How infrastructure bill could help Pa. avoid steep tax hike
I was run off the road by readers this summer when I encouraged Pennsylvania officials to consider raising more money by taxing motorists for the number of miles they drive annually.
Imposing that in lieu of the tax on fuel purchases would cost drivers significantly more. I argued the time had come to adequately fund road and bridge construction, and to create a system where everyone pays his fair share, including those driving electric vehicles.
With last Friday’s passage of a federal infrastructure bill, Pennsylvania should put the brakes on considering that plan.
It may not be necessary, or at least could be pared down significantly.
The $1 trillion infrastructure bill passed by the House, and soon to be signed by President Joe Biden, includes $110 billion to repair highways, bridges and roads.
Pennsylvania is projected to receive $11.3 billion for highway work and $1.6 billion for bridge replacement, along with funds for public transit, drinking water infrastructure and other projects.
That’s more than the $8.9 billion that Pennsylvania estimated it could raise in the first five years of transitioning from a gas tax to a miles traveled tax.
A broad federal infrastructure bill is long overdue. Previous presidents Donald Trump and Barack Obama had promised they’d get it done. They failed, making only smaller investments.
The bill includes $39 billion for public transportation; $65 billion for electric grid infrastructure; $66 billion for freight and passenger rail; $25 billion for airports; and $17 billion for ports.
It would provide $55 billion to improve drinking water systems and $65 billion to expand broadband service.
There would be money for climate-related initiatives, including more electric vehicle charging stations and electric school buses; flood control projects; climate change forecasting; and capping old oil and natural gas wells.
Critics in Congress who opposed the bill argued that too much money would be spent on non-traditional infrastructure. If the pandemic has taught us anything, it’s that broadband service is an essential service that everyone needs, just like roads, bridges and buses.
It’s a fair argument about whether climate change projects belong in an infrastructure package. I have called for more to be done to reduce the damage from global warming, so I don’t care where the money comes from, as long as it is spent well.
There regrettably is fat in any massive legislation that comes out of Washington. In this bill, negotiations reduced the initial price tag from $2 trillion. That was a success.
There are points to be concerned about regarding the bill. For starters, like most programs in Washington, it isn’t paid for.
A lot would be paid with unspent coronavirus relief funds. But the bill would increase the federal deficit by $256 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
The infrastructure spending also will create a lot of jobs, with those workers paying federal, state and local taxes and contributing to their local economies. So there are trade-offs.
I wonder about some of what is planned with the money.
The legislation includes $7.5 billion for charging stations for electric vehicles. Who is going to pay for that electricity?
I hopes it’s not me.
It’s fine for the government to provide seed money to set up more locations. But taxpayers should not provide free power at charging stations on the Pennsylvania Turnpike and other interstates, or at locations such as shopping centers.
The stations must be set up so that the vehicle owner pays for the charging.
What’s disappointing is that there wasn’t more bipartisan support for the infrastructure bill.
Only 13 of the 213 Republican members of the House voted for the bill last Friday. U.S. Rep. Brian Fitzpatrick of Bucks County was the lone Republican from Pennsylvania to support it.
There was more bipartisan support in the Senate when it passed the bill in August. Nineteen of the 50 Republican senators voted for it. Pennsylvania’s Pat Toomey did not.
Republican representatives who voted for the bill were chastised by some of the misfits in their party for helping the Democrats to achieve one of their party’s goals.
They weren’t helping Democrats. They were helping Americans. They were helping their country.
Our politicians have forgotten that is their job. They need a refresher on what their role is.
Hopefully, this bill will help Pennsylvania gets its aging roads and bridges back in shape, and reduce the burden on state residents to pay for it.
State motorists still will shoulder much of the cost. The infrastructure bill’s spending won’t last forever. Who knows how long it could be before the federal government makes such a commitment again.
That means Pennsylvania officials still must examine whether the current funding system, mostly through the gas tax, is the best way to pay for the work. I believe the system needs some tweaking.
But the federal infrastructure bill reduces the pressure to make a change quickly, and gives Pennsylvania some time to figure it out.