Post by ferryfast admin on May 31, 2005 10:38:36 GMT -5
Veto fat, unfair highway bill
May 29, 2005
Madison News (WI)
www.madison.com/
Congress is poised to penalize the nation in general and Wisconsin in particular with a bloated, unfair transportation bill. President Bush should veto the legislation and tell lawmakers to reconsider how much to spend and how to spend it.
Even though Congress appears to have the votes to override a veto, it needs to hear from the president that the nation cannot tolerate such fiscal irresponsibility.
The bill is now before a Capitol Hill committee working to reconcile differences between House and Senate versions. The House version would cost $284 billion between now and 2009. The Senate version would cost $295 billion.
Both are far beyond the $256 billion that Bush originally proposed. The president has pledged to veto any bill that exceeds the $284 billion in spending in the House bill. But that doesn't mean he is satisfied with the House version. The House bill contains a provision allowing Congress to reconsider state funding allocations during the life of the legislation. The president has threatened to veto that provision.
Furthermore, the House bill contains $12 billion earmarked for special projects meaning pork including $200 million for a bridge to an Alaskan island with 50 residents and $3 million for the National Packard Museum in Ohio.
The Senate version poses an even more important problem. Not only is it more expensive, but it also funnels the money to states through a formula that gives Wisconsin short shrift.
The bill was so loaded with favors that it passed the Senate with only 11 "no" votes, but two of those 11 were from Wisconsin's Russ Feingold and Herb Kohl, who recognized the funding for mula would be a bad deal for the state.
The formula takes into consideration each state's contribution to the federal Highway Trust Fund, which comes mainly from gasoline taxes. The complex formula includes rules to protect states with small populations, low incomes and high rates of fatal accidents on interstate highways. It also gives priority to construction of ferry terminals and projects to relieve truck congestion.
Wisconsin comes out a net loser: The state would send more money into the funding system than it would get back.
Wisconsin has a history as a state short- changed by federal transportation funding. But since 2000, the state has fared better. Wisconsin should not give up its progress for a return to being a donor for other states' transportation projects.
The transportation bill has been a continuing problem for Congress. The most recent transportation act expired in 2003. Short-term extensions have kept funds flowing, but the House and Senate have continually disagreed on new legislation.
The House-Senate conference committee has a can't-win task because neither the House nor the Senate bills are satisfactory. The president should reject the bill, and Congress should accept the veto and return to work.
Lawmakers should set a goal of producing a transportation bill that contains spending closer to the $256 billion Bush first recommended and that provides for a fair distribution of money to all states, including Wisconsin.
May 29, 2005
Madison News (WI)
www.madison.com/
Congress is poised to penalize the nation in general and Wisconsin in particular with a bloated, unfair transportation bill. President Bush should veto the legislation and tell lawmakers to reconsider how much to spend and how to spend it.
Even though Congress appears to have the votes to override a veto, it needs to hear from the president that the nation cannot tolerate such fiscal irresponsibility.
The bill is now before a Capitol Hill committee working to reconcile differences between House and Senate versions. The House version would cost $284 billion between now and 2009. The Senate version would cost $295 billion.
Both are far beyond the $256 billion that Bush originally proposed. The president has pledged to veto any bill that exceeds the $284 billion in spending in the House bill. But that doesn't mean he is satisfied with the House version. The House bill contains a provision allowing Congress to reconsider state funding allocations during the life of the legislation. The president has threatened to veto that provision.
Furthermore, the House bill contains $12 billion earmarked for special projects meaning pork including $200 million for a bridge to an Alaskan island with 50 residents and $3 million for the National Packard Museum in Ohio.
The Senate version poses an even more important problem. Not only is it more expensive, but it also funnels the money to states through a formula that gives Wisconsin short shrift.
The bill was so loaded with favors that it passed the Senate with only 11 "no" votes, but two of those 11 were from Wisconsin's Russ Feingold and Herb Kohl, who recognized the funding for mula would be a bad deal for the state.
The formula takes into consideration each state's contribution to the federal Highway Trust Fund, which comes mainly from gasoline taxes. The complex formula includes rules to protect states with small populations, low incomes and high rates of fatal accidents on interstate highways. It also gives priority to construction of ferry terminals and projects to relieve truck congestion.
Wisconsin comes out a net loser: The state would send more money into the funding system than it would get back.
Wisconsin has a history as a state short- changed by federal transportation funding. But since 2000, the state has fared better. Wisconsin should not give up its progress for a return to being a donor for other states' transportation projects.
The transportation bill has been a continuing problem for Congress. The most recent transportation act expired in 2003. Short-term extensions have kept funds flowing, but the House and Senate have continually disagreed on new legislation.
The House-Senate conference committee has a can't-win task because neither the House nor the Senate bills are satisfactory. The president should reject the bill, and Congress should accept the veto and return to work.
Lawmakers should set a goal of producing a transportation bill that contains spending closer to the $256 billion Bush first recommended and that provides for a fair distribution of money to all states, including Wisconsin.