Washington Votes to Unsnarl Traffic : State high on list of U.S. highway bill

One congressman’s pork-barrel project can be another’s manna. The list of so-called “demonstration” projects spread across the country in the $153.5-billion transportation bill approved Thursday by the House Public Works Committee offered good tidings for clogged California, even as some in Washington grumbled that the states with the most political clout brought home the bacon.

Well, California really is congested and it really does need a lift out of the chaos from Uncle Sam.

One House member who delivered the goods, or, more precisely, started them on their way westward, was Norman Y. Mineta (D-San Jose), chairman of a key public works subcommittee. He knows well that California’s transportation crisis is real and warrants special federal attention. After all, he comes from an area that, like many parts of Southern California, can use all the help it can get in finding ways out of the perpetual traffic jam.

So the wish list in the bill, while by no means a done deal, arrives as welcome as a summer rain in Southern California.

The main thing that’s attractive about these projects is that they are designed not so much to carve out new paths as to take the pressure off existing trouble spots. That is, they aim to fine-tune the existing infrastructure by widening and improving existing roadways and by giving motorists the alternative of getting there by rail or bus.

Not all were delighted with the list--Anaheim, for example, came up dry on anything that would facilitate transit in and out of a proposed Disney theme park.

However, Santa Ana’s congested Bristol Street--serving a growing regional government hub--was earmarked for widening.

And there are substantial funds designated for train and bus projects in Los Angeles and Long Beach. For example, Los Angeles would get $695 million for a Metro Rail extension, which is even more than the generous amount designated for a BART extension in San Francisco.

San Diego County is in line for widening of California 76 east of Oceanside.

There are, of course, political hurdles to clear. The committee vote only starts the ball rolling. The wrangling in Washington over a gasoline tax increase inevitably will affect these proposals one way or another. Some of the projects, but not all of them, could be done without such a levy.

President Bush has vowed to veto any bill that includes a gasoline tax increase. And whatever becomes of the proposals in the House, it will be necessary to reconcile what emerges with a Senate version of the bill, already passed. That’s important because the Senate has conspicuously left out any funding for these special projects.

Because politicians are not averse to delivering after they have done their horse-trading, it’s likely that a new bill written in conference committee will eventually have some of the special transportation projects in it. So even if California gets only some of what’s on this list, it definitely will have an easier time getting to work and home again.