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.
- Leading vs. following: Ayotte, Shaheen and the polls - 23
- The cupcake police: Stop! In the name of lard! - 15
- Page One Editorial: Obama is right - 27
- Taxed tips: Another NH revenue grab - 9
- Gosnell and NH: The horror of late-term abortion - 8
- Bridging the night: Bright ideas in Portsmouth - 0
- Shameful: Obama's Benghazi dishonesty - 29
- Hassan’s stunt: Northern Pass and priorities - 15
- Student IDs: Not this again - 9
The EPA's friend: It has a loyal ally in Shea-Porter
READER COMMENTS: 15- UNH commencement speaker tells graduates: Don't worry about mistakes, learn from them - 2
- Ayotte tells NEC graduates to be passionate about their work - 1
- Antioch University awards 145 degrees - 0
- Message to Nashua Community College grads: find strength - 0
- 160 students graduate from White Mountains Community College - 0
- Portsmouth driver distracted by Facebook hits utility pole - 0
- Robber escapes with drugs from Keene CVS - 0
- Teen hurt in Amherst boating crash - 0
- Portsmouth police DWI roadblock stops 179 motorists yielding 4 arrests - 0
Former FBI head tells St. Anselm graduates it is important to give back
READER COMMENTS: 1
Sorry, no question available



