Idaho Road Funds Threatened Budget-Balancing Deal Could Take $60 Million

Idaho could lose $60 million a year in potential federal highway appropriations under the budget-balancing deal before Congress, the chairman of the House Transportation Committee warns.

But a spokesman for U.S. Sen. Dirk Kempthorne, who has proposed his own bill to boost federal highway spending by 50 percent, adamantly disputed the preliminary projection from Rep. Bud Shuster, R-Pa.

Idaho now receives an average of about $125 million in federal highway funding each year.

Kempthorne, R-Idaho, wants to increase annual highway spending from $18 billion to $27 billion by authorizing the expenditure of all federal gasoline tax revenues collected. His bill would boost Idaho’s annual share to about $221.3 million during the next five years.

The budget-balancing deal between President Clinton and the Congress would boost federal highway spending only to about $19.5 billion during the next budget year based on preliminary figures, said Jim Nelligan, a spokesman for the House Transportation Committee.

About $9 billion would go toward balancing the budget instead of highway spending during the next budget year, Nelligan said, costing Idaho about $60 million a year in increased federal highway outlays over the next five years.

Gary Smith, Kempthorne’s assistant legislative director, said aides to Sens. John Warner of Virginia and John Chafee of Rhode Island have indicated federal transportation spending could range from $21 billion to $23 billion next year under the budget agreement.

Smith said Shuster’s projections are based on the best-case scenario of federal highway spending. “They make assumptions that aren’t valid and aren’t supported by legislation that is out there.”

The Clinton administration has proposed a $20 billion federal highway bill that would cost Idaho at least $12 million to $15 million during the next year, Smith said. But he said he is confident Idaho will get a larger share of federal highway money even at a flat federal funding level.

Gov. Phil Batt and other governors signed a letter to the House and Senate budget leaders from both parties protesting “the low funding assumed in transportation programs” within the balanced budget deal.

Federal gasoline taxes should be spent on transportation because good roads are important to the economy, Batt spokesman Frank Lockwood said.

“If you are using transportation taxes to make the deficit appear lower, it is a phony way to do the job,” he said.