When lawmakers return to Olympia next January, they’ll have a chance to demonstrate that they can make progress on the state’s two biggest challenges: improving a failing transportation system and funding the public schools. If the agenda sounds familiar, it is. These are the same issues they faced in the last biennium, with limited success.
So far, most of the political chatter has been about meeting the state Supreme Court’s McCleary mandate, requiring lawmakers to increase K-12 funding by $4 billion over the next four years. It’s a tough challenge, involving difficult tradeoffs. But it’s not the only priority.
Some transportation advocates quietly express concern that the McCleary imperative will deplete the oxygen under the dome, making it hard to breathe life into a transportation funding plan. A report released last week by the Washington Roundtable and the Boston Consulting Group revives transportation discussions, demonstrating why there should be no further delay.
Most of us are familiar with the state’s deteriorating transportation system. We experience it as hours stuck in traffic, washboard road conditions and we worry about incidents like the 2013 I-5 Skagit River bridge collapse.
The state Transportation Department finds that costs to drivers and businesses from highway congestion reached $858 million in 2013. While only 5.5 percent of state highway lane miles experienced congestion, more than half of it is concentrated in the major urban commute corridors.
The BCG-Roundtable report further clarifies conditions. Annual congestion costs amount to $840 per driver. Fourteen percent of the state’s roads are in poor or very poor condition. More than a quarter of our bridges are obsolete or structurally deficient. Do nothing and annual congestion costs will rise to $940 per driver and the number of bad roads and bridges jumps to 60 percent and 40 percent, respectively.
Doing nothing shouldn’t be the default position. In the last two legislative sessions lawmakers came close to agreement, but could not close the deal. There’s no point in casting blame. It’s more important to find areas of agreement.
That’s what the Roundtable did in asking BCG to calculate the economic impact of a transportation package. They narrowed it down to highway preservation and maintenance and six major improvements in “key economic corridors” that have bipartisan legislative support.
According to BCG, a $7 billion investment would return $42 billion in value over 30 years. The benefits show up in reduced congestion costs, improved safety, lower vehicle operating costs, expanded port activity and lower future repair costs. The analysts estimate the package would generate 184,000 construction jobs over the next 12 years. And BCG calculates that the bump in economic activity would boost state and local tax collections by $2 billion over 30 years.
Analyzing research conducted for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, economist Susanne Trimbath confirms the positive returns. She finds that nationally transportation improvements pay for themselves in 17 years. The improved roads and bridges will be in service much longer than that.
The Roundtable’s $7 billion is at the low end of proposals considered in Olympia in recent years. Yet it addresses the most critical immediate problems.
There are obstacles. Proposed funding might require a phased-in gas tax increase of 11.5 cents, increased truck and vehicle fees and bond sales. Public confidence in government is low now, fostering resistance to higher taxes. Yet, one reason voters don’t trust government is that government too often fails to deliver. The memory of nonexistent “shovel-ready” stimulus projects and the no-longer-boring Bertha’s troubles in Seattle contribute to the skepticism.
The $7 billion package is different. It doesn’t involve phantom projects or high-risk tunneling. The risk here is that the improvements won’t be made. With gas prices heading down, the tax increase would barely register at the pump.
Some lawmakers balk at how the state handles transportation projects. They should hold administrators accountable and press for efficiencies. That’s their job. But don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Such concerns should not stymie efforts to make investments now that will pay off tomorrow.
Politicians and advocates sometimes say “invest” to avoid saying “spend.” I’ll say it. We need to spend more on transportation. Call it an investment. It is. A good one.
Richard S. Davis is president of the Washington Research Council. Email rsdavis@simeonpartners.com.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
