It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The proposal, to be unveiled the same day as Mr. Trump’s 2019 budget, faces long odds on Capitol Hill, where members of both parties — particularly Democrats — are skeptical of any plan that fails to create a dedicated new funding stream to address the nation’s crumbling infrastructure. Lawmakers are also doubtful that such a small federal investment will be sufficient to spur an infrastructure spending boom.
The president, who plans to invite Democrats and Republicans to the White House this week to call for a sweeping bipartisan infrastructure initiative, will propose to devote a total of $200 billion in federal dollars to the program, according to senior White House officials who previewed the plan on the condition of anonymity. Half of that amount would go toward matching funds that states and cities commit to financing their own infrastructure projects.
Republicans are weighing whether to raise the federal gas tax. It's an idea they are prone to hate, but they may need it to pay for President Trump’s infrastructure investment plan.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently called for the Trump administration and Congress to raise the gas tax by 25 cents per gallon to help pay for an infrastructure package, projecting it would generate more than $375 billion over a decade.
Lawmakers and advocates say they could support other ideas for boosting long-term transportation revenue if Congress can’t pass a gas tax increase. Massie and Reed say one option would be to charge drivers for the amount they drive, in the form of a tax on vehicle miles traveled, or VMT.
Massie and Reed fear the gas tax soon will become obsolete as drivers turn away from gasoline and diesel-powered vehicles. “As new vehicles shift away from gas, we have to recognize the situation and find an alternative revenue source to feed into the infrastructure bank,” Reed said. “We can be creative and develop the next generation of user fees.” Reed also mentioned a tax on vehicle registration and a carbon tax as potential alternatives. Mortimer says the Chamber of Commerce has studied the future of the gas tax and believes it will be viable for another 10 years. He said Republicans are right to consider alternative taxes, but they should take immediate action now to raise the gas tax.
Macroeconomic analysis performed by the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation, however, shows that increasing the gas tax would depress economic activity and the incomes of millions of Americans. It would also raise significantly less revenue than its proponents project.
many key economic indicators, including savings, disposable income, and GDP, would experience slower growth due to the tax increase.
originally posted by: Sillyolme
Gas was nearly $4.00 per gallon in 2013. .25 won t be a problem.
But I thought there was already a tax for that included in the price.
Gas price chart from 1929 to 2015.
originally posted by: DBCowboy
This is where I have serious issues.
If government spent our money wisely then there wouldn't be an issue, but they don't.
What we need to worry about is the self driving vehicle issue and how that can effect trucking/transport and even personal cars.