Washington, D.C.—The following are opening remarks, as prepared for delivery, from Ranking Member of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Rick Larsen (D-WA) and Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Highways and Transit Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC) during today’s hearing titled, “America Builds: The Need for a Long-Term Solution for the Highway Trust Fund.”
Videos of Ranking Member Norton’s opening statement is here.
More information on the hearing can be found here.
Ranking Member Larsen:
Thank you, Chairman Rouzer and Ranking Member Norton, for holding this hearing.
The Subcommittee has explored through the “America Builds” hearing series why robust investment in our transportation infrastructure matters. Today, we will discuss how to keep the long-term funding certainty for highway and transit programs going—by discussing the future of the Highway Trust Fund.
The Highway Trust Fund provides predictable and steady funding for states, counties, cities, Tribes and transit agencies to build and maintain roads, bridges, freight corridors, transit systems and bike and pedestrian infrastructure.
These investments keep our economy moving and our communities connected, getting people and goods where they need to go.
Highway Trust Fund dollars are uniquely reliable, since they are shielded from the ups and downs of the annual appropriations process and government shutdown threats.
Predictable funding over several years allows states and localities to plan and deliver complex infrastructure projects.
Predictable cash flow also translates into dependable, good-paying jobs for workers.
However, over the past two decades the Trust Fund has faced an ongoing shortfall, requiring multiple interventions from Congress to keep grants, safety improvements and workforce development initiatives going.
Congress has not raised the federal gas tax since 1993. Not surprisingly, the revenue from gas and diesel taxes does not buy what it used to in infrastructure projects.
If the federal fuel taxes were indexed to inflation, the current 18.3 cent tax on gasoline would be over 40 cents per gallon and the diesel tax would be over 53 cents per gallon—compared to 24.3 cents today.
Congress has transferred $275 billion in General Fund revenue into the Highway Trust Fund since 2008 to keep investments going.
States have also stepped up to fill in some of the lost fuel tax revenue. Since 2013, 35 states and Washington D.C. have increased their state gas taxes.
Additionally, at least 39 states assess annual EV fees, ranging from $50 to $290. Electric vehicles are not the cause of today’s Trust Fund insolvency—but as they become more prevalent, incorporating them into a user-pays system is appropriate.
The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law also funded state and national pilot projects to study the viability of transitioning from a fuel tax to a road user charge.
As states continue to explore options to fund transportation investment, Congress can learn from these efforts.
There are many options to fund transportation investments that Congress will have to debate ahead of the next reauthorization bill.
However, what should not be up for debate is whether we continue to invest in our nation’s transportation infrastructure at the BIL’s robust levels.
What also should not be up for debate is that the entities who, thanks to the BIL, now reap the benefits of federal support—cities, counties, Tribal governments and MPOs—must continue to have access to reliable funding.
These entities are active participants in solving transportation problems and know local needs best. As we will hear in testimony from Mr. Tomer today, these entities also own proportionally more infrastructure than they get support for in federal dollars compared to their state partners.
Reliable highway, transit, and rail funding in the BIL has supported 90,000 infrastructure projects that are underway in every congressional district.
My home state of Washington has benefitted from $3.3 billion in Highway Trust Fund dollars putting women and men to work modernizing our infrastructure.
Last month the American Society of Civil Engineers’ Infrastructure Report Card showed that we are making progress in improving our infrastructure and called for sustained investment to keep the momentum going.
Additionally, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration reported that last year was the first time since 2020 that roadway fatalities fell below 40,000, a testament to the BIL’s focus on safety.
These encouraging signs of progress are years in the making and will need sustained support to continue.
The BIL’s down payment on our future should be the norm not the exception going forward.
A cleaner, greener, safer and more accessible transportation system is possible, but it requires continuing serious investment.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about sustainable funding solutions to address state and local infrastructure needs.
Ranking Member Norton:
I would like to thank Subcommittee Chair Rouzer for holding this hearing. The Highway Trust Fund guarantees predictable funding to state and local partners, empowering communities to build the infrastructure they need. However, since 2008, Trust Fund spending has outpaced revenue, a trend that is projected to exhaust the Trust Fund by 2028. Therefore, Congress must find a sustainable solution to ensure the solvency of the Trust Fund.
To date, Congress has transferred $275 billion from the General Fund to the Highway Trust Fund, including $118 billion in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. This infusion of funds enabled critical investments in roadway, bridge and freight infrastructure, roadway safety upgrades and transit network expansions. Without the General Fund transfers, these and many other priorities would have been sidelined.
Supplementing the Highway Trust Fund’s revenue with General Fund transfers has been necessary because Congress has not raised the gas tax in over 30 years, which has eroded its purchasing power.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act supported several pilot projects to study other funding options, such as a road user charge that would levy a fee on miles driven rather than gallons of fuel consumed. Congress should consider the full menu of options to ensure the solvency of the Highway Trust Fund, including a national road user charge.
Whatever Congress decides, the solution must meet several criteria. First, we need to provide a sustainable revenue source for the Highway Trust Fund that allows this Committee to continue to enact multiyear surface transportation bills.
Second, we need to retain and strengthen the Mass Transit Account of the Highway Trust Fund. Transit, which is an essential part of our transportation system, improves mobility, reduces pollution, reduces congestion for drivers and supports millions of private sector jobs.
Eliminating the Mass Transit Account—a proposal Congress hears periodically—would not make up for the Highway Trust Fund’s shortfall. According to Jeff Davis, one of our witnesses, the Highway Trust Fund will face an annual $40 billion gap between revenue and spending by 2027. Transit spending will account for only $17 billion, or less than half of the shortfall. Congress must reject any attempts to eliminate the Mass Transit Account, which would hurt people, our economy and our environment without solving the problem.
Third, we need to direct more Highway Trust Fund resources to the places that need them most: local roads. According to research by the Brookings Institution, local roads are entitled to a much larger share of federal resources than they receive, and they tend to be in much worse condition than state roads.
There are several paths that Congress may choose to take that would guarantee reliable funding, maintain the Mass Transit Account and direct more resources to local partners. I look forward to today’s discussion. Thank you.
--30--