"It's very wasteful, it's very expensive," said DeFazio, D-OR. "It's going to hurt the states. Congress is proving to unusually dysfunctional."

While trust fund and U.S. DOT operations were restored by Wednesday, long-term prospects for a six-year authorization of highway and transit programs are unclear, DeFazio said. He noted his "crystal ball is a little cloudy" regarding the future of the surface transportation bill. (The House voted Thursday to approve a 10-month extension of transportation authorization and a $19.5 billion deposit of general revenue into the Highway Trust Fund -- see related story.)

DeFazio said his subcommittee has offered its recommendations for the future of the federal highway and transit programs, but the prime concern in the House of Representatives is how to pay for the $500 billion bill. He offered several alternatives including indexing the gas tax and taxing oil by the barrel. Another option, he said, is taxing financial transactions, which could raise between $100 billion and $150 billion a year. Some economists have said this would calm some of the current market volatility and at the same time help offset the deficit while supporting transportation, DeFazio added.

DeFazio's concerns were echoed by speakers at another Tuesday panel, "Transportation, Energy, and the Environment - Policy Issues and Outlook: Staff Briefing."

"We're in a pickle," said Ruth VanMark, minority staff director for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. "We are in a worse pickle than we were six years ago," she added, noting that the new challenge is the Highway Trust Fund is broke and some people are questioning the value of infrastructure spending.

Jim Kolb, House Highways and Transit Subcommittee staff director, said the House will continue to push forward on a "transformational" six-year authorization bill that builds on the recommendations of the two national commissions that were created by Congress to examine future needs and options for the surface transportation programs. But he said that some areas of early consensus have fallen apart, and the challenge of finding new revenue in the current political atmosphere is difficult.

Both Van Mark and Kolb said the absence of any recommendations from the Obama administration has hampered progress. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar, D-MN, "has put down the first marker," Kolb said. "The administration has expressed interest but has not said a lot."

Jim Tymon, House Highways and Transit Subcommittee minority staff director, described the White House's lack of a six-year plan for transportation authorization as "problematic." Tymon expressed appreciation that Oberstar put forth an authorization product to work on last summer, but warned that without a revenue solution for the Highway Trust Fund, there is doubt about forward progress.

AASHTO Consultants Describe Authorization Challenges

In an earlier panel featuring a trio of transportation experts who are consultants to AASHTO, Jack Schenendorf, former House transportation committee staff director and member of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, concurred on the hurdles that face enactment of a multi-year authorization. There are some "tough challenges and the path to getting there is unclear," Schenendorf said. "The battle will not be won by the timid. We need boldness and resolution."

Kathy Ruffalo, who served on the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission, said that every action this year in Congress will be on "jobs, jobs, jobs. Everything will be seen from this prism. There will be intense pressure to impact the unemployment rate before the upcoming elections." She added that a multiyear transportation bill is a jobs bill and must be cast in this light.

Environmental expert Bill Malley described the changing legislative perspective on climate-change "cap and trade" legislation, which could influence transportation authorization provisions. He noted that since the Copenhagen international meeting on climate change, momentum has shifted.

Malley identified seven key questions that should be considered if cap-and-trade legislation advances:

1. Are transportation fuels included in the cap?
2. What revenues are directed from cap and trade to transportation systems and what limits will be placed on them?
3. What new transportation planning requirements are included?
4. What are the targets for emission reductions?
5. What is being done to promote cleaner vehicles and fuels?
6. How can we advance this technology through the legislation?
7. What about adaptation?