Update, Promote, and Develop America's Transportation Essentials Act of 2013

Mr. Speaker, 1 year ago today, I introduced the first gas tax increase in over 20 years. I was joined by a broad coalition in announcing the bill, supported by the AFL-CIO, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, building and construction industries and their unions, local governments, AAA and the truckers, environmentalists, transit, and cyclists. It was gratifying to have that broad base of support. One year later, the only thing that has

changed is that the need, if anything, is greater and the path forward is even easier.

I just completed a press conference with my good friend Tom Petri and with President Ronald Reagan. President Reagan, in 1982, in his Thanksgiving Day radio address, explained why we needed to raise the gas tax.

He said: ``One of our greatest material blessings is the outstanding network of roads and highways that spreads across this great continent. Freedom of travel and the romance of the road are vital parts of our heritage, and they help make America great.

``We simply cannot allow this magnificent system to deteriorate beyond repair. The time has come to preserve what Americans spent so much time and effort to create, and that means a nationwide conservation effort in the best sense of the word.

``So I am asking Congress when it reconvenes next week to approve a new highway program that will enable us to complete construction of the interstate system and at the same time get on with the job of renovating existing highways. The program will not increase the Federal deficit or add to the taxes that you and I pay on April 15. It will be paid for by those of us who use the system, and it will cost the average car owner only about $30 a year. That is less than the cost of a couple of shock absorbers.

``So what we are proposing is to add the equivalent of 5 cents a gallon to the existing highway user fee, the gas tax, which hasn't been increased in the last 23 years. The cost to the average motorist will be small, but the benefit to our transportation system will be immense. The program will stimulate 170,000 jobs, not make-work projects, but in real, worthwhile work in hard-hit construction industries, and an additional 150,000 jobs in related industries.

``Perhaps most important, we will be preserving for future generations of Americans a highway system that has long been the envy of the world and has truly made the average American driver king of the road.

``Thanks for listening, and until next time, God bless you.''

That is a speech that could be given by any of us or by President Obama--and should be. Congress did return after that holiday, and President Reagan and Tip O'Neill more than doubled the gas tax. What has not changed is that we haven't raised the gas tax in 22 years. It costs the average family $377 per year in damage to their cars.

If we increase the gas tax according to my proposal, H.R. 3636, it won't create 300,000 jobs; it will create 1.5 million family-wage jobs across the country.

Mr. Speaker, I understand people don't like the gas tax. I don't like the gas tax. I want to raise it, index it, and then abolish it and replace it with something that is sustainable. But in the meantime, raising the gas tax is the only viable approach, as verified by two Presidential commissions that reported to President Bush.

We have been asleep at the switch. It is time for us to step up. At a time of dramatically falling gas prices--23 cents on average in the last month, and they are projected to continue going down--now is the perfect time to step up, to raise the gas tax slowly over the next 3 years, rebuild and renew America, put family-wage jobs across the spectrum, and make our communities more livable, our families safer, healthier, and more economically secure.

All it takes is a little leadership and courage. Like Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill did 32 years ago, I think we can do that now, and we should.

Madam Speaker, last week I was proud to stand with representatives of the U.S. Chamber, the AFL-CIO, contractors, local government, transit, truckers, AAA, engineers, and environmentalists, all supporting my legislation, H.R. 3636, to update the gas tax.

It inspired the predictable firestorm. There was a rant from a shouting head on Fox who thought not only did we not need transportation money, but

thought that the previous money had somehow disappeared. Even the people who supported the gas tax said it was a horrible idea, like the article in Slate saying it is the best least-popular idea in politics. It provoked a torrent of reaction--some laudatory, some inflammatory. But it boiled down to basically three major points:

Where did this idea come from?

Well, it came from my decades of work in transportation, studying, listening to people from Portland, Maine, to Portland, Oregon; North Carolina to Seattle to California. It was 10 years of experience that I had directing the transportation functions at the city of Portland as the Commissioner of Public Works where I saw firsthand the impact of poor and declining infrastructure. It is every single major independent study that says we need more money for transportation, not less, and it is a disaster that we are poised to slash transportation funding October 1 unless something happens.

The question was asked: Isn't this unfair to lower-income Americans?

Well, actually no. Lower-income Americans stand to benefit the most, people who are at the mercy of oil companies and foreign producers who don't know how much they will pay for gasoline next week, whether it is $3.35 as it was when I left Portland earlier this week, or $4.25. That is why they think the gas tax goes up every year, but it hasn't increased since 1993.

Lower-income people are more transportation dependent. They work, in the main, by the hour. A traffic delay or deteriorating transit hits them harder because they have fewer choices. Terrible road conditions costs them money as it wastes fuel, it damages tires, and shakes their cars out of alignment. And lower-income people stand to benefit from the hundreds of thousands of family-wage jobs that will be created.

Well, my favorite question is: If this is so unpopular and such a remote possibility, why even bother?

Well, it is remote, but it is not impossible. Look at the user-fee increase that Ronald Reagan could sign, a nickel a gallon in 1982. We need leadership today if we are going to meet serious transportation challenges and help jump-start our economy. It may sound quaint, but I think leadership is not what you do when an idea is popular. Leadership is what you do when it is needed.

I hope Congress will lead on transportation funding.