Kan. Senate OKs Transportation Bill
The Senate approved, 22-18, a proposed transportation program drafted by its moderate Republican leaders. Democrats and conservatives tried but failed repeatedly during two days of debate to rewrite it.
Besides increasing the tax on gasoline, gasohol and diesel fuel by 5 cents a gallon, it would increase vehicle registration fees by between 20 percent and 30 percent over five years. It also would allow the state to issue $990 million in bonds.
The money raised from the bonds and tax increases would help finance $13.2 billion in transportation projects over 10 years. The money would pay for highway improvements and aid for rural airports, public bus systems and short line railroads.
Negotiations with the House over the final version of the bill are likely to be difficult. House members approved a plan with nearly $13 billion in spending over 10 years, but their proposal contained no bonds or tax increases.
Those negotiations were on senators' minds during the debate Wednesday. Supporters of the Senate plan argued that changing it would result in a smaller transportation plan and a weaker position for Senate negotiators.
"If we want a highway program and have to negotiate with the House, we need to have a strong position," said Sen. Audrey Langworthy, chairwoman of the Senate Assessment and Taxation Committee, which endorsed the bill.
Senators voted a day after Economic Lifelines, a coalition of interest groups led by construction companies, held a reception for legislators. Economic Lifelines is pushing legislators to raise taxes to help finance a big transportation plan.
Critics of the Senate plan suggested that refusing to make changes would make negotiations with the House more difficult because of the radical differences between the two chambers' plans.
"If you've got something in common, then you have an incentive to negotiate out the details," said conservative Sen. Stan Clark. "When we've got such a big, wide spread, I'm not sure the House is inclined to negotiate."
The next step in the process is for the House to consider the Senate's version of the bill. The House probably will reject it, and legislative leaders likely will appoint a conference committee of three senators and three House members to draft the final
ersion.
The House plan avoided bonds and tax increases by diverting more existing revenues to transportation projects. But it assumes that the Legislature approves no tax cuts for several years. Critics said it would steal money from education and other programs.
