 2002. Although Congress
has plugged the gap with revenues from the General fund, it has failed to come
up with an integrated plan – and a funding program –to assure adequate
maintenance of our existing assets and provide the improvements needed to
assure competitive capabilities in the years ahead.
Allowing the gasoline tax to lapse would,
among other things:
- Encourage people to drive more, thus worsening the already severe congestion that irritates us all – and costs more than $100 billion annually in extra fuel costs.
- Increase our negative trade gap, and increase our energy dependence
- Cost lots of jobs. 1billion in infrastructure spending supports about 25,000 jobs; if the tax lapses and we stop spending, hundreds of thousands of jobs will be in immediate jeopardy.
- Accelerate the already severe deterioration of existing bridges and highways
It’s hard to understand why anyone would even
consider allowing the tax to lapse.
Americans pay far less for gasoline than driver’s in other countries,
and much less in fuel taxes as well. The
recent Simpson-Bowles Commission recommended an immediate 15 cent per gallon
increase in the tax; others have suggested more substantial increases. Everyone except politicians seeking votes
seems to agree that our infrastructure needs immediate and substantial help.
It is clear that it does – and that the
needed help will cost lots more than another 15 cents a gallon at the
pump. In 2008 the national Surface
Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission – a Congressional creation –
recommended spending at least $225 billion annually, far more than we now
spend. Various estimates put the bill for deferred maintenance of our highways
and bridges in the neighborhood of $2 trillion.
In addition to needing lots more maintenance
on our roads and bridges, we also need an integrated plan to upgrade and expand
our capabilities in many areas. We need a plan that measures the adequacy of
our highways, mass transit capabilities, airports, ports, communication systems,
energy transmission systems, waste
facilities, water systems, hospitals, law enforcement facilities and
educational assets against those of other countries – and that provides for the
many and substantial improvements needed
to put the U. S. back in a position of leadership.
Around the world, our competitors are
spending far larger shares of GDP on infrastructure improvements than the U. S.
Brazil, India and China, are reportedly
spending more than $1trillion annually! And we are clearly falling behind.
In 2005, the World Economic Forum rated the
U. S. # 1 in economic competitiveness; today, we are ranked #15. Unless we fix
the problem, we’ll rank even lower in the years ahead.
Solving the problem is a necessity if we want
the country and our kids to have a satisfactory future– and stepping up to that
necessity also represents an opportunity to solve one of today’s major
problems. If Congress and the President were to come up with a national
infrastructure plan this fall, and fund it at just $200 billion annually for
the next ten years, we’d generate about 5 million new jobs.
Although it is clear that $200 billion will
not be sufficient to meet the competitive challenge being mounted by others, it
will be enough to provide a big chunk of
the roughly 12 million jobs we’ll need during those ten years to put the
currently unemployed back to work and provide opportunities for new
workers. Moreover, the economic activity
created and facilitated by that infrastructure investment will drive GDP growth,
create lots of additional employment opportunities and – hopefully – provide
the resources needed to build the capabilities not included in the initial
plan.
Some will doubtless say we can’t afford it. In
my view, these are investments we cannot afford to forego. Moreover, since we have spent or committed
between $3 and $5 trillion during the last ten years in Iraq, Afghanistan and
other military adventures – spending which has produced nothing and has yielded
neither assets nor infrastructure to support our future growth – I just don’t
buy the argument that we can’t find a way to finance the assets and
capabilities needed to assure a decent future for our kids and grandkids.
Those interested in a more comprehensive
examination of our infrastructure problem can find an excellent recent report
here: