States Pay Bigger Share for Highways, Bridges : Transportation: New survey also finds increase in gas taxes. The findings raise doubts about Bush’s call for legislatures to play a greater funding role.

State and local governments are bearing an increasing share of the burden of rebuilding the nation’s highways and bridges, and states have raised their gas taxes 122 times since 1980, according to a survey released today.

Although the survey was simply intended to provide statistical information, it raises questions about the feasibility of the Bush Administration’s recent call for states and local governments to play an even greater role in highway construction and maintenance.

The Road Information Program (TRIP), a nonprofit Washington-based transportation research institute, said its survey found that state and local governments bore 77.6% of the cost of highway improvements in 1988, compared to 74% in 1980. That represented state expenditures of $53.53 billion in 1988, compared to $28.54 billion in 1980.

The survey also found that states have already boosted their gas taxes by an average 84%--from 8.6 cents a gallon in 1980 to 15.8 cents a gallon by Jan. 1, 1990. Some states have raised their gas taxes three or more times during that period, including Wisconsin (five times), Minnesota and Indiana (four) and South Carolina and Nevada (three), the report said.

In California, TRIP’s findings were hailed by proponents of a June ballot initiative to double the state’s 9-cent-a-gallon gas tax over five years. If voters approve Proposition 111, the revenues generated would be dedicated to highway improvements.

Arthur Bauer, executive director of Californians for Better Transportation, a group that favors Proposition 111, said the report shows that California lags behind the nation in increasing its gas sales tax.

“Some states already have 20-cent gas taxes,” he said. “We’re hoping to get to 18 cents over the next five years. This helps illustrate the differences between states.”

TRIP collected the data contained in the report by surveying highway departments in the 50 states and the District of Columbia, as well as using information supplied by the Federal Highway Administration, the American Assn. of State Highway and Transportation Officials and other government and private organizations.

“This report is a response to the Administration’s saying that the states have to pick up more funding responsibility,” said Sally Thompson, a TRIP researcher and the report’s author. “What they’ve been calling for may not be possible since the states have been picking up the responsibility all along.”

Last month, Transportation Secretary Samuel K. Skinner released the Administration’s national transportation policy, which outlined the deteriorating status of the nation’s infrastructure but offered no federal programs or methods to pay for needed repairs. Instead, the policy urged state legislatures to offset a diminished federal role by increasing state taxes, seeking private-sector involvement and employing innovative financial deals for highway projects.

But TRIP’s report said many state governments are already trying to compensate for less federal aid with the kind of programs called for in the Administration’s national transportation policy.

It added that the states are just as strapped for money as the federal government, and often end up using highway funds for other purposes.

“Money collected from user charges such as motor-fuel taxes and registration fees is being diverted to unrelated areas, such as mass transit, education and law enforcement,” the report said. “In fact, 18 states considered legislation (to allow diversions of highway funds) in 1989 and 11 passed legislation.”

TRIP researchers asked state officials to list their “top three highway” priorities, and 30 of the 41 responding to the question “spoke of the need for stronger federal support,” the report said.

The state officials’ response was “in direct contrast” to the Administration’s “call for an increased state role,” Thompson said. However, the report also noted that “states are reluctantly accepting the fact that the federal government is not going to provide the regular, adequate highway funding they desperately need--not now and not in future years.”

The survey also showed that state officials are strongly opposed to increasing the federal gas tax to reduce the deficit, as has been suggested in Washington recently.

“A total of 41 respondents said such a tax would have a devastating impact on their highway programs,” the report said. It noted that 29 states passed resolutions last year opposing a federal gas tax increase to reduce the budget deficit.

State officials are more inclined to support the spending of federal motor fuel taxes already collected and held in the Highway Trust Fund, the report said.

“We would like to see (the Administration) spend down the Highway Trust Fund,” Art Taylor, a spokesman for the Missouri Highway and Transportation Department, said in an interview. “Once that money is spent down, we’re not opposed to the federal government raising its gasoline tax.”

The fund has a surplus of about $10 billion and it grows yearly since receipts continue to outpace expenditures by about $2 billion a year.