HIGHWAYS: THIS IS THE TIME FOR SOME BOLD ACTION

Last summer, Jim Talent, the St. Louis congressman who will be the Republican nominee for Missouri governor this fall, proposed a bold plan to fix Missouri's highway woes. For months there was virtually no debate or discussion -- until the General Assembly convened in January. Promptly, House and Senate Democrats began the sincerest form of flattery: imitation. Lawmakers in both houses introduced bond proposals differing in many ways from the Talent proposal.

The House version has made it through that chamber and will come before the Senate. It would allow the state to sell $2 billion in bonds over six years, with $500 million becoming available as early as July.

Projects funded by the bonds would be subject to approval by the General Assembly. The bonds are to be paid off within 25 years (the Senate version calls for a 15-year year payoff). The House proposal also caps the amount of fuel-tax money that goes to other state agencies such as the highway patrol and the Department of Public Safety.

Another key benefit of the House plan is that it is tied to completion of the Missouri Department of Transportation's original 15-year highway plan. A majority coalition of Republicans and rural Democrats succeeded in putting this in the proposal over the objections of the Missouri Highway and Transportation Commission. The commission, all of whose members were appointed by Gov. Mel Carnahan, abandoned the plan in 1998 in favor of a shift of funding to urban areas.

Plenty of questions remain on the bond plans. Example: How will the bonds in any of the proposals currently under consideration be repaid? Both the plan currently making its way through the Legislature and the Talent plan suggest no tax increase would be needed. But MoDOT officials say it's impossible to come up with a plan -- without a tax increase -- that doesn't simply take future highway revenue and spend it all now.

Certainly the meek $2 billion plan would put less of a financial burden on the state. But it wouldn't come close to addressing the major highway needs in Missouri. Legislators in support of this plan say that's OK, because what we really need is a long-range plan that would cost billions more and, more than likely, require hefty tax increases. The $2 billion plan, they say, is just a Band-Aid.

That's not good enough.

The Talent plan addresses the urgent need for huge funding commitments to highways over the next 10 years. His plan would not only fund all of the projects that were listed in the 15-year plan, but it also would incorporate some other key needs such as county bridge-replacement programs. It even covers needs identified by Governor Carnahan's Total Transportation Commission, which came up with a lot of spending ideas but concluded significant tax increases would be needed to pay the bills.

Bottom line: The Talent plan has been thoroughly thought out. The voluminous details of his plan are far too specific to list here. But highlights include using general-obligation bonds, bonds from a federal program that earmarks highway dollars for repayment, plus a committed funding stream from state revenue to pay for the ambitious program.

In short, Talent's plan turns on a philosophical commitment to generate millions of dollars in highway-department efficiencies plus moving $100 million a year out of general revenue into the highway department on top of existing MoDOT funding. Is this possible? In a boom economy when the state is having to refund millions of dollars, it is obvious the state can afford to pay for highway needs as long as prudent priorities are maintained. If the economy sours, the bond program would be suspended.

To get the highways Missourians were promised when state fuel-tax increases were imposed, it will be necessary to think beyond the limited vision of current highway officials and state leaders who are too timid to do what's necessary to get the job done. And Talent's plan will, without a doubt, depend on the election of a Republican governor and a Republican majority in the Legislature.