91��Ƶ

By Sean McNally, Senior Reporter

This story appears in the Feb. 9 print edition of Transport Topics. Click here to subscribe today.

The Senate moved toward final passage of its $900 billion stimulus package of spending and tax cuts last week, and despite ongoing efforts, it appeared unlikely a major boost in infrastructure money would be included in the package.

Senate Republicans, already concerned about the size of the bill, blocked a Feb. 3 attempt to add $25 billion for road spending to the package, supported by Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), chairwoman of the transportation appropriations subcommittee.

“Our economy needs a jolt,” Murray said on the Senate floor. “We have to create jobs and get commerce going again, and I believe one of the best ways we can do that and bring stability to communities is by investing in construction projects throughout the entire country.”

The amendment would have added $13 billion for highways and bridges, on top of the $27 billion already in the original bill. It also would have provided increases in transit and water infrastructure funding.

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, said he approved of the idea but opposed the amendment because it was not offset by cuts from other parts of the bill.

“There will be lots of opportunities to increase infrastructure investment over the next few days that do not add to the size of the bill,” he said. “We cannot add to the size of this bill.”

Debate on the legislation continued after Transport Topics went to press.

If the Senate approves the bill, a joint House-Senate conference committee would need to craft a compromise measure for President Obama to sign. The House passed an $819 billion version of the bill, including $30 billion for roads and bridges, on Jan. 28 by a 244-188 vote (2-2, p. 5).

Transportation industry officials suggested some infrastructure funding could be added to the Senate bill, but it was unlikely to match Murray’s amendment.

“My sense is that one way or another, the $27 billion-plus that’s in there for highways and bridges will end up somewhat higher,” said Rod Nofziger, director of government affairs for the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association. “If they can get the offsets, there certainly will be a higher number, if not a much higher number, for transportation infrastructure.”

Tim Lynch, senior vice president of federation relations and strategic planning for American Trucking Associations, told TT that he thought there was “a significant portion of the House and Senate, probably majorities, [that] would favor increasing the funding.”

“The difficulty,” he said, “is that, at this stage of the game, you’ve got to take it from someplace else.”

Greg Cohen, president of the American Highway Users Alliance, said outside of a few amendments that would redirect unspent funds in the bill to infrastructure, he thought Congress was “just sort of working around the margins.”

Republicans unsuccessfully pushed several amendments aimed at reducing spending and increasing tax cuts.

“The spending portion is way too big,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Feb. 3.

Later in the debate, McConnell said the Senate should cut programs he said would lead to “permanent spending increases.”

“This isn’t Monopoly money,” he said on Feb. 4. “All of it is borrowed money that the taxpayers will have to pay back at some point.”

President Obama urged Senate Republicans to work with the Democratic majority to pass the bill, saying that “no plan is perfect . . . but let’s not make the perfect the enemy of the essential.”

“Now, in the past few days, I’ve heard criticisms of this plan that echo the very same failed theories that helped lead us into this crisis — the notion that tax cuts alone will solve all our problems,” Obama said Feb. 4. “I reject that theory, and so did the American people when they went to the polls in November and voted resoundingly for change.”

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) echoed Obama’s opinion.

“Only 16% of the stimulus package goes toward infrastructure, which is the physical basis on which a nation’s economy functions, while 39% would finance tax cuts,” she said in support of Murray’s amendment. “To be very candid with you, I am one of those who do not believe tax cuts are necessarily stimulative.”

The proposal, Feinstein said, “raises the percentage of infrastructure from 16% to 19%. That is all it does. That is how big this package is and how little of it is really the kind of infrastructure we should be producing.”