What happens when there’s no road to kick the can down?

The recent Amtrak tragedy likely caused a shared feeling of anxiety across party lines in Washington, D.C. Leaders on both sides of the aisle and both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, we imagine, quietly hoped their own actions — or lack thereof — didn’t somehow contribute to the loss of life for some and serious injury for others.

What a shame that it can take a disaster to remind elected officials that their political stalemates can have devastating human consequences.

Even if the Amtrak accident is not linked to any type of federal infrastructure shortcoming, the moment of anxiety that rippled across Washington is important because it provided a moment of perspective. Leaders can certainly agree their own political differences should never put American travelers at risk of injury or death. This point of common-sense agreement should serve as the starting point for negotiations on infrastructure funding and strategy — a timely debate, with the Highway Trust Fund on a mere 60-day extension through the end of July and summer a critical construction season.

It used to be that spending on infrastructure, especially roads, was an area of agreement across party lines in Washington. And while we believe the environment for solving problems is improving inside the beltway, it’s disheartening to see Congress choosing to kick the Highway Trust Fund can down the road by passing a two-month patch before going on recess.

As is often the case in Washington these days, disagreements about how to make the Highway Trust Fund solvent are getting in the way of any real progress. The president would like to find the money in corporate tax revenue. Others would like to increase the gas tax — the fund’s traditional source of revenue. There are opponents to every idea, of course. Businesses are unlikely to welcome more taxes, but raising the gas tax is unpopular with many, as every American, and every business, who uses a car or truck, motorcycle or tractor, would be impacted.

These understandable disagreements should not stand in the way of solving the underlying problem. Disagreements always exist; they should not be the equivalent of a veto. We, America, can do better. And we can get there by setting shared goals at the start of the process.

Starting with the disagreement is the real problem in this debate, and in so many other debates in our nation’s capital. We set goals for the sake of progress every day in our personal lives. Without this process of goal setting, we wouldn’t be able to decide the simplest things in life — like what to have for dinner or what shoes to buy for our children.

Sometimes, there is clear agreement on the goal, making the job easier. We believe this is true for the Highway Trust Fund. There is bipartisan consensus that we require an updated, safe and efficient highway system for our shared needs. We agree no one should die or be injured because the government couldn’t agree on how to pay for the work and materials it takes to fill a pothole or repair the trusses of a bridge or replace broken railroad tracks.

Surely our leaders can agree on fixing the roads. After all, what else will they use to kick their cans down?

Huntsman was governor of Utah from 2005 to 2009, ambassador to Singapore from 1992 to 1993 and ambassador to China from 2009 to 2011. Bayh represented Indiana in the Senate from 1999 to 2011 and was governor of Indiana from 1989 to 1997. Huntsman is a co-chairman and Bayh is a co-founder of No Labels, a national movement dedicated to a new process for bipartisan problem-solving in Washington, D.C.