- Chinese Death Star: The moon cited as the perfect launch pad for ballistic missiles
- Help wanted: Homeland Security plagued by vacancies at the top
- We are not amused: Queen’s protection officers warned to keep ‘sticky fingers’ off the royal cashews
- Unleash the crossbows: Gov. Scott Walker creates new hunting season
- Bubonic plague kills 20 in Madagascar
- G-20 diplomats fell for hacker attack promising nude photos of former French first lady Carla Bruni
- Minnesota guardsman charged with stealing private soldier data for fake IDs
- Florida appeals court rules universities can’t regulate guns
- Vladimir Putin defends Russian conservative values
- Tea Party Patriots call key GOP firing a declaration of war
Road, rail bill hailed, scorned
Unlikely allies oppose $260B project package
Question of the Day
A House Republican’s transportation bill aimed at dealing with the nation’s crumbling road, bridge and rail systems has been attacked not only by Democrats but some conservatives and government watchdogs who say it amounts to another government stimulus package.
House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John L. Mica last week introduced the $260 billion measure to fund federal highway, surface transit and transportation safety programs for five years at levels he touted are consistent with current funding.
“No other bill this Congress will create jobs, lower energy costs or improve our deteriorating infrastructure as effectively as this legislation,” the Florida Republican said on Friday after his committee voted to approve the bill and send it to the full House for consideration.
But the conservative anti-spending group Club for Growth has denounced the bill, calling it a “remarkably bloated and inefficient piece of legislation” and has urged lawmakers to vote against it.
“Simply put, this is a massive 846-page bill that doesn’t cut any spending at all,” said a statement from the group. “It spends at least $30 billion more by supplementing fuel taxes with additional revenue from other sources.”
Club for Growth, which has pushed for greater state control of highway projects and an end or significant reduction of the federal gas tax, says the bill does neither.
The group said the measure would bring a “slowing down (of) reform agenda so that business-as-usual can resume sometime in the near future when nobody is looking.”
Taxpayers for Common Sense, a nonpartisan government watchdog, said a Republican plan to pay for spending projects in the bill with future royalties from the development of oil shale on public lands and offshore drilling “is nothing more than a budget gimmick that could exacerbate future budget deficits.”
“The royalty collection system is broken,” said a statement from the group. “It must be fixed before taxpayers can feel confident they are getting a fair return for the resources they own.”
Environmental and transportation safety groups have lashed out at the measure on several fronts, including its call for changes in the way transportation projects must comply with environmental regulations and provisions that could lead to increased oil drilling offshore and in Alaska’s Arctic wildlife refuge.
The measure also would slash gas tax subsidies for local transit programs such as buses, subways and commuter rail lines, and Amtrak.
“This bill is loaded with giveaways to road builders, shortchanging transit, anyone who walks or bikes, as well as public health and the environment,” Deron Lovaas, federal transportation policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement.
Mr. Mica’s bill did generate support from some conservative allies and transportation industry groups, including the American Trucking Associations and the American Road and Transportation Builders Association.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce supports the measure, saying it encourages private-sector investment by eliminating many mandates, consolidating programs and cutting significant red tape.
The Americans for Tax Reform also applauded the bill, saying that “new spending on transit and pet projects does little to yield economic prosperity.”
Transportation spending bills typically are among the most nonpartisan on Capitol Hill, as Democrats and Republicans alike pack such measures with pet spending projects. But Democrats bitterly have opposed this year’s version, which is free of earmarks, complaining it was crafted without their input.
Rep. Nick J. Rahall II of West Virginia, the senior Democrat on the House transportation panel, also said the bill flat-lines highway funding at a time when greater investment is needed to upgrade the nation’s aging road systems.
“It signals a retreat from creating greater transportation opportunities by short-changing transportation funding under highway, and transit programs and Amtrak,” he said.
The measure is expected to hit the full House floor for a vote later this month. But while it may pass the GOP-control House, it has little if any chance of passing in the Democrat-run Senate.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
Sean Lengell covers Congress and national politics and can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
- GOP tests Democrats on college loan issue
- Lawmakers outside intelligence loop get miffed about briefing structure in Congress
- John Boehner: Time is right to bring latest farm bill to House floor
- Supreme Court nears rulings on key voting rights cases
- John Boehner demands answers on NSA, phone records
Latest Blog Entries
By Matt Kibbe
The short-term deal will assure long-term overspending
- Obama's Afghanistan experts stumped on U.S. death toll, war costs during hearing
- NAPOLITANO: A conspiracy so vast
- House pushes through two-year Ryan-Murray budget deal
- Comma on!: Twitter erupts over Obama-Castro 'marriage'
- N. Korean news agency: Kim Jong Un's uncle executed
- Biden guarantees victory on immigration reform
- Jane Fonda Foundation fails to make single contribution in 5 years: report
- All-out war breaks out in GOP over budget pact
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- White House improvises again on patchy Obamacare rollout
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Born in 1930 in rural Missouri, Charles Vandegriffe, Sr., brings his time and place to the Communities.
Columns from Voices around the World talking about the events, people, politics and social issues that concern us wherever, and whoever, we are.
Chef Mary Moran discusses the food we eat, where it comes from and what it does for us.
An informed and often humorous take on the world of advertising, public relations and social media. 100% Pure. Not from concentrate.
Extraordinary day at Redskins Park
White House pets gone wild!
Let it snow