Tulsa World: Road-fund deadline looms

MAKE US YOUR HOMEPAGE | Tuesday, February 09, 2010 | WIRELESS

Home > News > Article

Newspaper View Print this story

Comment

RSS

Bookmark

Road-fund deadline looms
Without congressional action, a provision kicks in that could cause the state to lose federal funds.

KEY PLAYER
Jim Inhofe: Calling the situation "outrageous," he warns that up to $40 million in projects and 1,350 jobs are at stake.

By JIM MYERS World Washington Bureau
Published: 9/29/2009 2:26 AM
Last Modified: 9/29/2009 3:42 AM

WASHINGTON — Millions of dollars for road projects in Oklahoma and across the country hung in the balance Monday as the federal government bore down on a midweek deadline on a critical funding issue.

U.S. Sen. Jim Inhofe, R-Okla., a key player on transportation issues, warned that up to $40 million in projects and 1,350 jobs in the state could be at stake.

Oklahoma Transportation Secretary Gary Ridley said a $40- million immediate impact eventually would turn into one totaling $135 million.

"It really makes it difficult for us to do our job," Ridley said.

He described it as "somewhat peculiar" that the federal government would want to have a huge stimulus package for infrastructure projects and then allow such a budget issue to occur.

Inhofe agreed, but in somewhat stronger terms.

"With the billions of dollars pouring out of Washington these days, it's outrageous that we continue to face transportation shortfalls," said Inhofe, who is the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

"I have said repeatedly that transportation infrastructure is one of the best forms of stimulus spending that the government has at its disposal."

At issue is a rescision provision that would take back $8.7 billion that a previous Congress authorized states to spend. That provision was placed in a massive transportation bill by Congress several years ago to get past spending objections from then-President George W. Bush.

Without further congressional action, that provision kicks in Wednesday night along with the new fiscal year.

"Failure of Congress to immediately address the rescision will cost thousands of American jobs and delay or even cancel planned and ongoing road projects across the nation," Inhofe said.

"I am concerned that this failure would unnecessarily punish cash-strapped state DOTs. This is detrimental to every state and the entire highway program and needs to be resolved immediately."

Last week, the House passed a three-month extension of the current transportation law, but that measure did not address the rescision issue.

Key senators and the Obama administration want an 18-month extension of current law.

According to Inhofe, if neither approach gets through the legislative process in time, a continuing resolution will take effect and extend the transportation law for one month.

That won't address the rescision.

If that kicks in, Ridley said, the Federal Highway Administration will start removing the funds.

"This really gets into real money," he said.

Inhofe clearly has not given up on trying to avoid the rescision, but, given the action in the House, the situation was described as "bleak."

The issue may come down to either fixing the rescision or addressing the current Highway Trust Fund issue in the extension bill.

Doing both may be beyond even the reach of Congress.

According to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, failure to repeal the rescision language will have a "devastating effect" on many state departments of transportation.

John Horsley, AASHTO executive director, warned that the $8.7-billion highway rescision will reverse the positive economic gains of the recovery act.

On extending the current transportation law, Ridley favors the longer 18-month extension.

A shorter extension such as the one passed by the House last week makes it more difficult for states to plan ahead and approve projects in an efficient manner, he said.

Ridley said states like to time major road projects to take advantage of the construction season.

Jim Myers (202) 484-1424
Jim.Myers@tulsaworld.com By JIM MYERS World Washington Bureau

Newspaper View Print this story

Comment

RSS

Bookmark

Reader Comments

Show: Most Recent Comment First

Add your comment

10 comments have been made on this story so far. Tell us what you think below!

Reporting Comments

If you see a comment that violates our terms and conditions, please help us by clicking the "Report this Comment" link next to a comment. That will alert the web staff to review the comment. Thank you. -- Web Editor Jason Collington

	Report Comment Eagle 4, Tulsa (9/29/2009 7:48:39 AM) So, Inhofe is against Obama's spending except when it's adding to the lustre of Inhofe's image? And now he's against Bush's conservative values he was so strongly for? Stay tuned - James Chameleon Inhofe will change colors again any minute now. Oh, and don't bother with cutting his tail off, it'll just grow right back.
	Report Comment ajohnb, Jenks (9/29/2009 8:03:10 AM) Eagle4 , did you even read the story? He wants the money released to the states and obama administration and the democrat controlled congress wants appropriated money rescinded and not paid to the states. And all Oklahomans want is that they get their roads repaired. Not everything Inhofe does is bad for the state much to the liberals point of view. And he was elected by a majority of Oklahomans.
	Report Comment Thunder196, Tulsa (9/29/2009 9:22:04 AM) Mark this down, a first, I completely agree with Sen. Inhofe on this one.
	Report Comment born okay the 1st time, tulsa (9/29/2009 9:54:13 AM) Totally OT here: did Inhofe get a facelift? I dont recall him ever looking that wide awake? On the article: couldnt agree more, not surprised though, Obama's more concerned with how he looks on tv & in the news than actual issues. Yep, Denmark's more important than actually sending in more troops for this so called war , & more important than ANY of the pressing issues here at home.
	Report Comment parksport, (9/29/2009 10:28:10 AM) What a mess.
	Report Comment MaintenanceMan, Tulsa (9/29/2009 11:23:04 AM) I would like to have known if this was the demo controlled Congress in Bush's second term or the republican controlled from his first term.
	Report Comment Eagle 4, Tulsa (9/29/2009 1:58:07 PM) "At issue is a rescision provision that would take back $8.7 billion that a previous Congress authorized states to spend. That provision was placed in a massive transportation bill by Congress several years ago to get past spending objections from then-President George W. Bush." ajohnb, here is the meatball among the spaghetti - it's made from crow. Look up the definition of RESCISSION if it went over your head. Seems to me that fiscal responsibility is some on again-off again priority among Conservatives, depending on whose pocket is being lined.
	Report Comment cclinton, (9/29/2009 2:46:36 PM) He was against the stimulus before he was for it.
	Report Comment FUTURE WORLD, Tulsa (9/29/2009 9:38:27 PM) Why do they always wait until the last minute to get this stuff done?
	Report Comment tulsagerry, Tulsa (9/29/2009 11:12:45 PM) Get a REAL Job, Inhofe!

Add Your Comment
In order to post a comment on this article, you must sign in to Tulsaworld.com. If you do not have a site account, you can create an account for free.