Skinner Sees Federal Gasoline Tax as ‘User Fee’ : Revenues: The transportation secretary’s views seem aimed at circumventing Bush’s pledge of ‘no new taxes.’

Transportation Secretary Samuel K. Skinner said Thursday that a “user fee” on gasoline should not be considered a tax and added that such fees could be increased to generate additional revenues for highway programs.

Skinner’s comments, made during an interview with Times reporters and editors, appeared aimed at circumventing President Bush’s oft-repeated pledge of “no new taxes.” Skinner added, however, that he is unlikely to call for a federal gasoline tax hike this year, fearing that it would “preempt the states from doing what they need to do.”

But Skinner seemed to keep the door open by saying he thought that Bush’s pledge of no new taxes “was mainly geared towards . . . what people generally perceive to be income taxes, not what I call user fees.

“I think the gas tax is a user fee,” he added.

He said that the Administration’s budget request for an “8% to 10% increase” in user fees on airline tickets could be viewed as a model for an increase in fuel fees.

“Maybe this is semantics, but maybe it isn’t,” Skinner said.

Skinner advocated a yes vote on California’s gas tax initiative in June. His recently released national transportation policy calls for states to raise the money needed to pay for highway projects.

If voters approve Proposition 111 in June, the state gasoline tax would double over five years from its current 9 cents a gallon, and truck fees would increase. Both would generate funds for highway projects.

“It would be a real loss for the people of California if it were defeated,” Skinner said. “California people and California would lose; I would lose because I’m involved in California transportation.”

Skinner noted that statewide polls show voters unwilling to shoulder higher state gasoline taxes for highway improvements, and he acknowledged that Bush’s no-tax pledge has “a ripple effect” at the state and local levels. But he predicted that the measure would prevail.

“The polls I’ve seen all over the country indicate that, if people understand the issue . . . they will accept it,” he said.

Last month, Skinner announced the Administration’s transportation policy, which officials said would be used in upcoming congressional debates over reauthorization of aviation, highway and mass transit programs. Those programs will expire over the next 24 months.

The policy offered no new programs and did not suggest ways to pay for the nation’s deteriorating infrastructure. Critics have complained that it transfers too much responsibility to states and local governments.

On Thursday, Skinner repeatedly defended the policy, saying: “No one has criticized the quality of product. What they have criticized is the balance of the federal role versus the state and local role. That is a philosophical argument that’s been held in this country since the day we were founded, and that will continue to be.”

Skinner said that the Administration is conducting two studies to determine the scope and feasibility of other proposals contained in the transportation plan.

One of the studies is a task force examination of selling government facilities, such as airports, to private firms. Skinner said that there was no agreement within the Administration on privatization. He said a task force has been charged with doing a “thorough analysis of the pluses and minuses of the privatization of airports and what a sound policy would be.” He said that the study should be completed in May or June.

The other study, he said, is a strategic plan for national passenger rail transportation. “We’ve never analyzed on a realistic basis what role passenger rail can play and why,” he said.

Skinner added that, without that study, he could not argue for additional federal funding for Amtrak’s California or Eastern Corridor routes.