Not sure if there was any real need to bring Zeppelin into this, but Nikki Kelly has an article in the Journal Gazette entitled “Road Work Funds Low on Fuel.”
Receipts from the state gas tax are lower than they’ve been since 2000, costs to maintain roads and bridges have not gone down, and things are falling apart. Meanwhile, there is talk in Indianapolis about a “surplus.” I could probably generate a surplus in my household too if I just stopped paying for stuff; never mind the roof falling in.
Apparently this has been an issue for quite a while but cities and towns have mainly kept quiet in the face of ugly budgetary constraints at the state level. But, now that there’s talk of refunding the “surplus” without taking a close look at maintenance needs, there might be a bit of a dust up.
One problem seems to be that the gas tax used to maintain roads has stayed flat at 18 cents per gallon while vehicles have become more fuel efficient — in other words, drivers have been taxed less per mile driven. It’s good to encourage fuel efficiency, but at the same time, you have to pay for this stuff.
There is also apparently an issue with a state agency having budgetary increases that have been relatively small but which have been paid for out of a fund traditionally reserved for actual road expenditures. But revenues for that fund have been flat as well, leading to a net loss in money available for roads.
There is some squabbling between state and local officials about whose taxes ought to be raised to pay for the roads — local roads, local taxes say the state officials. The state gas tax is paid by locals, why shouldn’t it all be spent on local needs respond the local officials. No one wants to be seen as raising taxes.
This particularly caught my interest because I’m about 80% through a book by Earl Swift called Big Roads: The untold story of the engineers, visionaries, and trailblazers who created the American Superhighways. First of all, the condition of the roads in the early 20th century were horrible. The invisible hand of the free market had done nothing to create good roads. They were mostly impassable sludge when it rained, for example. Ultimately, it took government and a lot of it to create our road system. According to Swift, motorists of the time welcomed the gasoline tax. It undoubtedly helped that the advent of the gas tax coincided with a drop in the price of gasoline; but the “gas taxes seemed puny next to the progress they bankrolled.” People of the time were aware of the condition of the roads in the absence of those gas taxes.
People today just have no concept of truly miserable roads. And, to make matters worse, even while motorists are paying somewhat less per mile in taxes, the cost of gasoline itself has been rising quickly; meaning any sense of saving is simply wiped out. Makes me wonder what we could have accomplished if, back when gas was a dollar or two, if we had taxed it up to $2.50 or $3 – which we’re paying now – whether we could have built up our road funds or our public transportation infrastructure. Now we’re paying that much, but it’s mostly going to gas companies for their product.
1) It’s always appropriate to bring Led into the discussion.
2) I’d have thought the Minneapolis bridge collapse in 2007 would have spurred serious efforts to repair the nation’s infrastructure. I guess the recession got in the way of that. Just think what we could have done if half of ARRA wasn’t tied up in tax breaks.
3) I wonder how long it will be before the Daniels administration is more popularly viewed in the light of short-term gains at the cost of long-term maintenance. Maybe never? Another governor or two down the line will be blamed.
I don’t see where Gov. Daniels has yet been popularly credited for his Iraq War budgetary projections. So, I think it’s pretty easy to avoid being seen as the cause if you simply move along promptly before the effects come home to roost.
Move along to where? Read the breaking news.
Looks like Doug is getting a new neighbor soon enough. Not that I think it to be somewhat of a conflict to be applying for a job one has had a vested interest in while leading state government, or anything. And, when he’s done with this gig, another government pension to fall back on in his dotage.
Amazingly, I see a rather large hypocrisy correlation between Republicans trash-talking government pensions out of one side of their mouths, while accepting as many as they can get their hands on from the other side. Hypocrisy, thy name is Republican Office Holder.
Come to think of it, was this what EB had in mind when he floated the idea of heading an “institution” after leaving the Senate? This or some similar type “institution”?
I prefer that Universities be headed by people who bring proven academic credentials as well as talent for managing, and are largely unknown outside their circle due to their endeavors being non-controversial, not former politicians who went to a university once and have a known agenda. BTW, how do the trustees of a university, who search for and vote for new presidents, become trustees?
Most are appointed, not surprisingly by the Governor. That is just one more bit of “conflict of interest” that makes my lip curl.
For Purdue, most are alumni, and most are CEO of this or that, not counting the student representative (who was also appointed by self-same Governor).
Indiana, just like Illinois, but smaller.
Since none appear to be attorneys, I suppose the phrase “conflict of interest” barely registers on their internal radars? “Ethical” either, I suppose.
Perhaps it’s the same kind of pass given to TV meteorologists? Their track record for forecasting anything not happening outside the window is not very good, but people tend to give them a pass for being cute or for a acting folksy, since most viewers can’t forecast the weather any better themselves.
In Governor Daniels’ case, most people are no better at math than he appears to be, yet they give him a pass because he tries hard to appear folksy, and because most people never are allowed to see his snippy side.
Now, if Governor Daniels had been able to forecast the Iraq war costs using ounces instead of dollars as a measurement yardstick, then perhaps, he might have been able to come a wee bit closer to the mark?
The idea is to “give you back you own money” to show what a SUCCESS the GOP has been so the Gullible will elect Rev. Pence.
You’re from here, you know I’m telling the truth.
As much i always thought Boomers were ruining the country with their obsessive narcissism (yes, I know, broad brush) and their belief that American history started in World War 2, I have come to realize that it is the 35-50 year old who are ruining America. We seem to think we landed on a planet with functioning infrastructure and institutions and none of us want to pay for any of it.
All generations lack memory of history, but, dear lord, have you driven Hoosier roads? While Mitch is once again fighting his legacy in DC (what? Privatizing things has consequences? But, we spent the money!), here at home we find the Chamber of Commerce/Indiana Manufacturers Association, errr, Republicans and Democrats are once more willing to send rich people’s money back to rich people and screw the “Crossroads” part of the “Crossroads of Indiana.” Short-sighted is now a Hoosier virture
Thanks Doug…now I’m waiting for the GOP to propose a surtax on fuel efficient vehicles. Sigh.
But seriously, we need to stop bombing bridges and start building them, and the great thing about it. A bridge can’t very well be imported from overseas. Yet.
No the bridge can’t, but the engineering can. And so can the steel. Outsourcing engineering plans and materials to places like India and Russia does occur, especially on larger projects. Do we know or care how great their infrastructure is?