The Highway Trust Fund is About to Go Broke

[LAGC]

(CNN) -- A perpetual deadlock in Congress has resulted in eight extensions of the national transportation bill, causing roads to crumble, bridges to fall, and transit to break down.

Come March 2012, politicians will once again enter into a political debate about funding American mobility. Without a fiscal safety net in place, the Highway Trust Fund will go broke.

The Republican majority in Congress won't permit the transfer of federal funds from its general spending account to bolster the Highway Trust Fund. And despite the rationality of a user-fee system, neither party will lead the charge to raise the gasoline tax. Few taxes provoke more fury than those at the fuel pump and 2012 is an election year.

In reality, cutting the gas tax exacts a steep cost on the entire economy. The gas tax funds a broad range of economy-bolstering transportation projects across the country and it is already too low to meet current (and future) infrastructure needs. It's time to debunk the myths surrounding the maligned gas tax.
..
..
(more)

http://www.cnn.com/2011/11/18/opinio...ths/index.html

There's been a lot of talk about a VMT (vehicle miles traveled) fee, a per-mile road tax, since cars are becoming more energy efficient with higher gas mileage (or no gas mileage at all for 100% electric cars), and people are driving less because of higher gasoline prices, meaning less per-gallon gas tax being collected. The problem with a VMT is that the most likely way of collecting it involves installing a tracking device on every vehicle, with mileage data being wirelessly transmitted every time you gas up, if not eventually GPS tracking such as with systems like OnStar, that can track your every move and "phone home" periodically and update a central server so they can bill you for your miles at the end of each month.

Now, I don't know about you, but the idea of everyone's driving habits being tracked by the government really bothers the fuck out of me. The police would fucking love it, they could solve all sorts of crimes by finding out exactly what vehicles went where at any given time. This would be great for solving murder cases, if you had a suspect and needed to know where he may have dumped the bodies, for instance. But, as often is the case, extra security often comes with a equal trade-off of liberty. The potential for innocent travelers to be "in the wrong place at the wrong time" would be huge. I think I'd prefer keeping what little anonymity we have left, even if it means a few criminals might be more likely to get away with crime.

As much as I hate to say it, I think it might be a better idea to just keep raising the gas tax in the near-term, for as long as we can, until electric cars become so prevalent that no other option is available except for VMT-based taxation. I don't see any way around it, in the end -- unless we figure out how to make cars fly so as to not need roads or bridges or other infrastructure at all any more.

[El Laton Caliente]

Another Department that can be done away with. Let the States build highways. The only reason [excuse] the Federal Government had for getting into highway building in the first place was troop movements.

[mriddick]

One of the problems is to create jobs the gov't builds roads that really don't need building. Just in Ohio I know of 3 by passes built in the last 4 years that basically go to no where. Once these roads are built then the gov't goes broke maintaining it.

[El Laton Caliente]

Lousiana had the bridge to nowhere and the road to nowhere. The bridge crossed the Mississppi River between two rural areas down river from Baton Rouge about half way to New Orleans and was not tied into a highway on either end. The road, four lane concrete, went out into the swamp and ended a short boat ride from one of the Lousiana politicain's hunting & fishing camp.

[1 Patriot-of-many]

I'm going to guess for starters this "fund" was used in the general fund just as social security "lock box" was?

[Kadmos]

This is the extension of the 2005 highway act, half a trillion bucks, major restructuring.

My understanding was that we knew this was going to use up that fund and was a five year plan to do so.

As usual work takes longer and is more expensive than expected, sounds like standard operating procedure.

Start making the states give back money they took but didn't use (Palin's bridge to nowhere) and the problem is likely solved.

[Sidartha]

According to former Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters in an interview on PBS dated 2005;

MARY PETERS: Well, Gwen, the problem is, I think we have to examine where we're spending money today. And if we think that we're spending money today in the highest and best use, then perhaps we would need to make that discussion, but I don't believe we are.

You know, I think Americans would be shocked to learn that only about 60 percent of the gas tax money that they pay today actually goes into highway and bridge construction. Much of it goes in many, many other areas.

And as we don't -- we're not disciplined today to say, are we spending that money where it is the highest and best use of that money? Are we giving the American public the best return on investment for that money? And we owe it to ourselves to answer those questions before we ask Americans to dig down in their pockets and pay even more gas tax.

Of course the preferred method for some here is to simply raise taxes more and throw it down the hole faster.

[Kadmos]

Much of it goes in many, many other areas.

True, but a bit misleading still, the bulk of the rest of the money goes to other transportation related areas, subsidizing busing, subways, rail, and roads not part of the highway system.

The big issue in that bill from my perspective was the giant amount of pork pet projects given to congressmen, such as the bridges to nowhere. Instead of putting the money where it was needed it was put where they had to to get votes.

It went from a 250 billion dollar planned project to a 500 billion dollar money grab

[Sidartha]

Much of it goes in many, many other areas.

True, but a bit misleading still, the bulk of the rest of the money goes to other transportation related areas, subsidizing busing, subways, rail, and roads not part of the highway system.

The big issue in that bill from my perspective was the giant amount of pork pet projects given to congressmen, such as the bridges to nowhere. Instead of putting the money where it was needed it was put where they had to to get votes.

It went from a 250 billion dollar planned project to a 500 billion dollar money grab

You're kinda making my point for me there Kadmos.
When Gov programs have an inherent level of waste between 20-50%*
not including programs that are, in my opinion, 100% waste like the stimulus, then why should the Gov raise taxes instead of cutting the waste in the programs they already have or perhaps cutting the truly ridiculous programs entirely.

*http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-11-409T
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/trans...ure_08-15.html

Sorry for the run-on sentence.

[Warthogg]

The only reason [excuse] the Federal Government had for getting into highway building in the first place was troop movements.

True. Eisenhower used National Defense (troop movement) to get the interstate system started.


Wart