Will the midterms impact federal construction funding?
Published on 11/23/2010
The construction industry is still feeling the ill effects of the economic downturn, but voters sent a clear message in the midterms that they want to see the government restrain its spending. This predicament has left the construction industry wondering what to expect regarding federal infrastructure investments over the next two years.
The midterms' biggest impact will be on the composition of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. Almost half of its Democratic members lost their elections, including 36-year veteran Chairman Jim Oberstar, D-Minn. Representative John Mica, R-Fla., the ranking Republican on the committee, is expected to be tapped as Oberstar's replacement.
While Mica possesses solid conservative credentials, he has a history of bipartisanship when it comes to infrastructure spending. In the past, he has expressed support for long-term federal investments in surface transportation and President Barack Obama's proposed $50 billion national infrastructure bank, though Mica believes the bank should be larger.
"We need a $250 billion infrastructure bank," he said earlier this year.
Mica is also exploring changes to the fuel tax as a means of funding projects. According to media reports, he is not opposed to abolishing the fuel tax and replacing it with a percentage sales tax that would rise with fuel prices. Another option under consideration would link the fuel tax to the cost of highway construction inflation.
At the moment, though, it is unclear whether Mica will be able to convince his fellow Republicans to back federal transportation investments.
"Republicans will be pressured to write a highway bill, but that will prove to be another test of spending and across the aisle compromising," said a press release from the Associated General Contractors of America.
The AGC has also expressed concern over Republicans' instance on limiting earmarks. According to the Associated General Contractors of America, fewer earmarks would likely result in fewer votes for construction funding legislation in the future.
Tea Party darling and Minnesota Rep. Michelle Bachmann, though, recently suggested that earmarks be redefined to exclude transportation projects.
"I don't believe that building roads and bridges and interchanges should be considered an earmark," she said. "There's a big difference between funding a tea pot museum and a bridge over a vital waterway."
