Kenneth Orski, editor and publisher of Innovation NewsBriefs, examines how state governments are beginning to accept more responsibility for transportation funding.

The Obama Administration's fiscal year 2016 budget proposal has been declared a nonstarter by Republicans in Congress.

The proposed budget would fund infrastructure through a mandatory 14 percent tax on accumulated overseas earnings of U.S. companies (regardless of whether the earnings are repatriated or not). The proposal's powerful list of opponents includes Senate Finance Committee Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and House Ways and Means Committee Paul Ryan (R-WI). According to Senator Hatch, repatriation of corporate earnings may be a legitimate component of true tax reform, but it should not be used as an excuse for extravagant spending. Instead, any taxes on foreign earnings should be used to reduce the debt or to pay for structural changes in the tax code.

The administration's proposal would bring in $238 billion which, combined with $240 billion from the Highway Trust Fund, would fund a $478 billion six-year surface transportation bill. At $80 billion a year, the program would be spending twice as much as under current law.

While some observers believe there is still a possibility of an eventual compromise on corporate tax reform, the expiration of the current transportation bill at the end of May might require Congress to look for more immediate ways of funding the surface transportation program.