Professional Documents
Culture Documents
AUG 2012
The rescissions could have both advantages and disadvantages for states.
Two Kentucky road projectsan interchange and a connecting roadnear a business and industrial park in Bowling Green for which more than $7 million was earmarked are actually well under way. They are both fully designed, rights-of-way are being purchased and some utilities are being relocated to make way for the projects. But the construction phase cant move forward because a federal lawsuit concerning environmental review standards is pending at the appeals court level. State Transportation Cabinet officials say its possible the lawsuit wont be resolved by the end of the year, so the state could have to reobligate the funds to other projects and find additional federal funds for the Bowling Green projects later. The release of the earmarks can give states more flexibility in cases where the amount of the federal earmark didnt come close to what is actually needed for a project to begin. For example, Kentucky transportation officials point to a $983,000 allocation for the Interstate 66 project in Pike County, a comparatively small amount on a billion-dollar project they say is difficult for them to spend effectively.7
REFERENCES
Matthew Daly. White House offers states $470M in unspent funds for transportation projects. Associated Press. August 17, 2012. Accessed from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-offering-states-nearlyhalf-billion-dollars-in-unspent-funds-for-transportation-projects/2012/08/17/720a5704-e820-11e1-9739eef99c5fb285_story.html 2 USDOT Frees Up $473m for State, Local Road & Transit Projects.Transportation Issues Daily. August 18, 2012. Accessed from: http://www.transportationissuesdaily.com/usdot-frees-up-473m-for-state-local-road-transit-projects/ 3 Richard Simon. How to use an unspent $473 million? No surprise, ideas differ. The Los Angeles Times. August 20, 2012. Accessed from: http://latimes.com/news/nation/nationnow/la-na-nn-obama-transportationearmarks-20120820,0,6797177.story 4 USDOT Frees Up 5 Ibid. 6 Federal Highway Administration. Unobligated Balances of FY 2003-2006 Appropriation Act Earmarks (as of August 15, 2012). Accessed from: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/redisfy0306states.htm 7 Robyn L. Minor. State still committed to roads projects. Bowling Green Daily News. August 20, 2012. Accessed from: http://www.bgdailynews.com/news/local/state-still-committed-to-roads-projects/article_096c06aceae6-11e1-b8cf-0019bb2963f4.html
1
The earmarks were primarily for transportation projects that are now dead or have been delayed.
In some cases, the project was completed and some funding was left over. Other projects have been held up due to delays in design, environmental review, additional funding availability or other issues.5
Eighteen states have more than $10 million in rescinded earmark funds available.
Alabama ($51.5 million), California ($43.1 million), Texas ($30.8 million), New York ($29 million) and Pennsylvania ($28.5 million) have the most funds available among the states. Wyoming is the only state with no funds available. California has 71 earmarked projects that could lose funding, the most of any state.6
Table Source:
1 2
Federal Highway Administration. Unobligated Balances of FY 2003-2006 Appropriation Act Earmarks (as of August 15, 2012. Accessed from: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/redisfy0306states.htm Federal Highway Administration. Unobligated Balances of FY 2003-2006 Appropriation Act Earmarks by Project (as of August 15, 2012). Accessed from: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/pressroom/redisfy0306projects.htm