Support Grows for Hiking Gas Tax to Pay for Road Projects

In the wake of the June defeat of the governor’s $1-billion transportation bond measure, there is growing support in the Legislature for a constitutional amendment that would increase the gasoline tax to raise money for highway and transit projects.

Democrats in both houses of the Legislature have generally favored higher gas taxes. Now, many Republicans, mindful that the notion has strong backing from big business, say they would go along with such a proposal, arguing that it is more of a “user fee” than a tax increase.

To deflect opposition from the anti-tax faction within their ranks, these Republicans maintain that as cars have become more fuel efficient, the growth in revenue flow from the per-gallon tax on gasoline has not even kept pace with inflation. Increasing the tax, they say, would simply help close the gap and motorists would pay no more than they did a few years back when cars got fewer miles per gallon.

Chances Are Good

With bipartisan backing, they believe, chances are good that such a measure could gain the two-thirds support it needs to go on the ballot for a statewide vote, perhaps as soon as the Nov. 8 election.

“We are dedicated to rebuilding our highways,” said Assembly Minority Leader Pat Nolan of Glendale, a conservative Republican who generally opposes tax increases.

“We know the current structure of the gas tax has created an anomaly in which people are driving more but, because they use more fuel-efficient cars, are paying less of the cost of upkeep.”

Even Gov. George Deukmejian, who is strongly opposed to any measure that is perceived as a tax increase, said last week that he would not actively lobby against legislative approval of the idea. But aides to the governor emphasized that if such a measure ultimately makes it to the ballot, the governor would publicly oppose it.

Govenor’s Position Unchanged

“The governor’s position on gas tax increases has not changed,” Press Secretary Kevin Brett declared.

That kind of mixed signal has plagued similar efforts to boost the gas tax over the years. Lawmakers from both parties have argued that something must be done to resolve growing traffic gridlock throughout the state but fear that they will be painted as pro-tax--a dangerous label particularly in an election year.

Yet with the narrow defeat of the transportation bond measure--which faced little organized opposition and was heavily supported by Deukmejian--more legislators are coming to the conclusion that higher gas taxes may be the only way to reverse years of decline.

“That view is growing,” said Republican Sen. William Campbell of Hacienda Heights, who has teamed up with Democratic Sen. Wadie P. Deddeh of Chula Vista to introduce a bill to boost the current 9-cent-per-gallon gas tax by six cents. Use of the additional money would be restricted to paying for highway construction, road repairs and mass transit.

Underlying the support for higher gas taxes is the fact that gasoline revenues have risen only 7.7% since 1981 when the Legislature last authorized a 2-cent tax increase. Because of inflation, its value has actually declined.

Sees Two-Thirds Support

Campbell said he believes that there will be two-thirds support in the Senate for placing his gas tax measure on the ballot, a prospect that he said has been heightened by the governor’s offer to stay out of the way.

Deukmejian signaled the change in direction when he told reporters that he might be willing to negotiate with lawmakers to let a gas tax measure reach voters even though he is personally opposed to such a tax.

But while supporters of such an effort applauded the statement--particularly business interests that had lobbied the governor for months--most were cautious about predicting easy sailing.

Robert E. Burt, transportation consultant for the California Manufacturers Assn., described Deukmejian’s change of heart as “the slight cracking of concrete around the governor’s feet.” At the same time, Burt predicted that it would take a “full-court press” by the state’s top political leaders to get such a measure through the Legislature and approved by the voters.

The governor’s role in putting a constitutional amendment on the ballot is limited. Such a measure requires a two-thirds majority in both legislative houses but no action by the governor.

Could Lobby Lawmakers

Even so, the governor could make gaining approval of such an amendment difficult by lobbying lawmakers not to support it.

As a trade-off for not interfering, Deukmejian apparently intends to lay down certain politically sensitive conditions.

Aides to the governor said that unless the voter-approved limit on state spending is loosened, any additional money raised by increasing the gasoline tax would have to be rebated to taxpayers. So they argue that the gasoline tax amendment would also have to include a provision to lift the spending limit.

Others, including Nolan, said that such a provision is unnecessary.

The 1979 constitutional spending limit has strong backing among many Republican lawmakers, some of whom view the June defeat of two ballot measures that would have altered it as an indication of public opposition to more government spending.

Nolan said the Legislature could sidestep the problem by officially designating any increase in the gasoline tax as a user fee that is exempt from the spending limit.

‘People Are Really Leery’

Assembly Republican Caucus Chairman Dennis Brown of Signal Hill, an ardent tax opponent, said that if the legislative package required a change in the spending limit, “I think that would cause us a lot of problems. . . . People are really leery about tinkering with the limit on government’s ability to increase spending.”

Aides to the governor said that if the Legislature moves to approve a gasoline tax increase, Deukmejian may ask lawmakers to place on the 1990 ballot another major transportation bond issue like the one defeated by voters in June.

That is likely to anger a number of influential Democrats who argued, before the measure went to the voters, against the use of borrowed money to pay for transportation projects and are unlikely to back away in light of its defeat.

Nonetheless, these same Democrats are strongly in support of a gas-tax increase and Republican Minority Leader Nolan said he feels that there is “strong sentiment” among Republicans for increasing the money available for transportation projects.

“I think it’s right that the public should vote on this and, if the public agrees, we ought to do it,” Nolan said.