🔒Transportation Climate Initiative provides insufficient value to taxpayers

The General Assembly’s Environment Committee has put Connecticut motorists one step closer to paying even more for what are already among the highest gasoline and diesel taxes in the country with their approval of Senate Bill 884, a Gov. Lamont-endorsed bill authorizing the state to enter the Transportation & Climate Initiative Program (TCI-P).

Under the guise of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, TCI-P would suck over $1 billion out of the pockets of residents and businesses over the next 10 years through a gas tax, which would reach up to 9 cents in year one and up to 26 cents in later years.

It would also cede debate of future tax increases from the legislature to out-of-state agencies, making TCI-P the tax that keeps on taxing.

TCI-P is a “cap-and-invest” scheme, designed by a Washington, D.C. think tank called the Georgetown Climate Center, which would require motor fuel distributors to purchase allowances for the fuel they sell to gas stations.

The revenue from those allowance fees would be spent on in-state transportation projects, including 50% for underserved and overburdened communities. In reality, the cost would be paid by you, the motorist, when they are baked into the price you pay for fuel — just like every tax and fee is baked in today.

Gov. Lamont is on record saying the fee will be capped at 5 cents, but he cannot make that claim because the cost of the allowance fee is set at auction, which is open to industry and non-industry participants, not by him, the legislature nor Connecticut agencies.

There is a cost-containment process, but Georgetown’s own modeling shows the fee could rise to 26 cents per gallon by the end of the 10-year period.

Despite how you feel about climate change, TCI-P is not good value for the taxpayer. Georgetown’s own modeling in a March report found that up to 25.7% of the 26% reduction in emissions the plan claims to achieve will be met independently of TCI under existing state and federal programs.

So, for $1 billion, taxpayers will extract a measly 0.3% of transportation emissions reduction. Not publicly acknowledging this important detail, nor the lack of price control at the pump reeks of climate fearmongering for the state’s financial benefit. Taxpayers now must hope their elected officials can see past this environmental red herring for the very expensive gas tax it truly is.

Despite insufficient programmatic detail and spurious claims, Connecticut signed a memorandum of understanding to join TCI-P, a questionable decision considering 9 of the original 13 jurisdictions chose not to sign on.

Other states rightly recognized a variety of reasons to reject TCI-P, including poor overall value of the program, an unwillingness to saddle taxpayers with overwhelming administrative costs, anxiety over meddling with a highly evolved and complex fuel distribution network, and anticipation of federal regulatory activity.

Fortunately, the Connecticut legislature must vote to have Connecticut officially enter TCI-P. The motoring taxpayers of Connecticut can only hope their leaders see through this emissions reduction facade and recognize TCI-P for what it really is: a very expensive, ever-increasing gas tax and an abdication of the legislature’s voice on any future gas tax debate.

Jonathan Shaer is executive director of the New England Convenience Store and Energy Marketers Association.