As the days until the Aug. 5 election become fewer, supporters and opponents of the proposed Constitutional Amendment 7 have become more vocal of their positions on television and radio.
Last week, Missourians for Safe Transportation and New Jobs launched a statewide television advertising campaign emphasizing, in the words of former state Rep. Jewell Patek, R-Chillicothe, "the transportation and safety crisis facing Missouri's infrastructure."
The opposition group, Missourians for Better Transportation Solutions, will be doing a large mailing in the St. Louis area of likely August voters and a large-scale automated call to other areas throughout the state, said Thomas Shrout, the group's treasurer.
The main contention between these two groups is not the 800 projects that would be addressed by the $5.4 billion of revenue generated by the three-fourths of a cent sales tax. Instead, it is whether the proposed funding mechanism, a sales tax, is really the best way to generate the needed revenue to address the transportation issues facing Missouri.
Shrout said his group believes the proposed sales tax is "fundamentally wrong." Shrout also said there are other alternatives that have not been considered that would generate a similar amount of revenue for transportation projects.
"Congress has been discussing the prospects of raising the federal motor fuel tax, and we haven't discussed raising the state's motor fuel tax (of 17 cents) to the national average (to 20.51 cents)," Shrout said. "These ideas should be fully explored, before we decide to start taxing Missourians."
Shrout also said there were also discussions that the federal government could permit the Missouri Department of Transportation to make Interstate 70 into a toll road that need to be followed up on.
Patek said the opposition group has not introduced "any plausible suggestions or alternatives that would generate the level of funding" in the state legislature, in an initiative petition, or in their own advertising that would accomplish all of the projects on the list.
"We began working on addressing this transportation crisis in 2008, and we had heard nothing from the opposition group about any alternatives," Patek said. "That is until about a month ago, when they went on the attack. Frankly, Missourians deserve better than someone who is going to attack and not offer solutions."
Shrout said that in his opinion not every project on the list is as vital as it appears on the list or as supporters claim it to be.
Opponents also point to how the amendment's supporters are not clear in their advertisements and in their claims of job creation and increased safety, an assertion refuted by Patek.
"They say that building roads will generate job growth, but we know that is not true," Shrout said. "Missouri has one of the largest interstate and transportation systems in the country, yet our job growth has consistently lagged behind states with smaller transportation systems. Instead of investing in transportation, we should be investing job preparation and in higher education."
Supporters of the amendment, including the Columbia and Jefferson City chambers of commerce, Missouri Farm Bureau and the AFL-CIO, all say that if the sales tax passes in August it would generate job creation in Missouri's construction industry and provide a boost to the state's economy.
"An overwhelming group of small businesses all-across the state are supporting Amendment 7, because they know how important having good local transportation infrastructure and public transportation is to creating and sustaining job growth," Patek said.
Shrout said the additional rumple strips and shoulders being added to Missouri roadways, often in rural areas, are a small percentage of the total projects and would do little to actually improve the safety for the majority of Missourians.
"MoDOT themselves tweeted out on July 17 that the miles of additional shoulders were designed to allow farm equipment to travel safely," Shrout said. "For Missourians living in St. Louis or Kansas City, why should we have to pay for shoulder improvements on roadways we may never drive, especially when there is no sales or motor fuel tax on farm equipment?"
Patek said opponents' claims are just trying to distract from all the improvements the funds from Amendment 7 would complete.
"Amendment 7 would address the 2,000 bridges that are deemed in poor condition and the additional 20,000 miles of road improvements," Patek said. "Without Amendment 7, none of those issues would be addressed and Missouri would be set ever further back in maintaining and updating our aging infrastructure."
Both Patek and Shrout are confident their respective groups will be celebrating a victory on Aug. 5.
"There has not been the groundswell of people that appear to be in favor of this amendment," Shrout said. "As unscientific as it is, my gut instinct tells me Amendment 7 will not succeed on election day. The public is with us."
Patek said he is not concerned.
"Missourians are naturally cautious individuals," Patek said. "Anytime you are going to try to get them to tax themselves you first have to convince them of the merits of your plan and that's exactly what we have done. The idea of the sales tax has built a high level of consensus by Missourians across the state."
For all their disagreements, there is one thing that both the supporters and opponents agree upon - Missourians will have a plethora of information provided to them by both sides between now and Aug. 5.
"Missourians are smart individuals, we know they will review something like a constitutional amendment and judge it by the proposal's merits," Patek said.