The stakes have been raised for a fuel tax proposal that appeared to be gaining momentum in Missouri.
Like the mythical Icarus - who plunged to his death after daring to fly too close to the sun with waxen wings - the Senate sponsor's increased tax creates a new possibility for failure.
The Senate this week endorsed a bill by Sen. Doug Libla, R-Poplar Bluff, to raise the motor fuels tax, now 17 cents a gallons, by 5.9 cents.
A previous incarnation of Libla's bill would have hiked the tax 1.5 cents for gasoline and 3.5 cents for diesel. That proposal would have required legislative approval and the governor's signature.
The revised, nearly 6-cent proposal, however, would add an extra step - approval by a statewide vote.
We have no quarrel with submitting a fuel-tax increase to voters; our point is the increase also raises the risk of extending inattention to transportation funding.
Missouri's fuel tax has remained unchanged since 1996. The state's 34,000 miles of roads and 10,400 bridges make up the seventh-largest highway system in the nation, but revenues rank 46th among the states.
During last week's Senate debate, Libla said: "Continued neglect of our maintenance and bridge construction will have very expensive, long-lasting effects."
Even opponents of the tax do not dispute Libla's observation. Their opposition is based primarily on the contention government must learn to live within its means.
We don't quarrel with that philosophy, either. But, realistically, continued infrastructure deterioration impedes travel, commerce and development.
Legislators and administrators were galvanizing around the concept of taking a modest financing step as a means of generating momentum for additional steps.
That approach also raises questions: Will the public think an incremental step has solved the entire problem and reject subsequent proposals? Would the public have approved a larger tax hike? Do other revenue-raising opportunities exist?
Such questions can result in endless second-guessing, which likely will occupy lawmakers as the proposal continues along its legislative path; final Senate approval is required to advance the bill to the House.
Proposed tax increases travel on waxen wings. Perhaps we're over-cautious, but we would not have raised the stakes and heightened the risk of failure.