Few issues unite local leaders from states across the ideological spectrum like the prospect of massive trucks, much larger than typical highway tractor-trailers, rumbling down the roads and tearing up infrastructure.
More than 2,200 local government officials like me — from all 50 states, from blue and red bastions and everything in between — joined together recently to let congressional lawmakers know they are dead set against proposals to allow such trucks.
Under consideration as Congress debates the highway bill, the measures would increase the federal weight limits for tractor-trailers from the current 80,000 pounds to as much as 156,000 pounds.
In their group letter to congressional members, the officials stressed that many localities are already struggling to keep up with the backlog of roadway maintenance due to a lack of funds.
“We strongly oppose proposals in Congress that would allow any increase in truck weight or length. Heavier single-trailer trucks or longer double-trailer trucks would only make our current situation worse,” wrote the officials, who include county and municipal officials, public works directors and county engineers.
“Millions of miles of truck traffic operate on local roads and bridges across the country, and any bigger trucks allowed on our Interstates would mean additional trucks that ultimately find their way onto our local infrastructure,” they wrote.
Bigger trucks “would cause significantly more damage to our transportation infrastructure, costing us billions of dollars that local government budgets simply cannot afford, compromising the very routes that American motorists use every day.”
One proposal would create a 10-year “pilot project” allowing 91,000-pound trucks on the roads. Another would permit trucks hauling automobiles to operate permanently at 88,000 pounds. Another would let any governor declare a “crisis” and raise maximum truck weights on interstates — an authority that only the president currently has. And another would dramatically expand where massive log trucks are allowed to operate. Log trucks can weigh as much as 156,000 pounds, 38 tons more than the current weight limit.
Studies have shown that heavier and longer trucks damage infrastructure, especially bridges. Putting specifics on the potential damage, a study earlier this year by the Coalition Against Bigger Trucks found that various proposals would cause major damage to as many as 82,457 bridges.
Should Congress increase the weight limit of trucks to 88,000 pounds, the report concluded that 65,157 local bridges will be at risk, with a replacement cost of $70.6 billion. If Congress approves a truck limit of 91,000 pounds, the number of at-risk bridges jumps to 68,654 with a replacement cost of $78.7 billion. And with limits pushed to 97,000 pounds, 82,457 bridges are at risk, costing $98.5 billion to replace.
The vast damage to infrastructure is bipartisan — red and blue states would get hammered. The states with the highest potential bridge replacement costs include Arkansas, California, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Jersey, Ohio, Oregon, Virginia and Washington, the report found.
None of the various proposals to increase truck size includes additional funding for infrastructure.
It’s not just local officials from around the country standing together to ward off bigger trucks. For starters, the U.S. Department of Transportation, in its 2016 Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Limits Study, recommended against any such increases.
In addition, many groups are opposed to the measures due to safety issues associated with bigger trucks, including numerous law enforcement organizations and many of the people who drive big rigs. The Owner-Operator Drivers Association, the Truckload Carriers Association and the Teamsters oppose bigger trucks.
Only major corporations stand to profit as they seek to reduce shipping costs, leaving local governments and their taxpayers to foot the bill.
“The proposals would destroy our aging, failing roadways and bridges,” said Rick Bailey, commissioner for Johnson County, Texas. “If lawmakers approve bigger trucks, Congress would be creating yet another unfunded mandate pushed onto local governments and taxpayers. That is not right.”
Jeff Krueger is a township supervisor for New Market Township, Minn.