Home » Opinion » Editorials
July 05. 2012 7:51PM
Hitting the highway bill: Ayotte’s bold ‘no’ vote
Sen. Kelly Ayotte confirmed on Friday what her previous actions had suggested: She is the most fiscally conservative member of New Hampshire’s congressional delegation and the one most concerned about runaway federal spending.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen predictably voted for the $120 billion federal highway bill, and she was joined on the House side by Reps. Charlie Bass and Frank Guinta. Ayotte, though, was one of only 19 senators to vote no.
“We need to strengthen America’s transportation infrastructure, including worthy projects like widening I-93. But this bill was yet another ‘buy now, pay later’ scheme that fails to fundamentally reform how we pay for highway projects,” Ayotte said in a statement. She added, “that kind of reckless borrowing is what has brought us to the brink of a fiscal crisis. We need a highway bill that addresses justifiable needs within our transportation system without continuing our country on a path to bankruptcy.”
Given that the bill funded the much-delayed widening of I-93 from Exit 3 in Windham down to the Massachusetts border, Ayotte’s vote was a bold one. She easily could have voted for the bill and rationalized that the New Hampshire money made her “yes” vote necessary. However, as Granite Staters are seeing, Ayotte prefers a tough but principled vote to an easy one that compromises her beliefs.
Federal highway spending is supposed to be financed by the 18.4-cents-per-gallon federal gas tax. This bill spent about $20 billion more than was available in the highway trust fund. Rather than trim the spending, Congress financed the rest through general tax revenues. As we are spending more than we are taking in already, the bill is effectively debt-financed. Some of the loss to the general fund is covered by raising premiums for the Pension Benefits Guarantee Corporation and for federal flood insurance. Instead of those revenues going to pensions and flood insurance, they are diverted to highway spending.
Ayotte voted against the bill because it relied on such financial shenanigans. She was right to do so, and we wish her colleagues from New Hampshire had joined her. If members of Congress continue to vote for irresponsible spending because it funds things in their states, there is no hope for reforming Washington.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen predictably voted for the $120 billion federal highway bill, and she was joined on the House side by Reps. Charlie Bass and Frank Guinta. Ayotte, though, was one of only 19 senators to vote no.
“We need to strengthen America’s transportation infrastructure, including worthy projects like widening I-93. But this bill was yet another ‘buy now, pay later’ scheme that fails to fundamentally reform how we pay for highway projects,” Ayotte said in a statement. She added, “that kind of reckless borrowing is what has brought us to the brink of a fiscal crisis. We need a highway bill that addresses justifiable needs within our transportation system without continuing our country on a path to bankruptcy.”
Given that the bill funded the much-delayed widening of I-93 from Exit 3 in Windham down to the Massachusetts border, Ayotte’s vote was a bold one. She easily could have voted for the bill and rationalized that the New Hampshire money made her “yes” vote necessary. However, as Granite Staters are seeing, Ayotte prefers a tough but principled vote to an easy one that compromises her beliefs.
Federal highway spending is supposed to be financed by the 18.4-cents-per-gallon federal gas tax. This bill spent about $20 billion more than was available in the highway trust fund. Rather than trim the spending, Congress financed the rest through general tax revenues. As we are spending more than we are taking in already, the bill is effectively debt-financed. Some of the loss to the general fund is covered by raising premiums for the Pension Benefits Guarantee Corporation and for federal flood insurance. Instead of those revenues going to pensions and flood insurance, they are diverted to highway spending.
Ayotte voted against the bill because it relied on such financial shenanigans. She was right to do so, and we wish her colleagues from New Hampshire had joined her. If members of Congress continue to vote for irresponsible spending because it funds things in their states, there is no hope for reforming Washington.
- Nashua elementary teacher honored for real-world lessons - 1
- Elementary students in Farmington offered seven habits of healthy kids - 0
- Afterschool activities canceled in Jaffrey - 0
- Experts weigh in on UNH logo designs - 15
- Texting + driving = deadly consequences - 0
- Deerfield teacher honored by national science organization - 0
- Institute of Art graduates its largest class in Manchester - 0
- UNH hires firm to redesign one of its logos - 23
- Lakes Region, Great Bay CC hold commencement ceremonies - 0
Pushback against logo plan for UNH heats up
READER COMMENTS: 1- Updated: House votes to ban lead sinkers and jigs an ounce or under - 9
- Updated: Car may have started itself, crashes, burns at Manchester Home Depot - 5
- Threats at Goffstown High ‘not credible’ - 0
- Updated: House passes auto dealers bill of rights - 2
- Rochester man facing up to 30 years in prison for brutal assault - 1
- Man who confronts burglar in Nashua gets bit - 0
- Police say Nashua man struck woman with Jeep - 0
- Pease chosen to receive new KC-46A refueling tanker; to bring 100 jobs - 9
- FBI agent kills Florida man during questioning about Marathon bombing suspect - 3
Updated: NH House defies Hassan, kills casino bill by 35-vote margin
READER COMMENTS: 23
Sorry, no question available



