Connect with us

Politics

Despite Low Gas Prices, Gas Tax Hike Appears Unlikely

Published

on

A person gets fuel after gas prices dropped below $2 a gallon at the Quick Mart in High Point, N.C., Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2015. (AP Photo/Daily Free Press, Laura Greene)

A person gets fuel after gas prices dropped below $2 a gallon at the Quick Mart in High Point, N.C., Wednesday, Jan. 14, 2015. (AP Photo/Daily Free Press, Laura Greene)

JOAN LOWY, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The new Republican-controlled Congress is facing an old problem: where to find the money for highway and transit programs.

With gasoline prices at their lowest in years when the new Congress convened, there had been talk that it might be time to raise federal gas and diesel taxes, which haven’t budged in more than 20 years.

But already, GOP leaders are tamping down expectations, leaving no clear solution to the funding problem.

“I don’t know of any support for a gas tax increase in Congress,” Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, the No. 2 Senate GOP leader, said flatly. Explained Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz.: “They don’t want to vote for a tax increase.”

House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, while not closing the door entirely, said there aren’t enough votes in the House for a gas tax increase. Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa., the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee chairman, was equally doubtful.

“The president has ruled out a gas tax. I don’t think there’s a will in Congress, and the American people don’t want it,” Shuster recently told The Associated Press.

The gas tax, now 18.4 cents a gallon, and the diesel fuel tax, now 24.4 cents a gallon, were last increased in 1993. In the meantime, Americans are driving less per capita, cars are more fuel efficient and construction costs have gone up. Fuel taxes bring in about $34 billion a year to the federal Highway Trust Fund, but the government spends about $50 billion a year. The trust fund has been the main source of federal transportation aid to states for more than 60 years.

In that environment, two key GOP senators — Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch of Utah and Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman James Inhofe of Oklahoma — had raised the hopes of transportation advocates by saying raising fuel taxes should be considered along with other funding options, using the more politically palatable term “user fees.” But the idea appears to be a long shot at best.

Congress has kept transportation programs teetering on the edge of insolvency since 2008 by repeatedly transferring just enough funds from the general treasury — and making corresponding spending cuts elsewhere in the federal budget — to meet obligations for a few more months or, in one case, as long as two years. Finding acceptable spending cuts to offset the transfers gets more difficult each time.

The latest funding patch cleared Congress last August only about three hours before the Transportation Department said it would begin cutting back aid payments to states. That fix is only expected to last through May, when Congress will be back where it started unless lawmakers act sooner.

“The political support for increasing taxes to pay for transportation appears to be very limited,” said Joshua Schank, president of the Eno Center for Transportation, a think tank.

A majority of Americans think the economic benefits of good transportation outweigh the cost, but they can’t agree on how to pay for new highways or repairs of old ones. An Associated Press-GfK poll last summer, before the plunge in gas prices, showed 58 percent opposed raising federal gasoline taxes to pay for repair, replacement or expansion of roads and bridges. Only 14 percent supported an increase.

The lack of voter enthusiasm for raising gas taxes hasn’t deterred die-hard gas tax supporters who say it is preferable to a one-time fix because it would ensure continued funding. Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., issued a statement Thursday saying he intends to reintroduce a bill to raise fuel taxes 15 cents a gallon. He introduced a similar bill last year, but it wasn’t considered by the GOP-controlled House. Blumenauer estimated the increase would raise an additional $210 billion over the next decade.

President Barack Obama has previously rejected a gas tax increase, instead proposing to close corporate tax loopholes and use the revenue to pay for infrastructure. His plan would boost highway spending 22 percent and transit spending 70 percent over four years.

Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx told a transportation conference this week that’s still the administration’s preferred option, but he also expressed “openness to ideas that emerge from Congress.”

Sen. John Thune, R-S.D., the No. 3 Senate GOP leader, who helped raise speculation that a fuel tax increase might be possible when he said all possible funding options should be considered, including a gas tax increase, this week described such a possibility as “unlikely.”

“I can’t see a scenario for some sort of user fee increase that you’d have to offset with tax relief in some other area,” he told reporters. “Nobody is going to vote for a gas tax increase.”

Instead, Thune said, closing tax loopholes, especially those that encourage corporations to move overseas, and using the money to pay for infrastructure is his “preferred option.” But he also observed that “tax increases are always hard, and there’s a perception that we ought to be able to find savings in other areas to fund infrastructure.”

___

Follow Joan Lowy on Twitter at http://www.twitter.com/AP_Joan_Lowy

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Community

Gov. Newsom Signs New Affordable Housing Legislation

LOS ANGELES WAVE — The legislation introduces a new “One-Stop-Shop” financing system designed to reduce duplicative reviews and accelerate affordable housing projects. According to the governor’s office, the reforms are expected to lower construction costs by an estimated $60,000 to $70,000 per affordable housing unit, allowing existing state investments to finance more homes.

Published

on

California Governor Gavin Newsom stands with public officials after signing Assembly Bill 179 in Oakland, Calif., on July 13 2026. Assembly Bill 179 modernizes how California finances and delivers affordable housing. (Lloyd B Davis/Bay City News)

Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed new legislation aimed at expanding affordable housing, reducing construction costs and speeding up housing development across California as part of the state’s 2026-27 budget.

Assembly Bill (AB) 179, signed July 17, modernizes California’s affordable housing finance system by streamlining project approvals, expanding funding for housing programs and creating new financing tools for homeowners rebuilding after disasters. State officials said the measure is intended to help increase housing production while strengthening efforts to address the state’s housing affordability and homelessness challenges.

The legislation introduces a new “One-Stop-Shop” financing system designed to reduce duplicative reviews and accelerate affordable housing projects. According to the governor’s office, the reforms are expected to lower construction costs by an estimated $60,000 to $70,000 per affordable housing unit, allowing existing state investments to finance more homes.

“When I took office in 2019, my goal was clear: to reverse decades of inaction on housing and homelessness and ensure there was enough housing and care for people to leave the streets,” Newsom said in a statement. “I’m grateful for the Legislature’s partnership, as together we add to this proven foundation with new laws that cut red tape, expand financing opportunities, and help communities build housing faster.”

The measure also establishes a $100 million Disaster Rebuilding Fund to help homeowners repair or reconstruct homes damaged by disasters. In addition, the budget includes $900 million for another round of Housing, Homelessness Assistance and Prevention grants while adding new accountability requirements for certain cities and counties receiving state funding.

To support affordable housing development, the budget provides $500 million in enhanced state low-income housing tax credits and $200 million for the Multifamily Housing Program to build and preserve affordable rental housing for low-income Californians.

According to the governor’s office, California has made progress in increasing housing production since 2019. Annual residential construction has risen by 59%, from about 70,000 homes in 2018 to approximately 111,000 in 2024. The administration also reported that more than 682,000 homes have been built statewide during that period and that the average time from development application to entitlement has dropped from 160 days to 68 days.

State officials also highlighted recent declines in homelessness, including what they described as the state’s largest reduction in unsheltered homelessness in 16 years.



Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: Jim Crow 2.0 at the Pentagon

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

Published

on

Photo: iStockphoto / NNPA.

Pete Hegseth insists that he is restoring “merit” to the United States military. But after months of dismissals, blocked promotions, and ideological purges, the evidence tells a different story. His campaign against so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion” has become something far more dangerous: an assault on equal opportunity that falls with particular force on African Americans, while also targeting women, Latinos, gay Americans, and transgender service members.

The latest example is both troubling and infuriating.

Once again, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reportedly blocked the promotion of an exceptionally qualified woman—Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt. Bauernschmidt is no ordinary officer. She became the Navy’s first woman to command a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, one of the most demanding leadership assignments in the world. Her career reflects decades of exemplary performance, operational excellence, and leadership under extraordinary pressure.

Yet once again, a distinguished military career appears to have been subordinated to an ideological agenda masquerading as “merit.”

I call BS!

The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

The pattern has become impossible to ignore.

General Charles Q. Brown Jr., only the second African American to serve as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was dismissed despite a career that placed him among the most accomplished military leaders of his generation.

Admiral Lisa Franchetti, the first woman ever to serve as Chief of Naval Operations, was removed despite decades of distinguished command experience.

Reports have documented interventions that blocked or delayed the promotions of Black officers and women selected through the military’s rigorous promotion system.

Now Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt joins the growing list of highly accomplished officers whose careers have been derailed for reasons that have never been persuasively explained.

Where is Congress?

Its silence has become deafening.

Congress has an independent constitutional responsibility to oversee the armed forces. Instead, too many lawmakers have watched silently while one of the nation’s most respected institutions is subjected to ideological litmus tests and political interference.

This is not military reform.  It is testosterone-fueled performative masculinity disguised as a philosophy of military excellence.

The irony is impossible to miss. Hegseth repeatedly invokes “merit,” yet his rhetoric begins with the assumption that Black officers, women, and other historically excluded Americans must somehow justify their achievements in ways that white male officers are rarely required to do.

That is not meritocracy.  It is prejudice wrapped in patriotic language.

No one is asking that anyone be promoted because of race or gender. Americans simply expect that promotions be based on demonstrated competence, leadership, integrity, and service. The officers being targeted have already proven themselves repeatedly under one of the world’s most demanding evaluation systems.

Their records speak for themselves.

The attack on African American military leadership has been especially pernicious.

For generations, Black Americans fought in segregated units, earned decorations while denied equal treatment, and repeatedly demonstrated loyalty to a nation that often failed to extend them full citizenship. They broke barriers not because standards were lowered but because excellence finally overcame institutional discrimination.

Today’s campaign against “diversity” threatens to revive old assumptions under new slogans.

The implication that Black generals and admirals somehow owe their success to affirmative action rather than extraordinary performance echoes some of the ugliest stereotypes of the Jim Crow era. Yesterday’s segregationists claimed Black Americans were inherently less qualified. Today’s culture warriors simply employ more politically acceptable language while inviting the same suspicion about Black achievement.

That is why Hegseth’s campaign increasingly resembles Jim Crow 2.0.

The targets may now wear stars on their shoulders instead of military patches on segregated uniforms, but the underlying message is hauntingly familiar: Black excellence is presumed suspect, while white excellence is presumed earned.

America’s military became the finest fighting force in history because it opened its doors to talent wherever it could be found. It grew stronger after President Truman desegregated the armed forces. It became stronger when women assumed greater command responsibilities. It became stronger when every qualified American was given the opportunity to serve to the fullest extent of their abilities.

Diversity is not a concession.  It is a strategic advantage.

The nation’s adversaries do not fear an American military because it is racially homogeneous. They fear it because it draws upon the talents of more than 340 million Americans whose diverse experiences, perspectives, and abilities make our armed forces unmatched anywhere in the world.

Every politically motivated dismissal of a distinguished officer sends a chilling message throughout the ranks: excellence alone may no longer be enough if you belong to the wrong demographic group.

That weakens morale.  It weakens recruitment.  It weakens retention.

And ultimately, it weakens national security.

Pete Hegseth has every right to pursue military readiness. He has no right to redefine merit in ways that repeatedly cast suspicion upon the accomplishments of Black officers, women, and others who have devoted their lives to defending this nation.

America deserves better.  The men and women who wear the uniform deserve better.  The Constitution deserves better.

And unless Congress finds the courage to exercise meaningful oversight, history may well remember this period not as a restoration of military excellence, but as the moment political ideology attempted to resurrect, in modern form, the old poison of exclusion.

Jim Crow did not strengthen America.  Jim Crow 2.0 will not strengthen America’s military.  It will only diminish it

Wade Henderson
Strategic Advisor
Civil and Human Rights
wade@wadejhenderson.com

Continue Reading

Activism

Oakland Post: Week of July 29 – August 4, 2026

The printed Weekly Edition of the Oakland Post: Week of July 29 – August 4, 2026

Published

on

To enlarge your view of this issue, use the slider, magnifying glass icon or full page icon in the lower right corner of the browser window.

Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.