Ohio Rep. Steve LaTourette, left, at a press event with local auto dealers last year. Image: Plain Dealer

They’re betting the Republican majority in the House will “investigate, slow and try to block Obama administration initiatives that it considers detrimental to the auto industry” – initiatives like “safety legislation, the new consumer finance agency’s regulations, fuel economy proposals and the EPA’s new ethanol standard.”

Auto industry lobbyists are looking forward to two years of gridlock. They think their bargaining power is now strong enough to get them a seat at the negotiating table on things like safety legislation, resulting, they hope, in smaller penalties for violators. They’re worried about new standards for brake-override systems and black-box crash data recorders. According to Automotive News:

The auto safety bill crafted in the wake of Toyota’s unintended-acceleration problems is going nowhere as long as Republicans control the House, predicted Dave McCurdy, CEO of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

They’re also glad Republicans will rule as the House oversees the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency chief, Elizabeth Warren. Oh, and “the EPA’s decision last month to let refiners blend as much as 15 percent ethanol into gasoline, up from the current 10 percent” – they’re looking forward to letting House Republicans take care of that one too. Indeed, the auto industry has reason to believe it will have access to politicians in this Congressional session – after all, they bought it.

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the industry spent $9.3 million on campaign contributions in 2009-2010, including spending by individuals and PACs. Sixty-nine percent of the money went to Republicans. They got pretty good bang for their buck, too: of the 20 candidates they gave the most money to, 15 won. And of the five that didn’t, well, even most of those went okay for the industry.

For example, automakers and dealers gave $112,100 to Charlie Crist’s failed campaign for Senate in Florida. But they also gave $45,250 to the man who defeated him, Marco Rubio.

And sure, they gave a chunk of change to Tom Ganley, who first opposed Rob Portman in the GOP Ohio Senate primary and then dropped out of that race to try (unsuccessfully) to unseat Rep. Betty Sutton (D-OH). Ganley runs the largest automotive group in Ohio and largely self-financed his campaign. He may have lost, but both of the candidates that beat him were also automotive industry victories.

Sutton ranks number 16 in auto industry favorites in the House, bringing in almost $31,000 this year in contributions from the industry. And Senator-elect Rob Portman was the number one recipient of car money, raking in $163,275. Maybe that was the deciding factor in Portman’s stunning come-from-behind victory – Portman went from trailing his Democratic opponent after the primary to an 18-point win in November.

Photo: Pufferfish

The Center's work directly answers a question asked by many attendees at last week's University of Virginia infrastructure conference: How can the public be awakened to the relevance and political importance of transportation as an issue?

Unfortunately for the elite industry players who attended the conference, the answer may be that the public isn't yet aware of just how much waste is built into state and federal transportation spending. From the Center's initial report:

The matter of how and from where the federal money is actually doled out is among the biggest headaches. The majority of federal dollars for these various transportation programs actually get distributed to state and local governments to be spent at their discretion. But that has caused problems.

For one thing, wrote the Government Accountability Office last year, “Rigorous economic analysis does not generally drive the investment decisions of state and local governments.” That was an understatement. Most state transportation agencies surveyed by the GAO in 2004 — 34 out of 43 — called political support and public opinion “very important” when investing federal dollars. Only eight states attributed the same importance to cost-benefit analyses.

With the debate in Congress currently focused not on how to reform the bloated, broken system but how long to delay reform, it's unclear whether the Center's findings can move the needle in the short term.

But that all-but-certain postponement of the next federal transportation bill makes today's report all the more shocking. Anyone who reads it will find no reason to support 12 or 18 more months of federal transportation funding distributed through an unaccountable system of state DOTs.

Like Mr. Paterson and Mr. Skelos, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver now Albany's longest-serving leader drew heavily from established interest groups, including trial lawyers, the insurance industry, banking interests and an array of labor unions. Mr. Silver also received money from some groups that opposed Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg's plan to charge a fee for cars entering parts of Manhattan, including limousine services and rental car companies. Though Mr. Silver said he personally supported the idea, he did not allow it to come up for a vote in the Assembly.

You can add to that partial list car dealers, service stations, parking garages, and private bus companies, which opposed the idea of pricing until an exception was brokered for them late in the game. All told, Silver collected $308,044 from contributors in the latest six-month fundraising period, outpacing challengers Newell and Henry by a (predictably) wide margin.

Here's a rundown of major donations to his campaign from groups who sided against pricing or influenced the proposed legislation.

Note that most of the contributions were given before the Assembly's Democratic conference scuttled the pricing bill in a closed-door session. (Groups are located within the state of New York unless otherwise noted.)

• GREATER NY AUTO DEALERS ASSOC.: $3800, March 19
• BLACK CAR PAC: $2500, March 19
• UNITED BUS CORPORATION: $2500, March 14
• HUNTINGTON COACH, LLC: $2500, March 14
• KENSINGTON ENTERPRISES LLC (parking garage): $2000, March 19
• VANGUARD CAR RENTAL USA INC. (Tulsa, OK): $1500, May 16
• SYLVAN FORESTER GARAGE, LLC: $1000, March 19
• CHAMPION PARKING 36 LLC: $1000, March 19
• ENTERPRISE RENT A CAR NY PAC: $1000, March 19

The Post finds that Queens City Council Member David Weprin has been raking in campaign contributions from parking garage owners, all the while serving as one of the loudest critics of Mayor Bloomberg's congestion pricing plan. This ought to sound familiar to Streetsblog readers. Back in May we found that Weprin had taken in at least $20,500 in contributions from the parking lobby. The Post identified an additional twenty grand:

Records show that David Weprin, chairman of the City Council Finance Committee, received 28 contributions totaling $40,650 from garage companies and their owners. Garage operators are worried about losing customers if the city imposes an $8-a-day fee on cars entering Manhattan, and they want to stop the mayor's plan in its tracks.

Austin Shafran, a Weprin spokesman, said the contributions had "absolutely nothing to do with his opposition to congestion pricing."

A survey conducted last week by The Queens Tribune found only two of 27 Queens state legislators who backed the mayor's plan. But one key Queens legislator, Rep. Joseph Crowley, who also serves as the Queens Democratic chairman, is in the mayor's corner. The Metropolitan Parking Association, which represents 800 lots and garages, contributed $5,000 last year to the Queens Democratic Party.

In this May 10 op-ed for the Queens Courier, Weprin argues that his Eastern Queens constituents will be "devastated" by congestion pricing.

Photo: Larry Greenberg, QCLDA