The odd thing about this argument is that even if the House gets all of the general fund money it wants in its budget standoff with Huntsman, it still will have to raise taxes to build the roads Utah needs. Either that or gut the rest of the state budget. You know, things like education and Medicaid.

So rather than bickering with each other over a few tens of millions of dollars, state leaders should begin the tax increases that will be necessary to raise billions of dollars in new highway and transit funding over the next 10 years.

They should start by raising the motor fuels tax, popularly called the gasoline tax, by 5 cents per gallon this session.

Instead, legislators and the governor are arguing over much smaller stakes. The House Republicans want to spend $85 million in new, ongoing money on roads. Gov. Huntsman has proposed only $33 million in one-time money.

But assume, for the sake of argument, that the House is right, that it wins the budget battle, and roads get all $85 million. Regional transportation planners say that the state needs $4.1 billion over the next 10 years beyond current revenues to keep up with the state's growth in population and miles driven. It needs another $2.1 billion for mass transit.

Another $85 million annually, as the House proposes, would put only $850 million over 10 years toward highways. That's a drop in the oil drum. Even if the economy improves dramatically over that period, the existing tax structure will not be adequate to raise the needed highway funds.

A 5-cent increase in the fuel tax would raise an estimated $821 million over 10 years. A 10-cent increase would raise double that. That still would not be enough, which is why regional planning agencies have recommended a whole menu of additional tax increases that could include applying the general sales tax to motor fuels ($1.2 billion), indexing the fuels tax for inflation ($749 million), a 5-cent county-option fuels tax on the Wasatch Front ($377 million), and increasing registration fees by $20 ($473 million).

Obviously, as a comprehensive package, these tax hikes are DOA on Capitol Hill. But legislators are going to have to do something beyond the status quo, or their constituents are going to find themselves spending more hours every day in traffic jams.

Isn't that why we don't all want to live in Denver or Los Angeles?