The Bell Tolls for User-based Funding

The Bell Tolls for User-based Funding

March 24, 2014  | ENO CENTER FOR TRANSPORTATION

Last month was the first time in a long time that anyone with the ability to act on it has proposed a specific funding source for surface transportation over a multi-year period. Both the House Ways & Means Committee and the Administration proposed an infusion of general funds into the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) in order to stabilize the HTF and provide enough revenue for a multi-year authorization bill. Both called for corporate tax reform as a funding source for this general fund infusion, and though their specifics might differ, the overall theme was the same: user-based funding was not mentioned; general funds are what is being proposed for multi-year surface transportation bills.

While most transportation industry stakeholders might have preferred a proposal for user-based funding, at this point many are happy to see any proposals at all. After almost five years of extensions, short-term bills, and near defaults of the HTF, any certainty that could bring about a four-year transportation bill is likely to be preferable to the status quo. While there is still support for the idea of user-based funding, short of a few lone wolves such as Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.), and Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), no one in Congress or the Administration has seriously proposed a gas tax increase since the HTF first faced a funding shortfall in 2008.

Neither of these new funding proposals is expected to become law anytime soon, given that neither Congress nor the Administration is showing much of an appetite for actually moving ahead with corporate tax reform. Moreover, even if they did try to move ahead with such a package, the chances are low that it could be passed before August, when the HTF is now projected to run out of available funds to meet its obligations. This means a short-term patch is much more likely than a multi-year bill.

Nonetheless, these funding proposals are indicative of the zeitgeist with respect to transportation funding – the appetite for user-based funding is waning. Particularly disappointing for many transportation advocates has been the fact that this Administration has never proposed a user-based source for transportation. When President Obama was elected, the economy was in free-fall and he had promised not to raise taxes during a recession, so a gas tax increase was off the table. When the recession ended, he couldn’t risk proposing an increase as he campaigned for re-election. When he was re-elected, he had other immediate priorities beyond a gas tax increase. But now those expecting the President to come to the rescue of user-based funding are out of excuses. It is now the official policy of this Administration to use general fund revenues to fund surface transportation in lieu of raising user fees, and this has been Congress’ de facto policy since 2008. In fact, general funds now account for approximately 27 percent of all HTF spending and this number has been increasing. Without Congressional and Administration support for a gas tax increase, this trend is unlikely to reverse course.

This means that at least until 2017 the most likely option for funding a multi-year transportation bill is increased use of general fund revenues. How we raise funding for transportation and how we spend it are deeply intertwined, and thus the prospect of using more general funding means we need to seriously reconsider how we spend the new revenues. The following are three guidelines to consider if we are going to be moving forward with general fund revenues as a substantial source of funding for surface transportation:

  1. Spending from general fund revenues should not be formula driven.

Formula funding can be justified when funds are derived from users, in part because formulas can be an effective and efficient means of distributing the funds that were collected back to those users in a relatively equitable manner. Politically it would be next to impossible to distribute user-based funds purely on the basis of potential returns on investment, because too many users could wind up paying a substantial amount into the system and getting very little in return.

General funds are a different story. It is notable that our largest federal discretionary grant programs – New Starts, Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER), and High-Speed Rail – are all funded with general funds rather than user fees. The use of general funds implies that the benefits should be widely dispersed to the nation, rather than strictly to users of the system. Continuing to distribute gas tax revenues to users via formula makes sense – though perhaps focused more on system preservation than expansion – but new general revenues should be distributed primarily on the basis of the national benefits their investment can provide.

  1. Spending from general fund revenues should not be modally driven.

Transportation thought-leaders have long decried the modal silos that characterize our transportation investments. People do not stick exclusively to one mode, so it is counterproductive for projects and funding to flow by mode. However, user-based funding makes breaking up these modal silos incredibly challenging. For example, while trucking companies might agree that some federal investment in rail makes sense, this does not mean they wish to pay for such investments out of their own pockets.

It would be a mistake and a huge missed opportunity if we maintained our modal silos while transitioning to the use of more general fund revenues. General funds should be distributed in modally agnostic manner, wherein the funds are given out on the basis of the national benefits a given investment can provide, regardless of mode. Transportation investments supported by general revenues offer an opportunity for the federal government to promote “programs” of transportation investment, which may include multiple modes and innovations across numerous jurisdictions. Supporting such programs with user-based formula funding is very challenging, but doing so with general funds as in the case of the TIGER program is quite doable.

  1. USDOT must be reorganized to accommodate this new structure.

The shift from user-based funding to general funds, if it is a long-term shift, will necessitate a major reorganization at the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). The Department is currently organized in a modally divided manner that primarily enables the distribution of formula funds to states and transit authorities. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is the largest surface transportation agency, reflecting a time when we had a national project to build the Interstate Highway System. No such project exists today in any mode, and a new USDOT should reflect this change.

One possible structure could be to organize USDOT along specific purposes. For example, it may make sense to have an agency devoted to preserving existing infrastructure, and providing remaining user-based funding by formula to states and localities in order to enable them to do so. Another agency could be devoted to determining priorities for new national investments, based on guidelines from Congress, perhaps by rigorously analyzing any competitive proposals from potential grantees. While we might still need agencies devoted to specific modes in order to regulate safety, we would no longer need to have grant-making capacity at the modally specific agencies. Such a shift would enable USDOT to react more effectively to rapidly changing trends in transportation, while also promoting innovation and programmatic investments regardless of mode.

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Eno Center for Transportation.

Share

Related Articles

Inflation Is Cutting into States’ Big Infrastructure Windfall

Inflation Is Cutting into States’ Big Infrastructure Windfall

“It’s still eating away slowly but surely,” said Jeff Davis, a senior fellow at the Eno Center for Transportation, a Washington,...

With 2 Weeks Left, Appropriators Work Towards Year-End Ominbus Bill

With 2 Weeks Left, Appropriators Work Towards Year-End Ominbus Bill

Stopgap appropriations under the current continuing resolution (Public Law 117-180) expire at midnight on December 16, and Congressional...

USDOT Spent Record $114 Billion in FY 2022

USDOT Spent Record $114 Billion in FY 2022

The final Monthly Treasury Statement for fiscal year 2022 revealed that the U.S. Department of Transportation spent a net $113.7 billion in...

FY23 Highway Funding: Allocated Set-Aside Reaches All-Time High; 33 States Face Vulnerable Road User Penalty

FY23 Highway Funding: Allocated Set-Aside Reaches All-Time High; 33 States Face Vulnerable Road User Penalty

On October 20, the Federal Highway Administration gave states a pro-rated share of fiscal 2023 highway funding permission under the...

DOT Has Issued NOFOs for Almost 2/3rds of FY22 IIJA Competitive Funding

DOT Has Issued NOFOs for Almost 2/3rds of FY22 IIJA Competitive Funding

As of the close of this week, the U.S. Department of Transportation has made available almost two-thirds of the estimated $24.9 billion in...

FTA Offers $600M for Transit Rail Car Replacement Grants

FTA Offers $600M for Transit Rail Car Replacement Grants

If at first you can't get a new grant program up and running before the first year's worth of funding rolls over, then go ahead and put out...

FHWA Gives States $59.9B in IIJA Highway Formula Funding

FHWA Gives States $59.9B in IIJA Highway Formula Funding

The Federal Highway Administration on October 6 formally apportioned $59.9 billion in highway funding to states via formula. The money was...

Counterintuitive: What If Access to Dedicated Revenues Actually Holds You Back?

Counterintuitive: What If Access to Dedicated Revenues Actually Holds You Back?

50 years ago this month, the biennial highway reauthorization bill was on its way to defeat for the first time. The cause was the demand by...

Congress Clears CR to Dec. 16 After Removing Manchin Permitting Reforms

Congress Clears CR to Dec. 16 After Removing Manchin Permitting Reforms

Congress has cleared an eleven-week continuing resolution (CR) providing stopgap appropriations for the fiscal year that starts at midnight...

Manchin Permitting Reforms Revealed; Senate Test Vote on Tuesday

Manchin Permitting Reforms Revealed; Senate Test Vote on Tuesday

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) has finally released the text of his environmental permitting reform bill, which Congressional leaders have...

GAO Finds That - Surprise! - Senior Appropriators Get More Earmarks

GAO Finds That - Surprise! - Senior Appropriators Get More Earmarks

In the fiscal 2022 appropriations cycle, Congress resurrected the practice of earmarking individual projects for themselves in the annual...

Still No Clarity on Stopgap Continuing Appropriations

Still No Clarity on Stopgap Continuing Appropriations

Today is September 16, which means that fiscal year 2022 expires two weeks from today. Usually, by this point in time, we have some clarity...

Be Part of the Conversation
Sign up to receive news, events, publications, and course notifications.
No thanks