LAWMAKERS SHOULD TAKE ACTION ON GAS TAX HIKE

Voters sent Jefferson City a message in November that higher taxes are unwanted in Missouri. Citizens of the state had been asked to make an investment in education; they didn't buy the package. Because of that vote and its various interpretations, legislators are now hesitant to act decisively on a gasoline tax increase that will bring in more federal money for state road projects and upgrade Missouri's infrastructure in a major way. We believe the General Assembly should show leadership and act immediately in approving this tax. It would provide an immediate boost for the state's economy in addition to being an investment in Missouri's future.

To clarify what is on the table, the Missouri legislature is considering a 6-cent gasoline tax increase that would be phased in (two cents at a time) in 1992, 1994 and 1996. The revenue from this tax would be directed toward road and bridge improvements in the state, specifically for a list of projects clearly defined by the Missouri Department of Highways and Transportation. Without the increase, those taxes will not be funded in the near future.

Lawmakers can enact this increase without a vote of the people, since it comes in beneath the lid of the tax-limiting Hancock Amendment. However, many legislators are hesitant to proceed.

Why would we support the legislature moving on such a proposal less than three months after Missouri citizens overwhelmingly beat Proposition B, a tax increase to fund education? We offer nine reasons for this endorsement.

1. Employment. Missouri's economy needs a boost immediately. If the legislature acts by mid-February, 7,800 news jobs could be created in Missouri this year. Over the life of the projects proposed, more than 40,000 jobs might be created.

It's little wonder that the Missouri Chamber of Commerce, the Missouri AFL-CIO, the Missouri Municipal League, the Missouri Retailers Association, in addition to the Cape Girardeau Chamber of Commerce and the Regional Commerce and Growth Association, are backing this tax increase.

Gov. John Ashcroft is also on board for moving ahead with the proposal, as are the Democratic leaders in the state Senate (James Math~ew~son) and House (Bob Griffin).

2. Safety. You can attach no dollar value on lives saved. Obviously, road hazards will be reduced from the construction of 1,682 miles of new dual-lane highways, 892 bridge replacements or rehabilitation projects and elimination of all single-line bridges in the state.

3. Development. An investment in infrastructure ultimately should pay off in economic development. Better roads for Missouri mean more efficient shipping, enhanced tourism and retail opportunities and a greater likelihood of attracting new industries, among other things. With the 15-year program outlined by highway officials, every city in Missouri with more than 5,000 population will have a four-lane highway link.

4. Fair share. To get money from the federal highway trust fund, states must provide a matching amount; the matching ratio is about 80 percent federal and 20 percent state. For every dollar Missouri can make available for a match, the state gets $4 from Washington. According to highway department data, Missouri could get as much as $12.6 billion in federal money if the increase passes, and only about $3.4 billion if there is no tax increase.

5. Good buy. With Proposition B, taxpayers could claim some confusion on what the measure would cost them. In this case, the cost is easy to calculate. If a citizen drives 15,000 miles a year in a car that gets 20 miles per gallon, 750 gallons of gasoline are used annually. With the 2-cent immediate addition to the tax, this citizen would pay $15 a year for the extensive improvements. By the time the full tax increase is implemented in 1996, the cost would only be $45 a year, or about 87 cents a week.

Also, keep in mind that the gas tax is a pure user fee: the more one travels and buys fuel in Missouri, the more one will pay for the upkeep of roads and bridges. Non-residents traveling through the state, and buying gasoline in Missouri, will pay their share, too.

6. Good track record for highways. Under the leadership of Chief Engineer Wayne Muri, the state highway department has built a lot of credibility. It delivered on the many promises made in Proposition A, an infrastruc~ture-oriented tax plan approved by voters in 1987. We have every reason to believe the department will deliver as effectively with the new money.

7. Advantageous federal bill. Under previous highway legislation, Missouri got back only about 83 percent of the money it paid into the federal highway trust fund. With new highway legislation approved by Congress last year, Missouri will get back 96 percent of what it sends to Washington in gas taxes. The improved formula makes it all the more desirable for the state to move ahead with highway projects.

8. Missouri's gas tax will still be lower than the taxes in neighboring states. Even with the full 6 cents in effect, Missouri would still have a lower gasoline tax than Illinois, Iowa, Nebraska, Kansas, Arkansas and Tennessee. It is almost a certainty, too, that by 1996, the taxes in those states will rise again.

9. Good for our region. Southeast Missouri will see some specific and significant benefits from the tax increase and planned road projects. Routes 25, 34 and 72, all improving access into Cape Girardeau, will be upgraded with the tax increase. Improvements will be made along Interstate 55, including a new outer road at Scott City and an interchange leading to Oak Ridge. Nash Road will be extended from near I-55 to the Southeast Missouri Regional Port Authority facility.

On an even grander scale, improvements will continue on Highway 60, leading to the completion of a four-lane route across the bottom part of the state.

What about the legislators' concerns about bypassing voters to forward this gas tax increase? These are some valid concerns. However, lawmakers are elected and sent to Jefferson City to safeguard the interests of citizens. In this case, evidence seems overwhelming that the interests of citizens are best protected by making this wise investment in Missouri infrastructure. If legislators aren't willing to take some criticism for what doing what they believe is the right thing, they have made poor career decisions.

The facts are compelling for the General Assembly to approve this tax increase immediately.