OTA Dispatch Issue 3 2019

20 Oregon Trucking Associations, Inc. Oregon Truck Dispatch amongst the states. Oregon’s share totals $72.9 million. Now, if Oregon does not complete their Environmental Mitigation Plan and spend these funds, they forfeit them back to the trust and they are divided to other states. In 2017, lawmakers directed $18 million to replace 450 older diesel school buses. By 2019, they had about $50 million burning a hole in their collective pockets. After countless negotiations, HB 2007 looks quite different. Most notably, the bill now applies only to the Portland tri- county region and relies on vehicle registration as a flexible method identifying older vehicles and distributing grant funds. The bill also exempts a long list of vehicles like log trucks, farm vehicles, or fleets of five or less. The timeline is long enough to allow some fleet turnover to occur naturally, and the bill provides an adequate level of funding for those looking to upgrade their fleets in the Portland region. While the bill started as all stick and little carrot, it is now an effective way to distribute VW incentive funds to the Oregon trucking companies without burdening the entire industry. Cap and trade ( HB 2020 ) was another flagship item for Democrats and it remained in the spotlight from the beginning of session until adjournment. With supermajorities in each chamber, they were clearly confident based on their rhetoric within the Capitol. HB 2020 appeared to be pre-ordained by party leadership, who consistently touted the measure as “inevitable,” a “moral imperative,” and “absolutely going to pass this session.” The bill sought to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by creating a “cap” on emissions and requiring regulated entities to buy allowances from the state. While it is a very confusing program, it would essentially create a stock market of sorts, with just one stock—carbon allowances. As time went on and the “cap” became more stringent, the carbon allowance price would inevitably increase. This scheme is designed to simply make fossil fuels more expensive and encourage people to change behavior and adopt alternative energy sources. It came as no surprise then, when lawmakers flatly refused to allow any type of accommodations to motor fuel users during negotiations. Manufacturers and utilities were treated quite differently, and were set to receive exemptions, free allowances, and delayed implementation under the program. It made little difference to lawmakers that Oregon just increased transportation taxes by 53% over eight years under House Bill 2017 . They did not blink at the prospect of these costs compounding with the Low Carbon Fuel Standard. And they remained unfazed when they learned that they would surely put Oregon carriers at a disadvantage when Oregon is already the #1 most expensive state in the nation for trucking. The rigid negotiation posture taken by Democrats on HB 2020 stems from several key issues. First, many within the Democrat caucus are ‘true believers’ in what they perceive as the pending climate Armageddon. They believe any program that does not fully capture and penalize fossil fuels is not worth their time. Second, Democrats fell prey to the sunk-cost fallacy this session. They believe they have spent substantial time touring the state, engaging stakeholders, holding hearings, and drafting the bill, and that this time and effort would be wasted unless they passed their final product— HB 2020 . The problem with this reasoning is that none of the true groundwork was ever done regarding transportation, and transportation is arguably the most important aspect of HB 2020 . Did they tour the state and seek input? Certainly. But they largely ignored the massive number of Oregonians who appeared to oppose the measure. Did they do their diligence? Simply put, no. Cap and trade proponents largely boxed out dissenting voices concerned with the potential negative impacts the program would have on transportation in Oregon. While the first two points partially explain the Democrat’s motivations, it should come as no surprise that what was really at stake under House Bill 2020 was money. As we peel back the layers of HB 2020 , we see that it is a sophisticated attempt to launder money out of the Highway Trust Fund. The bill sought to bring all motor fuel users into the program under the guise that those tax funds would be continuously protected within the Highway Trust Fund. However, lawmakers inserted a provision which provided for immediate, expedited review to the Oregon Supreme Court to rule on how these new funds could be constitutionally spent. With one unfavorable ruling, proponents would now have at their disposal hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars per year, and instead of dedicating them to roads and bridges, they could go to any pet project they see fit. House Bill 2020 continued to weave through the legislative process, with drama at every turn. When the Legislative Revenue Office released a report in late May illustrating the devastating impact HB 2020 would have on transportation funding, proponents largely scoffed and pressed onward. When it appeared Democrats did not have the votes to move the bill out of Joint Ways and Means, President Courtney unceremoniously Cap and trade ( HB 2020 ) was another flagship item for Democrats and it remained in the spotlight from the beginning of session until adjournment. With supermajorities in each chamber, they were clearly confident based on their rhetoric within the Capitol. 2019 Oregon Legislature, cont.