Fitzsimon on Transportation: Ignorance or Untruth?

Chris Fitzsimon thinks that $170 million in transfers from the HTF to the General Fund are justifiable because that amount was provided for in the original HTF legislation. He argues people like columnist Sharon Valentine and radio personality Ballard Everett are complaining about a whole lot of nothing, because "left out of virtually every rant about the transfer is that it was part of the legislation that created the Highway Trust Fund in 1989." Everyone with hay fever step back–Fitzsimon has created a straw man and he’s taking swipes at it:

This year’s budget included a provision saying that it is the General Assembly’s intent to end the transfer from the Highway Trust Fund. And if lawmakers can find the money without reducing vital investments [like these?], it may be a good idea.//But nobody has been raiding or stealing anything. They are simply following the intent of the law that created the Highway Trust Fund. And if we are going to address the transportation crisis in any meaningful way, lawmakers will need to raise new revenue. Misleading complaints about the Trust Fund aren’t enough.

I don’t know which hypothesis is more disappointing — that Fitzsimon knows so little about transportation issues in our state but writes about them anyway, or that he might simply be lying. In either case, I’d like to call Fitzsimon’s attention to the 2001-02 transfer of $251.7 million, the 2002-03 transfer of $377.4 million, the 2003-04 transfer of $252.4 million, the 2004-05 transfer of $242.6 million and the 2005-06 transfer of $252.6 million — all of which are more than the $170 million provided for in the 1989 HTF legislation. Nobody has been raiding or stealing anything?

In defense of Fitzsimon’s straw man, however, some people think building infrastructure is the state’s first responsibility, not pork projects, state health insurance for the middle class, or Taj Mahal high schools that allow only 18 kids in a classroom. $170 million per year would be a big help in building infrastructure. But what’s at issue is the extra the Governor and Democrat-led General Assembly have raided. You do the math. (I’ll pass over $700 million in transportation bonds that were sold and used in a weak attempt to pay back what was raided by Easley’s N.C. Moving Ahead Project that voters did not approve.)

But what is more disconcerting in all this is that Fitzsimon seems to think there is no other allocation strategy besides the current one (i.e. the Equity Distribution Formula) that might better address the state’s infrastructure needs without "new revenue." How about redirecting funds from non-cost-effective projects to the maintenance of existing roads and bridges?  (Professor David Hartgen says we could have saved $2.5 billion if we had eliminated the 50 least-cost-effective projects. This waste would include the elimination of projects like expensive highway exits that get fewer than 50 cars per day, or widening to four lanes rural highways all over rural eastern North Carolina where population is actually decreasing.)

Of course, just like all government spending, all transportation projects are "vital" to Fitzsimon who never saw a new tax he didn’t like. And in his heart-of-hearts he knows that he’d rather get everyone in the state on "vital" programs like Medicaid for the middle class before relieving traffic congestion in the fastest growing areas of the state. The next time you’re sitting in a traffic jam, fixing a flat caused by a pothole, or worrying about a faulty bridge, you have people like Chris Fitzsimon and Mike Easley to thank. They are running the show.

(FY ending 1990-2006      – millions of dollars)	Original Legislation	Actual Authorization	Difference
General Fund (all years)	$2,946	$3,473	+$527
Match for Federal Funds (04+)*	–	$289	+$289
Road/Bridge projects (02-05)	–	$1,143	+$1,143
Public Transportation (02-05)	–	$190	+$190
Economic Development (02-04)	–	$47	+$47
Small Urban Construction (03)	–	$7	+$7
Total	$2,946	$5,149	+$2,203