Republicans were elected to do more than maintain the status quo in Washington. In 2024, voters sent a clear message to rein in federal spending, reduce burdensome regulations, and restore fiscal discipline to a government that has spent decades borrowing from future generations.
Unfortunately, the Surface Transportation Reauthorization legislation — named the BUILD America 250 Act — recently approved by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, runs counter to these objectives, and conservatives should take a hard look at this legislation.
No one disputes the importance of maintaining America’s roads, rails, bridges, ports, and transportation networks. Infrastructure is a core government responsibility, and investments in transportation are essential to economic growth and interstate commerce. But supporting infrastructure does not require supporting every transportation bill that comes before Congress.
At roughly $580 billion over five years, the bill represents one of the largest transportation authorizations in American history. At a time when the national debt exceeds $40 trillion, and annual deficits continue to soar, Congress should be asking how to do more with existing resources — not how to authorize hundreds of billions in additional spending.
Fiscal conservatives should be particularly concerned that the legislation continues Washington’s habit of expanding federal commitments far beyond the core mission of maintaining roads and bridges.
One example is the creation of a new federal electric vehicle and plug-in hybrid fee collection system. Supporters argue that EV owners should contribute to the Highway Trust Fund, and there is a legitimate debate to be had about ensuring that all road users pay their fair share.
But rather than pursuing a simple and efficient solution, the bill creates a new federal-state collection apparatus that requires state motor vehicle agencies to act as tax collectors for Washington. States will be required to modify registration systems, establish reporting procedures, transmit revenues, and comply with federal oversight requirements.
To make matters worse, the bill also authorizes federal grants to help states build the bureaucracy necessary to administer it.
Think about that for a moment. Congress is proposing a new federal fee and then spending additional taxpayer dollars to help states create the systems needed to collect that fee. That is precisely the kind of bureaucratic growth that Republicans have spent years criticizing.
Transportation policy should not become an exercise in creating new administrative structures. Yet that is exactly what this provision does.
The same concerns apply to the bill’s approach to transit, passenger rail, and Amtrak funding.
For decades, Amtrak and many transit systems have relied heavily on federal subsidies. Yet instead of asking whether these programs should become more self-sustaining, Congress continues to authorize billions of additional dollars for programs that remain dependent on taxpayer support year after year.
Transit systems primarily serve local and regional needs. Passenger rail projects often provide concentrated benefits to specific geographic areas. Reasonable people can support these services. But it is fair to ask whether taxpayers in every state should continue to subsidize programs that have struggled to demonstrate financial sustainability for generations.
The bill’s inclusion of major portions of the Railway Safety Act is another example of how it departs from conservative principles. Rather than embracing the technological innovation that has helped make America’s freight rail network one of the safest and most efficient in the world, these provisions layer on costly federal mandates that threaten to slow innovation and increase costs throughout the supply chain.
Even House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Sam Graves (R., Mo.) opposed adding the provisions during the committee markup, warning that they would cost Americans “billions,” while ignoring the safety gains made possible by new technologies.
The Trump administration demonstrated that infrastructure projects can be delivered faster and at lower cost when Washington removes unnecessary barriers and streamlines permitting — though of course there’s more to be done here. Americans are tired of projects that take years to approve and even longer to complete.
Republicans should be building on that success by simplifying programs, reducing red tape, and returning decision-making authority closer to states and local communities — without federal dollars or strings attached.
This approach of constantly creating new grant programs where Washington politicians with campaign incentives decide which projects get funded is turning back the clock to the corrupt days of the earmark process. State and local officials — and the general public — should be incorporated into a transparent, competitive, multi-layer process that removes the ability for individual congressmen to dole out favors to allies.
Conservatives do not oppose infrastructure. We oppose waste. We oppose bureaucracy. We oppose the idea that every transportation challenge requires a new federal program, a new grant initiative, a new tax, or a new layer of regulation.
The modernized transportation system that America needs is one that moves people and goods efficiently, supports economic growth, and respects taxpayers. Achieving that goal requires fiscal restraint, regulatory reform, and a renewed focus on core infrastructure priorities.
Republicans have an opportunity to produce a transportation bill that reflects the principles they campaigned on and the mandate voters delivered. Before this legislation moves any further, Congress should return to the drawing board and produce a bill worthy of those principles.
Paul Teller, President of Teller Strategies, spent more than 15 years working for U.S. House and Senate conservatives and all four years in the Trump-Pence White House.
