The partisan positions are simple enough (though the reality often varies): Democrats generally will spend first and find funding later, while Republicans won’t.
President Obama’s 2015 federal budget proposal is an example of the former; the House Republican version, hot off the desk of budget chairman Paul Ryan this week, represents the latter (with heavy doses of anti-Obama rhetoric).
Both are more political than practical – this is, after all, an election year – and neither are expected to get any traction in a divided Congress.
Still, the House plan does feature a transportation “function,” so let’s have a look.
The bottom line, for trucking: “Maintaining the solvency of the Highway Trust Fund and the policy of the trust fund being user-fee supported is a priority. With the Highway Trust Fund facing insolvency in late 2014 or early 2015, efforts need to be made to find a long-term solution to the trust fund’s financial challenges.”
For any editor, a passive phrase like “efforts need to be made” warrants a red pencil and note: Who, exactly, is to make these efforts? But in Washington, the passive voice is the default style – one that often obscures responsibility (“Mistakes were made.”) but more typically means, “We’ll look into it, sooner or later, maybe.”
So this says right away that the Ryan plan doesn’t offer much in the way of new revenue to pay for improving transportation infrastructure (the long-term part). However, since it’s serious about the user-pay principle, the budget-balancing is going to come from reduced spending.
