Almost half of state transportation budget goes to 11% of roads. Also on this page: SEWRPC chief explains toll road promotion. US DOT exaggerates road building job benefits, report says.

Petri joins transportation conference committee

June 6, 2004 -- U.S. Rep. Thomas Petri (R-WI), an ardent friend to road-builders everywhere, has been appointed to the conference committee that is to work out the differences in House of Representatives and Senate transportation bills.

Petri supported a budget-busting $375 House billion transporation bill that was widely derided as a pork-laden feast for special interests. After President Bush threatened to veto the measure, the House reduced the bill by $100 billion, still $19 billion more than the president requested.

The "leaner" House bill also was widely derided as a pork-laden feast for special interests.

The Council for Citizens Against Government Waste said the smaller House bill still "includes approximately 3,000 parochial projects for home districts—double the number approved in the previous six-year highway bill, passed in 1997."

Conservative columnist Robert Novak noted that "the 1982 highway bill contained only 10 earmarks," or money set aside for a particular project in a particular congressman's district. "The 1991 bill, the last highway bill passed under Democratic leadership, contained 538 such projects. But the addiction for pork has grown so large that the current bill contains at least 3,193 earmarks."

The Senate proposal is $318 billion.

Petri's support for massive highway spending is reflected in the special interest donations to his campaign fund.

Petri is a featured participant at the MMAC's pro-toll road transportation financing forum to be held later this month.

Almost half of state transportation budget goes to 11% of roads
Funding for other programs lags

Your tax dollars at work: SEWRPC chief explains toll road event promotion

May 31, 2004 -- The Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission is promoting on the home page of its web site a pro-toll-road forum sponsored by the Metropolitan Milwaukee Association of Commerce. Since it's very unusual for a government agency to promote a special interest forum, we asked SEWRPC Executive Director Phil Evenson if a forum sponsored by, say -- 1000 Friends of Wisconsin, the NAACP, or Citizens Allied for Sane Highways -- would receive equal treatment from SEWRPC. The response? Here's what Evenson said:

In response to your inquires, pleased be advised of the following:

1. The SEWRPC presently has no written criteria relating to what information from other groups may be posted to our web site.

2. Accordingly, all such decisions presently are made by me using my judgment.

3. In the case of the MMAC forum, when we were requested to post the announcement, I made the decision to cooperate because of two equally important findings: a)a clear and direct relationship between the event topic and our transportation planning work; and b)the scheduled appearance in our Region of the Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration, one of the Federal agencies that funds our planning work.

4. Until such time as the SEWRPC adopts a formal policy statement concerning these matters, I will continue to exercise such judgments when confronted with similar requests. All requests should be directed to me as the Executive Director.

US DOT exaggerates job benefits of road building, report says

May 22, 2004 -- The US Department of Transportation's contention that highway building creates numerous jobs is "highly questionable," according the conservative Heritage Foundation.

DOT contends in a study that spending $1 billion on highway buildign will will produce the equivalent of 47,576 jobs for one year. The study, however, uses cautionary statements and “wiggle words” in explaining its research because the model it uses has only a limited ability to predict job creation, according to the think tank.

Supporters of the Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Planning Commission's unfunded $7 billion freeway expansion plan have argued that it will create thousands of jobs.

The Heritage Foundation report, however, points out that any $7 billion project is likely to create jobs.

SEWRPC advertises toll road conference May 22 -- The taxpayer-funded Southeastern Wisconsin Regional Plannning Commission is promoting a private group's forum that is aimed at creating support for toll roads. The Milwaukee Metropolitan Association of Commerce's June 22 forum, promoted on SEWRPC's home page, features pro-toll road speakers, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. SEWRPC proposed a $7 billion freeway expansion plan for southeastern Wisconsin, but declined to suggest how to pay for it. The plan, endorsed by MMAC president Tim Sheehy, is pending before the Wisconsin Department of Transportation. The Story Hill webteam on Thursday asked SEWRPC for information on how it decides what private ventures to promote on its government site. The web team also asked if SEWRPC would use its home page to promote transportation forums sponsored by other private organizations. No response yet, but it will be posted here when available. Stay tuned...

The US DOT, in pumping up the job figures, simply ignored the fact that a dollar spent by the federal government on highways is a dollar that can’t be spent on other activities that may create even better and more permanent jobs, said Robert Utt, author of the Heritage Foundation report.

“The only way $1 billion in federal highway spending can create 47,000 jobs is if the money appears out of nowhere, like manna from heaven,” he said.

Utt said an earlier Congressional Research Study showed that any employment gains generated by increased highway spending “likely would by offset by job losses elsewhere in the economy.”

The Congressional Budget Office has found that more recent highway spending has become less beneficial to the economy than private investment in general, Utt wrote.

He quoted the 1997 CBO study in his report: "Some investments in public infrastructure can be justified by their benefits to the economy, but their supply is limited; some (perhaps substantial) portion of federal spending on infrastructure displaces state and local spending; and on balance, available studies do not support the claim that increases in federal infrastructure spending would increase economic growth."