by Ginger Harris
Coming in November to a voting booth near you — the "highway robbery amendment."
Actually I'm talking about "Amendment 3," and it'll promise the moon and the stars — or at least better highways — and all for free. Amendment 3 would increase funding for highways — not by raising gas taxes or by adding a new tax on heavy trucks, but by taking money away from other state services.
Amendment 3 will greatly restrict the transfer of gas taxes and license fees to other state agencies for transportation related services they provide to MoDOT.
The Highway Patrol is currently the greatest recipient of such transfers. Its money will continue to flow — as it should, since traffic law enforcement is essential to highway safety. The Revenue Department is the second largest recipient. It currently receives highway user fees in return for collecting motor fuel tax revenues, motor vehicle sales tax revenues, issuing driver and vehicle licenses, and enforcing "drunk driving" laws. The arbitrary limit on appropriations for the Revenue Department set by Amendment 3 will only cover approximately 30 percent of the department's highway-related functions. That leaves a $41 million hole to fill ($46 million by fiscal year 2009). That cost will have to be picked up out of general revenue, which means there will be $41 million less available for vital state functions such as education, environmental protection, etc.
But the "sleeper" is that Amendment 3 will also grab $141 million per year of sales tax money (general revenue) by fiscal year 2009 and use it to finance at least $1.3 billion in bonds to build new roads. This could add to the miles of state roads needing maintenance. And by reducing general revenue it will result either in cutbacks in other state programs like environmental protection, education, health, mental health, indigent and senior services, courts, public safety, etc., or a tax increase to make up the difference.
Proponents of Highways-above-all-else apparently think that because they already get half of the state sales tax on motor vehicles, they should get it all. They allege that half of the money is currently being diverted from highways. Nothing could be further from the truth. A sales tax is a tax on the transfer of property — whether a computer or a hummer — and it's general revenue. Not until 1979 was the constitution amended to allocate half of the tax on vehicles to the road fund. So if any diversion has occurred, it was when half of the revenue was taken from the general revenue fund (and from services like education which it supports). Now the highway people want it all. Led by the Associated General Contractors of St. Louis, the Heavy Constructors Association of Kansas City, and other construction interests, proponents spent more than $400,000 earlier this year to have petitions circulated among Missouri voters. Voters signed on to a "fix our roads with no tax increase" pitch, and the required number of signatures was verified in July.
Amendment 3 is being promoted with a very simple message: end the diversions, fix our roads, no tax increase. Nothing in the ballot language mentions the sales tax, or reducing the amount of general revenue for other state services. In fact, the ballot language — approved by the Secretary of State — specifically says, "The constitutional amendment has a zero net fiscal impact." So much for truth in advertising.