[Senate Hearing 111-1227]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 111-1227
THE IMPORTANCE OF TRANSPORTATION
INVESTMENTS TO THE NATIONAL ECONOMY
AND JOBS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 3, 2010
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
21-164 PDF WASHINGTON : 2016
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman
MAX BAUCUS, Montana JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey DAVID VITTER, Louisiana
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont MIKE CRAPO, Idaho
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee
TOM UDALL, New Mexico
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon
KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York
ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania
Bettina Poirier, Staff Director
Ruth Van Mark, Minority Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
MARCH 3, 2010
OPENING STATEMENTS
Boxer, Hon. Barbara, U.S. Senator from the State of California... 1
Inhofe, Hon. James M., U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma... 2
Cardin, Hon. Benjamin L., U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland 4
Bond, Hon. Christopher S., U.S. Senator from the State of
Missouri....................................................... 7
Klobuchar, Hon. Amy, U.S. Senator from the State of Minnesota.... 10
Voinovich, Hon. George V., U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio... 100
WITNESSES
Rahn, Pete K., Director, Missouri Department of Transportation,
on behalf of the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials....................................... 11
Prepared statement........................................... 13
Response to an additional question from Senator Vitter....... 62
Buechner, William R., Vice President, Economics and Research,
American Road and Transportation Builders Association.......... 63
Prepared statement........................................... 65
Responses to additional questions from Senator Vitter........ 83
Poupore, Raymond J., Executive Vice President, National
Construction Alliance II....................................... 86
Prepared statement........................................... 88
Foss, Tom, President and Chief Operating Officer, Griffith
Company, on behalf of the Associated General Contractors of
America........................................................ 92
Prepared statement........................................... 94
THE IMPORTANCE OF TRANSPORTATION INVESTMENTS TO THE NATIONAL ECONOMY
AND JOBS
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 3, 2010
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The full Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m.
in room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Barbara Boxer
(chairman of the full Committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Boxer, Inhofe, Bond, Voinovich, Cardin,
Whitehouse, Klobuchar, and Merkley.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
Senator Boxer. Good morning, everybody, and thank you so
much for being here.
This is the first in a series of hearings to spotlight
important areas of focus in the process of authorizing surface
transportation programs. Today's hearing will examine the ways
transportation investment creates and preserves jobs and
increases America's economic competitiveness.
We know transportation infrastructure investment is a
proven jobs creator. According to the DOT, every $1 billion in
Federal funds for transportation that is matched by State and
local funds supports 34,700 jobs. According to a recent report
by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, AASHTO, more than 280,000 direct jobs have been
created or sustained at projects across the country as a result
of the highway and transit funding in the American Recovery and
Reinvestment Act.
On February 19th Transportation Secretary LaHood and I
toured a facility in Los Angeles where workers are providing
preventive maintenance service to city buses through L.A.
Metro's Bus Mid-Life Program, replacing engines and fuel
cylinders, refurbishing interiors and wheelchair lifts, and
repainting older buses to improve their safety, performance and
reliability.
A Federal investment of $47 million under ARRA is giving
these buses a new lease on life, and it is keeping 97 workers
on the job. These workers and their families and thousands like
them across the country are the real beneficiaries of Federal
investments that are putting Americans back to work,
strengthening our economy, and rebuilding the infrastructure
that keeps our country moving.
Transportation investments not only create and sustain jobs
in the short term; they help us with economic recovery. They
also provide benefits to America's families and businesses
every day, including shortened travel and commuting times,
increased productivity, and improved safety. Infrastructure
investments also enhance the productivity of business and
individuals by reducing disruptions that waste money, time and
fuel and undermine our competitiveness.
In the coming weeks, we will be considering many important
aspects of the surface transportation authorization, including,
among other topics, Federal, State and local partnerships to
accelerate transportation benefits, mobility and congestion in
urban and rural America, and transportation's impact on the
environment.
The next highway transit and highway safety authorization
provides an opportunity to take a fresh look at these programs
and make the changes necessary to ensure our transportation
system will meet America's needs in the coming years. At the
end of the day, it is a matter of setting the right priorities
and crafting innovative and effective means to address them.
As the Chairman of this Committee, I want to acknowledge
the bipartisan support that I have received in this whole area
of transportation and infrastructure. It really warms my heart
because, as we know, it is hard to find those areas of
agreement these days, but this is one area where there has been
much agreement.
I also want to say that I am encouraged that the House is
taking up the reauthorization of this SAFETEA-LU bill on
Thursday under suspension of the rules. And if we can get two-
thirds vote, then we put this whole thing to bed, this 1-year
extension, which will give certainty to all of our States. If
they don't get the votes under suspension of the rules, we have
other ways. They can go issue a rule and go the regular route,
but we are hopeful, and we could use all the help that we can
get here from Members of the Senate calling our colleagues over
there, and of course outside groups as well. And we can get
that to bed, then we can fully concentrate on the
reauthorization, and this is my hope.
So job creation is my top priority, and I am grateful,
again, to colleagues on both sides of the aisle for their great
interest in moving forward together on a transformational
transportation bill that makes the investments necessary to
ensure our long-term prosperity.
And with that, I will call on Senator Inhofe, the Ranking
Member.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
And you know, what she says is right. We sometimes disagree
on other issues in this Committee. This Committee has such an
incredible jurisdiction. It has the largest jurisdiction of any
Committee in the U.S. Senate. It takes two Committees in the
House to do what we have in our jurisdiction, so there are
areas of disagreement.
This area, and I am proud to say that as someone who just 5
days ago was--the National Journal said I was the most
conservative and rated me No. 1 and the most conservative one,
and yet I tell them hastily that in a couple of areas--national
defense and infrastructure--I am a big spender. That is what we
are supposed be doing here.
Now, I had an opening statement I was going to give because
I didn't know we would be able to get to the point last night
that we got, so I feel a little better. We have in the audience
today Gary Ridley. He has testified before this Committee,
Madam Chairman. He is our Transportation Secretary in Oklahoma.
Stand up, Gary. I know Pete is a good friend of yours, and
you work together. And if you were on the panel, I would have
you tell us what a crisis we would have in Oklahoma if we
hadn't been able to do what we did last night.
Now, what the Chairman says is right. We need to take care
of this thing. We did pass legislation out of here, and it
would save us a lot of money, and we would be able to plan in
advance.
Those of us who came here with a business background, it is
mind boggling when you are doing something where you are
dealing 1 month at a time, and we can put a price tag on that,
on what it costs us each month that we are doing it this way.
So I agree with you, Madam Chairman. I am hoping that we will
be able to get this adopted.
I can remember when we did the last major bill in 2005. It
was very successful, but that was a $286.4 billion bill. That
didn't really take care of the maintenance of what we have
right now. That is why I think this Committee--and I know that
most of the Members on this Committee agree with this--we have
to give a higher priority to this.
So while we escaped a crisis, at least in my State of
Oklahoma and I suggest in most other States last night, we
still need to do a better job, and that is what we are going to
be doing.
So thank you, Madam Chair.
[The prepared statement of Senator Inhofe follows:]
Statement of Hon. James M. Inhofe,
U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma
I am relieved the Senate was able to work out a deal last
night on the 30-day extension of the highway program. However,
this is in no way a victory. This simply means that we will go
back to the highway program being funded $1 billion a month
lower than 2009 levels and living with the uncertainty of
short-term extension. In fact, the States won't receive the new
funding provided by this extension for close to a month--just
when this extension is expiring. The House needs to move and
pass the long-term extension the Senate sent over last week.
Before I get into today's hearing, I want to thank my good
friend Gary Ridley, who is Oklahoma's Transportation Secretary,
for coming out to Washington to help resolve this crisis. Gary
is an asset to both Oklahoma and the Nation.
There has been a lot of discussion recently about the
impacts of infrastructure investment on the economy, so I thank
the Chairman for having this hearing to clarify some
misconceptions. For years I have been leading the fight in
Washington for increased investment in transportation and
infrastructure because I believe strongly that no other form of
Government spending is as beneficial to our citizens and the
economy as infrastructure investment.
There is an undeniable link between a robust economy and
strong transportation infrastructure investment. Yet when it
comes to other Federal spending needs, transportation is often
neglected as a priority--one only needs to look at the so-
called ``stimulus'' bill to see evidence of this.
Despite the relatively small amount of highway investment
in the stimulus bill, it is evident that highway investment is
a proven job creator--much more so than any of the other of the
Administration's so-called ``stimulus'' initiatives. Although I
support increased infrastructure investment in any form, it is
important to note that supplemental highway funding in the so-
called ``jobs bill'' is in no way a substitute for the short-
and long-term economic necessity of a multi-year highway bill
re-authorization.
As an author of SAFETEA in 2005, I know first-hand that
infrastructure spending from a new highway bill is one of the
most proven ways to stimulate the economy and create jobs.
However, when we look at the benefits of infrastructure
spending, we often focus solely on the immediate employment and
economic benefits, which is only part of the story. The
greatest impact is over the long run--when the new roads and
bridges add to productivity by improving mobility. I believe
one of the most overlooked aspects of the post-World War II
prosperity was the creation of the interstate highway system.
We simply can't continue to ignore the infrastructure
crisis in this country. The Department of Transportation has
estimated that the maintenance backlog on our Nation's roads
and bridges exceeds $600 billion. I have often said that,
despite its large size, SAFETEA didn't even maintain the system
we have. The previous estimate was just $500 billion--in other
words, increases in the costs of steel, cement and higher
wages, combined with chronic underinvestment, have put us into
an even deeper hole.
We learned in many of our previous hearings that if we
don't take dramatic action, growing congestion and
deteriorating pavement conditions will choke the U.S. economy.
It is understandable in these dire economic times to measure
investment decisions based on immediate results, but if we are
going to continue to be the leader in the global economy, we
need to take a much more strategic approach. We can no longer
rely on transportation infrastructure investments made a
generation ago.
As the rest of the world continues to finance new ports,
highways, and sophisticated rail networks to attract new
commerce, we are falling far behind, and our underinvestment
means that our domestic industries are operating globally at a
competitive disadvantage. If we fail to provide a free flowing
transportation system to accommodate the needs of our economy,
our manufacturing industries will be forced to export their
operations abroad.
I welcome our witnesses, and I look forward to hearing
about their first-hand accounts of infrastructure investment's
impact on the economy as well as the consequences of continued
underinvestment.
Senator Boxer. Thank you, and I agree with everything you
said.
Senator Cardin.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN L. CARDIN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND
Senator Cardin. Well, Madam Chair, first let me give you
some good news. The snow is melting. Spring is around the
corner, and the construction season will be beginning soon in
earnest. So this hearing is particularly timely for this
Committee to exercise its responsibility to make sure that we
have the surface transportation authorizations necessary for
the infrastructure of America and the growth of America.
So I thank you for holding this hearing, and I thank the
witnesses that are here to help us as we start this journey to
enact the next authorization for surface transportation.
I need to, though, start by what happened this week, where
we saw the vulnerability in a lapse in the highway program.
That had immediate impact, and I think we need to underscore
that because before we look at reauthorization we have to make
sure that there is no gap.
Let me, if I might, just quote from two people who talked
about the impact of one Senator blocking the short-term
reauthorization, or short-term continuation. John Horsley,
President of the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, said in response to the block on the
extension, ``It will have a ripple effect throughout the whole
construction world. The jobs we are trying to create through
the stimulus programs are going to be undercut by cancellations
of contracts. There is a consequence in the real world.''
William Millar, President of the American Public Transit
Association said, ``Letting Federal funding for transportation
programs expire at a time when jobs are a national priority is
unthinkable.''
I say that first because we were successful last night in
getting an extension done, and the Chairman is expressing
optimism that we can get the extension through the end of the
year. It is critically important that we have no more lapses in
our transportation authorization programs so that we can
continue this.
And while trust fund extensions are essential for the time
being, all of these SAFETEA-LU 2005 projects and intermediate
ready-to-go projects are nearly complete, and it is time for
new project authorizations.
While our next transportation bill reauthorization could
result in landmark achievements in pavements like the
Appalachia Development Highway System, which is critically
important to the people of Maryland, it is time to increase
development in transit systems, multi-modal infrastructure and
smart growth transportation projects that emphasize
sustainability and livability.
The benefits of these types of projects are many, not the
least of which are jobs associated with transit and smart
growth projects. Building transit systems and retrofitting
community transportation infrastructure will be efficient,
multi-modal transportation systems and create traditional hard
hat and engineering jobs, just like roads and highway projects.
The American Public Transit Association estimates that for
every $1 billion invested in transit, it yields 30,000 jobs.
This includes jobs in bus and rail car manufacturing, an
industry that is very important in America; a variety of high
tech, high paying jobs in software development and design
computer programs for logistics management, fare collection and
safety and security management; the design, procurement and
installation of computer systems to operate these programs, not
to mention the permanent transit operators that are created
when we expand our transit system.
It is lasting jobs that are worth the most to our
communities around the Nation. Transit and increased efficiency
in community transportation systems foster increased economic
development and increase property values.
I am encouraged by President Obama and Secretary LaHood's
recognition of how sustainability and livability and
transportation design play in not only protecting the
environment, but also creating economic sustainability for our
Nation's communities.
So Madam Chair, as we start this process of looking at how
we are going to deal with the next chapter in our surface
transportation, I hope we will take advantage of this to focus
on where we can create jobs, create the type of infrastructure,
but also create the livable communities that are so important
to Americans.
And with that, I look forward to hearing from our
witnesses.
[The prepared statement of Senator Cardin follows:]
Statement of Hon. Benjamin L. Cardin,
U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland
Thank you, Madam Chairman, for holding this hearing this
morning.
As the snow in the region and across the country begins to
melt and with spring just weeks away, State DOTs around the
country are preparing for the 2010 construction season. As
authorizers of Federal funds for surface transportation
projects it is time we get down to work and deliver the means
for our States and counties to get working on the next phase of
transportation projects for our States and regions.
However, before discussing the importance of new road and
transit construction projects we must continue to address the
needs of our State and local Departments of Transportation.
These agencies continue to make progress on existing road and
highway projects using the critical Federal funding we have
provided by way of extending the surface transportation trust
fund in lieu of full reauthorization.
Yet with complete disregard for the needs of the States and
the pay checks of thousands of highway construction workers, we
saw the ability of one Senator to single handedly halt this
progress.
John Hoarsely, President of the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), said in
response to the block on the extension, ``It'll have a ripple
effect throughout the whole construction world . . . The jobs
we are trying to create through the stimulus programs are going
to be undercut by cancellations of contracts . . . There is a
consequence in the real world.''
William Millar, President of the American Public Transit
Association, said, ``Letting Federal funding for transportation
programs expire, at a time when jobs are a national priority,
is unthinkable.''
I am glad we were finally able to pass a short-term
extension of our highway program. At the same time, I am
encouraged that this Committee is focusing attention on the
reauthorization of SAFETEA-LU, because there is terrific
promise in the jobs we will create by authorizing new
transportation projects across the country.
While trust fund extensions are essential for the time
being, all of the SAFETEA-LU 2005 projects and intermediate
``ready to go'' projects are nearly complete, and it is time
for new project authorizations.
Our next transportation bill reauthorization could result
in landmark achievements in pavement--like the completion of
the Appalachian Development Highway System. It is time to look
toward increased development of transit systems, multi-modal
infrastructure and smart growth transportation projects that
emphasize sustainability and livability. The benefits of these
types of projects are many, not the least of which are the jobs
associated with transit and smart growth projects.
Building transit systems and retrofitting community
transportation infrastructure with efficient multi-modal
transport systems create traditional hard-hat and engineering
jobs just like road and highway projects.
The American Public Transit Association estimates that
every billion dollars invested in transit yields 30,000 jobs.
This includes jobs in:
Bus and rail car manufacturing;
A variety of high tech, high paying jobs in software
development to design computer programs for logistics
management, fare collection, and safety and security
management;
Design, procurement and installation of the computer
systems to operate these programs;
Not to mention the permanent transit operations jobs that
are sustained long after a transit project is completed.
It's lasting jobs that are worth the most to communities
around the Nation. Transit and increased efficiency in
community transportation systems foster increased economic
development and increased property values.
I am encouraged by President Obama and Secretary LaHood's
recognition of how sustainability and livability in
transportation design play in not only protecting the
environment but also in creating economic sustainability for
our Nation's communities.
I look forward to the testimony of our witnesses. Thank
you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Boxer. Thank you.
Before I call on Senator Bond, Senator Inhofe wanted to
take the remainder of his time because he has a couple of
minutes remaining.
Senator Inhofe. Very brief. I was reminded by my staff that
while I was ad-libbing my opening statement, I left out
something that was significant that we want to make sure, so
let me just go ahead and put this paragraph in.
I am relieved, as I have said, the Senate was able to work
out a deal last night on a 30-day extension on the highway
program, but this is no way to victory. This simply means that
we will go back to the highway program being funded at $1
billion a month--$1 billion a month lower than 2009 levels, and
living with the uncertainty of short-term extensions, which I
think I implied that.
In fact, the States won't receive the new funding provided
by this extension for close to a month, just when this
extension is expiring. The House needs to move and pass the
long-term extension of the Senate bill, as we have said, and I
think that is right.
The figure that I have from Gary Ridley, Madam Chairman, is
that just in our State of Oklahoma, by doing this on this 30-
day extension thing as opposed to the long-term extension, it
is costing us $160 million over this period of 12 months in my
State of Oklahoma. And I would hope that during the opening
statement of Mr. Rahn that you would kind of share with us what
it is doing in the State of Missouri.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Boxer. Well, Senator, now that you have put this
out so forcefully, I just hope the message gets to the House
Democrats and Republicans. Pass this bill under suspension on
Thursday, please. Please put this behind us because these
delays are really hurting our people back home, all of us,
every one of us, no more than Missouri.
So I would like to call on Senator Bond.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER S. BOND,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MISSOURI
Senator Bond. Thank you, Madam Chair and Senator Inhofe.
The hearing is a great opportunity not only to examine the link
between infrastructure spending and job creation, but also to
understand how transportation policy can help rebuild our
economy.
I personally was very disappointed that the huge stimulus
bill that was passed last year spent an appallingly small
amount on highways and transportation. To me, and I think to
some of my highway friends in Missouri, it was a great
opportunity that we whiffed. It would have put a lot more
people to work. It would have done a lot more for the economy
and had lasting impact.
But I thank the witnesses for coming. Your perspectives are
important. We need to hear from you what is going on in the
States and get a better understanding on what we can do at the
Federal level.
A very special, warm welcome to my old friend, Pete Rahn,
while he is here on behalf of AASHTO. As has been mentioned
several times, he is the Director of Missouri Department of
Transportation, and I would say on his behalf that he is a
popular DOT Director. There have been some in the past who
refused to listen to the people. I found as I traveled the
State prior to Pete's assuming this position that people were
terribly frustrated that the highway priorities were not being
developed at the local level, and Pete has avoided a whole lot
of problems others had by listening. It is amazing how much you
can hear when you listen. I think Yogi Berra may have said
that.
But he has a mantle full of awards for his notable service,
and he is here with some good information. As a self-described
infrastructure conservative, I, like Senator Inhofe, am a big
spender when it comes to fulfilling our major responsibilities
in defense and transportation.
And we know that every billion dollars will generate some
30,000 to 40,000 jobs for every billion spent. But it also
leads to the development of our States. When I was Governor, I
wanted to find out what were the keys to having a growing
community, and it was very clear--if you had good highways, the
town grew, jobs came, people were better off. And it makes a
lasting impact, far beyond the immediate jobs it creates.
AASHTO uses a term, ``economic benefit magnifier,'' and
estimates an average economic benefit over $5 for every dollar
spent, and I would not be surprised. When we build a new
highway, provide access from point A to point B, we create
communities where businesses will want to locate. We can build
bridges and fund transit systems in the middle of nowhere and
still create jobs, but we miss out on the jobs that should be
created.
Unfortunately, over the last year, instead of working
toward a blueprint for our future for our Nation's aging
transportation system, we spent all of our time dealing with
the consequences of inaction. We need a blueprint for improving
and investing in our Nation's transportation system, and
tomorrow's priorities are the ones that will give us the best
bang for our buck.
Unfortunately, that is not where we are today. Here, we all
agree on the economic benefit of infrastructure, but right now
we are missing out on the full extent of those opportunities
because we are operating off a bill that under-funds
yesterday's priorities.
This is why I truly hope, and maybe it is too late to have
that hope, that we could do what we are supposed to do every 5
years and have a real genuine authorization that looks forward
5 years.
Now, some people know the secret that this is my last year
in the Senate, and I would love nothing better than to be able
to work with my colleagues to frame the infrastructure
development for the future, but we will take whatever we can
get. That is why I was one who supported the bill, despite what
were some very real partisan problems with the way it was
structured.
But we can't continue to delay these hard decisions. There
are no easy solutions. But I think we get paid to make the
tough decisions and try to lay out a plan for the future. It is
time to do our job, move forward with a reauthorization bill,
pass a blueprint that will move our transportation system
forward, help our economy grow.
I thank the Chair and the Ranking Member and our witnesses
today for a very, very important message I am confident they
will deliver.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Boxer. Senator Bond, you need to know that this is
the point of the hearing. This is the first hearing on our way
to markup. And I have been working closely with Senator Inhofe,
Senator Voinovich, Members on my side, and our intention is to
hold a series of hearings and then sit down and write the bill
while you are still here, and while Senator Voinovich is still
here. That is a commitment I make to you, and that is a pledge
that I make to you. We do have to do this bill, and we are
going to do it.
And I also want to say that I agree with you that the
stimulus bill did not have enough for infrastructure. As a
matter of fact--although Senator Inhofe, I don't want to get
him in any kind of trouble back home, opposed the stimulus
bill, he worked with me, and we tried to triple the funding for
infrastructure.
I also want the record to show that we did succeed,
Senator, in upping it to $48 billion. Plus we got more funding
through the Build America Bond Program, which in California we
issued billions of Build America bonds, which are also
infrastructure and many States utilize them.
There also was some money for TIGER grants, and in
addition, $8 billion for high speed rail. It still, in the
context of the large bill, was not enough, and I fully agree
with you on that. And I fully agree that this bill that we
write now for the next 5 years has to be robust, and it has to
be clear that this is an economic driver for America.
So I just want you to feel good about that. You will be
part of what we are calling MAP-21, Moving Ahead for Progress
in the 21st Century, and you and Senator Voinovich will be part
of that.
Senator Bond. Well, I like the MAP-21 team better than the
LU bill that we had. I like that idea. I thank you and I
really, I enjoyed working on the 2005 bill. I am sorry my loss
of seniority knocked me out of the position, but I know that
Senator Voinovich will do a good job, and I very, very much
appreciate and thank you for making every effort to see if we
can't go forward this year.
Senator Boxer. We will.
Senator Inhofe.
Senator Inhofe. Let me just quickly respond to what you
said.
Yes, I did oppose the stimulus bill because it didn't
stimulate. It is as simple as that. It had a total of 3 percent
of the whole $787 billion that went to roads, highways,
bridges. Now, and while it was an improvement to increase by
the $48 billion, still that wasn't roads, highways and bridges.
That was transportation, a lot of things that I probably would
not have individually wanted.
The amendment that we had would have tripled the amount of
money that went to roads, highways, bridges and maintenance and
construction. And of course, we lost that amendment, but we
tried.
Senator Boxer. OK. Now, I didn't want this to turn into an
argument over the ARRA, but just let the record show that there
is disagreement. We believe the tax cuts in that bill did
stimulate the economy. We believe it has saved and created
jobs. So let the record show there is a big disagreement on
that.
Where there is agreement is we all wanted more for
highways, bridges, and yes, I did support transit, but I also
supported the highways, bridges and roads.
With that cleared up, we will call on Senator Klobuchar,
and then we will get right to our panel.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MINNESOTA
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Thank
you for holding this hearing.
Thank you, all of you, for being here.
You know, I live six blocks from the bridge that fell down
that August day in Minneapolis, an eight-lane highway right in
the middle of the river. So I am reminded of the need for
transportation investment literally every time I go home
because any time I have to get to about three-fourths of the
places I go, I drive over that new bridge, which is a beautiful
new bridge. It got built in 9 months because there was a sense
of urgency.
Well, there is not always a sense of urgency of all the
repairs that need to be made, as you all know, all around the
country. And that was a national embarrassment and really a
call to action for the people of this country.
And it has been pointed out, and we will hear about today
at this hearing, it is not just a safety issue to invest in our
infrastructure. It is also an economic issue.
The direct link between transportation investments and job
creation is clear. The Federal Highway Administration estimates
that every $1 billion of highway spending creates roughly
35,000 new jobs. And like my colleagues here, I would have
liked to see more infrastructure spending in the stimulus bill,
but now it is our time to move on and to get a new
transportation bill done.
The other thing that I don't believe has been pointed out
that is a real concern of my constituents is just the lost
economic time when people sit in traffic. I am here talking
about the fact that we should be doing more with rail, and we
should be doing more with highways and making them more
efficient.
In fact, Americans spend 4.2 billion hours a year stuck in
traffic, at a cost to the economy of $78.2 billion or $710 per
motorist. And that is why I have been intrigued by the interest
in public transportation in our State in places that are pretty
conservative areas that suddenly want the train expanded from
Big Lake to St. Cloud, that want bus lanes, that want more bus
stations. And I think it has been a new found interest in that
kind of public transportation, in addition to the expansion of
roads and bridges and other things that are really the meat and
potatoes of how we look at transportation policy in our State.
So I want to thank you for being here. I look forward to
hearing from you today.
Thank you.
Senator Boxer. Thanks so much for your patience, and we are
going to start with our panel: Peter Rahn, Director, Missouri
Department of Transportation, on behalf of the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
And I want to thank you personally for the work you did to
help us finally get this short-term extension, and now
hopefully the long-term extension done. So why don't you go
right ahead, Mr. Rahn.
STATEMENT OF PETE K. RAHN, DIRECTOR, MISSOURI DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION, ON BEHALF OF THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF STATE
HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS
Mr. Rahn. I am Pete Rahn, Director of the Missouri
Department of Transportation, and on behalf of the American
Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials I am
here to talk with you about the importance of transportation to
the economy.
But first, Madam Chairman, let me thank you, and of course
Senator Bond and the members of this Committee for your
leadership in passing legislation last week which extended the
highway and transit programs until the end of the year. That
action was absolutely crucial to my State and to all States.
As a matter of fact, there was so much uncertainty a week
ago as to the future of the highway program that I had to
announce the suspension of the February letting and the
potential shutdown of all future highway contracting in the
State for the remainder of the fiscal year. I understand that
some of the contractors affected by that decision may have
contacted Senators here in Washington to ask for their help in
passing your bill.
Let me turn now to the Economic Recovery Act. On February
17th of last year, Missouri started construction on our
Nation's first highway stimulus project within minutes of the
President's signing the bill into law. Our Osage River Bridge
Project replaces a Depression era structure that was in
desperate shape. Stimulus funding has had a huge impact in
Missouri. A survey of a dozen of our largest contractors has
found that MODOT now makes up more than 90 percent of their
workload, when traditionally we would be about 40 percent. ARRA
has worked, and it is filling the void.
States have pushed hard to create jobs and deliver projects
under ARRA. On February 19th, 2010, California fully obligated
its $2.57 billion in ARRA highway funding. As of yesterday's
deadline, every State obligated every highway dollar they were
eligible to receive, and not one dime will be returned to
Washington, DC, for redistribution.
I understand that every member of the Committee has been
given a copy of AASHTO's report, Projects and Paychecks. It
found that States have created or saved 280,000 direct on-
project jobs. While transportation, as of December of last
year, received 6 percent of total ARRA resources, it created at
least 14 percent of the 2 million direct jobs saved or created
to date.
Longer lasting economic benefits include repair or
replacement of 1,125 bridges, resurfacing of 21,400 miles of
pavement, and the purchase of 7,450 buses. My answer to the
question: Is transportation important to the economy? You bet
it is.
Transportation is a $1.2 trillion industry, generating 8
percent of the jobs and accounting for 9 percent of the U.S.
economy. It supports agriculture and natural resources,
manufacturing, retail and services. Together, these businesses
and industries account for 84 percent of the U.S. economy.
Demand for freight has increased steadily since the 1970s.
However, the freight productivity improvements gained through
the Interstate Highway System and deregulation of trucking and
the railroads are beginning to fade. Freight demands have now
exceeded the capacity of the Nation's highways, rail, waterway
and port systems, and we are facing a freight transportation
capacity crisis.
AASHTO will shortly publish a report called The Freight
Transportation Bottom Line, which examines demand, capacity and
the implications of congestion and deteriorating freight
transportation performance and what should be done about it. We
will provide this to you.
The final freight issue I want to raise is global
competition. China spends 9 percent of its GDP on
infrastructure; India, 3.5 percent; and the United States less
than 1 percent. Their economies are growing far faster than our
own. If we are to maintain our economic competitiveness,
national investment in transportation needs to increase.
In 2010, there are two things the Senate can do to help
assure that our transportation can help sustain economic
recovery. First, we hope you can enact a new jobs bill similar
to the one which passed the House, which provides $27.5 billion
for highways and $8.4 billion for transit. Second, we hope you
can complete action on a multi-year authorization. Funding this
program at the $500 billion level pending in the House will
have AASHTO support.
We need a balanced bill that increases funding for both
highways and transit, and funds continue to progress on high
speed rail. We also need a balanced bill which meets the needs
of both rural and urban parts of the country. Funding the
program at the $500 billion level would help to double transit
ridership, preserve and modernize the highway system, and
launch a new era of inner city passenger rail. We believe such
investments are vital to the economy.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Rahn follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Boxer. Thank you very much.
And Dr. Buechner, Vice President of Economics and Research,
American Road and Transportation Builders Association.
Thank you very much.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM R. BUECHNER, VICE PRESIDENT, ECONOMICS AND
RESEARCH, AMERICAN ROAD AND TRANSPORTATION BUILDERS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Buechner. Well, good morning, Chairman Boxer, Senator
Inhofe and members of the Committee. Thank you very much for
inviting ARTBA to be part of this hearing.
You asked us to address two key issues in our testimony
today: first, the impact of transportation investment and the
Federal Surface Transportation Program on jobs; and second, its
impact on American competitiveness in the world market.
I can answer both questions on one breath. The impact is
enormous. Last year, $120 billion of construction was performed
on transportation infrastructure in the U.S., making this the
second largest construction sector in the United States, only
second to home building. That $120 billion investment supports
nearly 3.4 million American jobs: almost 1.7 million jobs in
construction and 200 supplier industries plus an additional 1.7
million throughout the economy that are sustained by
transportation construction in employee firm and agency
spending.
To put that in perspective, transportation construction
sustains about 2.5 times as many American workers as motor
vehicle and parts manufacturing in this country, so it is a
very important industry. The importance of the Federal Surface
Transportation Program to this sector of employment can't be
overstated. Over 90 percent of the U.S. transportation
infrastructure is publicly funded and maintained. And about 45
percent of the capital investment in transportation
infrastructure comes from the Federal Government.
But there is another very important dimension to this job
story, and it helps articulate how vitally important the
Federal Surface Transportation Program is to America's future
competitiveness. The work product delivered by the men and
women employed in transportation construction makes possible
the jobs that exist in virtually every other major sector of
the U.S. economy.
For example, how many tourism related jobs would exist in
the United States without our network of highways and transit
and railways and water ports and airports? How many
manufacturing jobs, how many retail jobs, how many trucking
jobs? The fact is, we believe that conservatively about 78
million American jobs are fully dependent on the existence of
the Nation's transportation infrastructure. These are what we
call dependent industries. And it fleshes out the importance of
transportation investment to jobs in the United States.
Most economists will tell you that along with advanced
telecommunications, the relatively low cost and reliability of
freight transportation in the United States has been critical
to this country's economic success for years.
Unfortunately, we are letting this competitive advantage
slip away. The latest commodity flow survey shows that almost
80 percent of freight in the U.S. is shipped by truck over the
Nation's highways, and much of the rest are multi-modal
shipments that include trucks. So the competitiveness of
American business depends on an efficient, reliable highway
system.
The growth of traffic in recent years has far outstripped
the increase in highway capacity, and each year congestion gets
worse and worse. The impact on trucking is costing American
businesses billions of dollars each year in lost productivity
and higher costs that make U.S. industry less competitive.
Let me quote from a recent article by Michael Lind, Policy
Director for the New American Foundation, where he says,
``America's failure to modernize its overloaded freight
transportation infrastructure, chiefly the railroad network and
highways used by trucks, is imposing costs on American
efficiency. As a result of congestion, the penalty on American
growth rose from 8.6 percent of GDP in 2003 to 10.1 percent in
2007, even before the crisis.''
Chairman Boxer and members of the Committee, the Nation's
transportation challenges are not going to solve themselves. I
cannot stress enough the importance of enacting a new, robustly
funded multi-year surface transportation authorization bill
this year. This measure must focus on clearly unmet national
needs such as good movement, traffic congestion and public
safety.
To that end, we urge you to carefully consider the merits
of the critical commerce corridors freight movement proposal
the ARTBA membership has developed. We are certainly aware of
the difficulties facing reauthorization, but there are also
grave consequences for failing to act. One example is that the
Recovery Act's transportation investments will be tailing off
rapidly by the end of this year. This means that absent a new
infusion of capital investment, the hundreds of thousands of
jobs being supported by these funds will also come to an end.
We greatly appreciate your leadership in commencing today's
hearing and shepherding legislation to stabilize the Highway
Trust Fund through the Senate last week. Be assured, the
American Road and Transportation Builders Association stands
ready to provide any assistance it can as you work to develop a
multi-year bill.
Again, thank you for inviting us to testify.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Buechner follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much.
Next, we will hear from Raymond Poupore, Executive Vice
President, National Construction Alliance.
STATEMENT OF RAYMOND J. POUPORE, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT,
NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION ALLIANCE II
Mr. Poupore. Thank you, Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member
Inhofe, and distinguished members of the Committee.
On behalf of the National Construction Alliance II, a
partnership between two of the Nation's leading construction
unions, the International Union of Operating Engineers and the
United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America, I want
to express our appreciation for the opportunity to join you
today.
The two unions of the Alliance together represent nearly 1
million workers, the same workers who build our Nation's
highways, bridges, transit systems and much more. As I begin my
testimony, the construction industry is in a depression, 25
percent unemployment, 2 million construction workers without
jobs, the worst construction economy since World War II.
Together, we need to put America back to work. The NCA II
believes that the Environment and Public Works Committee can
and should play a key role in American economic competitiveness
by undertaking two equally important--but separate--steps in
the area of transportation policy and investment.
The Committee should adopt both a short-term and long-term
strategy to aid the ailing national economy through
transportation investments. First, the Environment and Public
Works Committee should continue to provide its leadership in
developing an immediate investment in jobs legislation. It
should include the full array of infrastructure in the
Committee's jurisdiction--wastewater, drinking water, locks and
dams--with highway transportation playing a lead role.
The first prong of the strategy is necessary immediate
investment in transportation to create jobs in the short term.
And let me thank you, Chairman Boxer, on your work with
Senators Durbin and Dorgan to develop another infrastructure
investment package before this construction season.
The bipartisan effort by certain Committee members to
support transportation funding on the HIRE Act last week was
also much appreciated. That was a key step, but we hope only
the first one. That investment nearly stabilizes the inadequate
SAFETEA-LU funding level. The Nation needs another investment
in good transportation related jobs now.
A key consideration for the short-term infusion of
infrastructure spending is this: every dollar invested in
construction generates another $1.59 that flows through the
rest of the economy. This multiplier effect is higher for the
infrastructure investments than for any policy under
consideration, except for direct transfer payments.
Investing in infrastructure is literally the best short-
term job creation move that Congress can make. Members of the
Carpenters and Operating Engineers and the other building
trades need paychecks now, and the rest of the economy will
benefit not only in terms of directly attacking high
unemployment in construction but also by making an essential
down payment in the competitiveness of the Nation.
That point brings me to the second longer range
recommendation of the NCA II, enacting a multi-year
transportation authorization. In coordination with the other
Committees of jurisdiction, the EPW Committee should
immediately begin the work of authorizing a multi-year
transportation bill and enacting it into law as quickly as
possible. Through transportation investments in the
authorization of a multi-year bill, the Committee can greatly
enhance the country's competitiveness in the global
marketplace.
The Nation's transportation system is being left in the
dust by some foreign competitors. Spain, China and Japan are
leaving the U.S. behind on high speed rail. Asia and Europe
boast the world's best, most efficient airports. None of the
world's top 10 airports are in the United States.
Madam Chairman, a long range authorization provides
certainty for transportation planners and construction
employers. Construction contractors won't make investments in
new equipment, for example, unless they have long-term
certainty about future work opportunities. State officials
won't conduct the design and engineering work and prepare the
projects unless they have predictability about available
resources.
Similarly, the construction trades won't be able to bring
in new apprentices into the industry unless there is certainty
about future job opportunities. It doesn't do anyone any good
to prepare a worker for a job that doesn't exist. It takes
around 4 years in most of the trades apprenticeship programs to
become a journey level worker.
Just as business and the labor community come together
around transportation investments, we hope that Democrats and
Republicans will be able to come together to make the necessary
investments to move this Nation forward.
We thank the Environment and Public Works Committee for
conducting this hearing and what we hope and understand will be
a series of sessions to develop the policy that will guide the
Nation through a key phase of economic progress. The NCA II is
particularly appreciative of Senator Voinovich's efforts to
have the majority leader commit to scheduling a floor vote on a
multi-year transportation authorization in 2010.
In conclusion, the NCA II urges the Committee to support a
dual transportation investment strategy. We need a short-term
investment in infrastructure now to reach the under-utilized
markets in the 2010 construction season, and we need a long-
range, multi-year authorization designed to provide certainty
to planners, contractors and workers, ensuring that the
Nation's highways are safe and efficient, and that the United
States reasserts its place as the world's economic powerhouse
undergirded by a world class infrastructure.
Madam Chairman, thank you and this Committee for the work
you have done in helping put America back to work, and thanks
for the opportunity to offer this testimony.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Poupore follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much.
Before I call on Tom Foss, I just want to note that when he
finished, we are going to turn to Senator Whitehouse for his
opening statement, and then to Senator Voinovich for his.
Senator Whitehouse. I will waive.
Senator Boxer. So, fine.
Mr. Foss, and I want to say that you are representing the
General Contractors, is that correct, today?
Mr. Foss. Yes, Senator Boxer.
Senator Boxer. And you are President and Chief Operating
Officer of the Griffith Company, and you are speaking on behalf
of the Associated General Contractors of America.
And I just want to personally thank that organization for
all you did to help us get where we are today. I know you are a
Californian. We welcome you.
STATEMENT OF TOM FOSS, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER,
GRIFFITH COMPANY, ON BEHALF OF THE ASSOCIATED GENERAL
CONTRACTORS OF AMERICA
Mr. Foss. Thank you, Senator Boxer.
Madam Chairman, members of the Committee, thank you for the
opportunity to present testimony on the importance of
transportation investment to the national economy and jobs.
Like Senator Boxer mentioned, my name is Tom Foss. I am
President and CEO of Griffith Company. We are a 108-year-old
general engineering contractor operating in Southern
California.
I started with Griffith Company in 1978 as a laborer. I
know this business from the outside and in. Griffith Company
builds highway infrastructure, bridges, airports, et cetera,
and I am here representing the Associated General Contractors
of America.
The U.S. transportation system unites road, rail, air,
seagoing commerce into a nationwide network that connects
customers to manufacturers who are often on different sides of
the globe. Much of this system was provided through Federal
transportation programs which have largely been administered by
States as agents of the Federal Government.
The program has been successful in establishing the best
transportation system in the world. The efficiency of the
Nation's transportation system, particularly its highways, is
critical to the health of the Nation's economy. Efficient
transportation plays a key role in business productivity,
product cost, quality of life, global competitiveness and jobs.
An efficient transportation system is important to the
construction industry because we are a major user. Construction
materials and supplies accounted for 1 out of every 10 U.S.
manufacturing shipments and 1 out of every 16 machinery
shipments in 2009. For a company like Griffith, transportation
is important to our business--it impacts the movement and
delivery of products to our jobs.
Traffic congestion causes contractors to schedule
deliveries at times that may not be most cost effective or
efficient. Managing construction start and finish times are
also impacted by the ability of workers to get to the job site.
Here is an example. We price our work in downtown Los
Angeles. When we calculate the movement of goods, we use an
average of four miles an hour for our truck speed. As we get
out to areas of less congestion, we may use a rate of 30 to 40
miles an hour for the movement of goods. That is a multiplier
of cost in construction.
For the construction industry, the transportation program
represents the market in which we work. Griffith Company relies
on the transportation industry for market opportunities and the
livelihood of our 485 workers and the families they represent.
Our employees are our greatest asset, and they reflect the
communities in which we work.
The economic slow-down has hurt our industry. Since the
peak construction employment in January 2007, 1.7 million
construction jobs have been lost, with job losses accelerating
significantly over the past 12 months. This is because the
total construction market contracted by more than $100 billion
in 2009 over 2008.
As you have heard, construction unemployment currently
stands at nearly 25 percent. Construction employment in
California has dropped 37 percent in the last 4 years and
stands at the lowest level since 1998.
In California, as elsewhere, the collapse of the housing
and commercial markets has led to an increase in the number of
contractors competing in the public sector. A few years ago,
CalTrans averaged three to four bidders on their projects.
Today, that number is between 9 and 10. I have seen projects
with well over 20 bidders. The bidding climate is very
difficult to be low bidder and more difficult to make a profit.
One of the largest risks for a company like mine is the
failure of subcontractors. We began to see failures last year,
and we anticipate this trend to continue in 2011. Both general
contractors and subcontractors will have a high failure rate
this year, with many of these businesses being small
businesses.
The ARRA money was a help to our industry. In California,
it was a big help. Without having a long-term bill, the
uncertainty permeates down into the local and State markets.
For example, Caltrans has a list of projects budgeted at about
$770 million ready to be built but waiting for funding. We need
stability and continuity in this program. Without that, the
State and local agencies stop bidding work. It puts everything
about my business at risk. The uncertainty that comes, my
relationship with my bank, my insurance company, my surety
company, all have added stress because of the uncertainty in
our market.
Bottom line, the highway program needs to have the long-
term program. This program is a pay as you go program. The
system's user fee is deposited in the Highway Trust Fund, which
is then used to improve the system. We need to enhance that.
The multi-year authorization is needed to restore faith in the
program, build the system we need to reduce congestion, and get
our goods to market.
It is our responsibility to leave future generations a
legacy that provides them the foundation for future economic
growth as solid as the one that we inherited. Now is the time
for a multi-year bill.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Foss follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much.
Well, I think this panel was terrific, and I would turn to
Senator Voinovich for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE V. VOINOVICH,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OHIO
Senator Voinovich. I just would like to say that your
presentations were terrific. And I look at this as the need for
our infrastructure as a country, the opportunity to pass a bill
that would be one that would be different than what we have
done in the past. It would deal with some of the real problems
that we have out there.
No. 2, that of the jobs that are there, and you have
eloquently talked about those jobs. Carbon footprint, we
haven't talked about that, but we are talking about reducing
greenhouse gas emissions, and this will have a dramatic impact
on reducing emissions, so it is a two-fer from that point of
view.
Return on investment, you were mentioning. You know, in
Ohio the bids are coming in 10, 12 percent below what they were
a couple of years ago, so there is a lot of competition. We are
going to get a lot more return on our buck than we have in the
last several years.
The certainty of it I think is extremely important, and you
have emphasized that, that we need to have it so that we know
where we are going.
Mr. Foss, I know contractors that are out of business today
because their line of credit has been shut off because they
don't know what the future looks like today.
And I think that the last part of this, I think, we are
talking about human beings. And this reauthorization with
robust funding would take and put a segment of our economy in
place for the next 5 years. In other words, people could bank
on it. Today, people, it is uncertainty.
So I think what we should be doing also is thinking about
all the families out there, millions of people who are worried
about whether they have a job, or whether they are going back
to work, or whether they can pay their mortgage, whether they
can buy a car, whether they can fund their kids' education,
whether they can just do other things that they would like to
do. We have got to listen to that and our company.
Thank you, Madam Chairman.
Senator Boxer. Senator Voinovich, I wanted to say something
that I said before you came. I made a commitment to Senator
Bond and to you, in your absence at that moment, that we will
do a bill that you will participate in, and we will get that
bill done in this Committee. I feel very confident in that, and
this today is the kick-off of that bill.
So I want to thank you for your strong--I mean, I just want
to say for the record, Senator Voinovich has been pushing for
this long 5-year reauthorization for a long time now. And now
that we hope we have gotten the 1-year extension behind us--we
are not sure, but looks good for Thursday in the House, we are
hoping--we will be able to get moving.
So I am going to start with Mr. Rahn. First, again, I want
to thank you for your February 19th notice to contractors for
this reason. You brought it home to the American people and to
us that there are consequences for our actions or inactions.
And I blew up your letter, and I made sure that everybody knew
that if we didn't move on the short-term extension and then now
on this yearly extension, that there would be a dire situation.
And so you told us today that you took that very dire step
because you had to take it.
And so I wanted to ask you, in your own words because you
are very forceful, to explain what a long-term extension, and
that means the yearly extension, and then the 5-year
authorization, what it would mean to a State like yours, the
certainty of this.
Mr. Rahn. Madam Chairman, thank you for your comments.
The fact is that trying to deliver a construction program
of hundreds of millions of dollars requires years of planning
and a great deal of effort in delivering those projects, and
choreographing that with environmental agencies, contractors
and such. And we simply cannot do that on these 30-day fits of
starts and stops. And we can't make long-term decisions and
neither can contractors. No contractor is going to buy a
$500,000 piece of equipment if they don't know that there is a
program that is going to be out there for the next 5 to 6
years.
And so the entire realm of highway and transit construction
means you need a certain, an absolute stream of revenue to be
able to make long-term decisions and undertake these projects.
For us in Missouri, the fact is even with the Senate's
adoption of the House version of a 30-day extension, it has not
resolved the issue of the authorization level of $30 billion
versus $42 billion.
Senator Boxer. Right.
Mr. Rahn. And so today that means I still cannot release
our letting process. Not only did I have to cancel last
Friday's letting, Monday should have been the day that we
advertised for the March letting. And we have not advertised
for the March letting either.
What is at risk right now is this: if we do not get the
authorization level restored to the funding levels of 2009,
Missouri will have to make up a $243 million shortfall in the
current fiscal year, and the only way we can do that is to
cancel our lettings from February through June to make up for
this $243 million shortfall.
Senator Boxer. OK. Well, colleagues, this is so critical
because that is why this Thursday vote in the House is so
important. If they pass this under suspension of the rules, we
have taken care of the yearly extension. That would solve your
problem. Is that correct, Mr. Rahn?
Mr. Rahn. Yes, Madam Chairman.
Senator Boxer. OK. I hope you can let all the Missouri
Congresspeople understand this. Would you do that for me? Would
you do that?
Mr. Rahn. Absolutely.
Senator Boxer. And will all of you on the panel commit to
please, if you could stay around today and talk to those House
Members. Would you do that, all of you? Could I see all of you
shaking your head yes, that you will contact those? Because we
have done it over here. We took care of it over here in the
HIRE Act, H-I-R-E Act, and we need you to do that.
I wanted to talk to my constituent, Mr. Foss, about the
impact on small businesses. We all know that the smaller
contractors and subcontractors are so essential to the whole
process. And I wonder how can we, through our program, help
these businesses remain competitive and stay in business? Does
it get to the issue that Mr. Rahn talked about, which is the
certainty of a long-term bill?
Mr. Foss. The entire premise of the long-term bill is to
allow the agencies to get a planned program in releasing the
work. Subcontractors that work for Griffith Company will have
opportunity on business just based on my ability to bid on work
as well.
In California, lots of our agencies, Los Angeles in
particular, they have a set-aside for small business, like we
do on the Federal level, for the under-utilized businesses or
the disadvantaged businesses. Los Angeles opens that up to
small business. That gives small business an opportunity to
enter into our industry on a competitive level to get the work
they need to stay in business.
Senator Boxer. So you think that certainty is the key here?
Mr. Foss. The certainty is the key.
Senator Boxer. OK.
Mr. Foss. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Boxer. Very important.
OK, we will turn to Senator Inhofe for his questions.
Senator Inhofe. Thank you, Madam Chairman.
We talk a lot about the jobs, and that is very, very
important. I think, though, that the primary thing is the
crumbling infrastructure. I know in our State of Oklahoma, we
have had some real crises take place, and it gets worse. It
doesn't get better. So in helping us to build our case with
some of the people with whom we work, let me just ask a couple
of things here.
Dr. Buechner, you talked quite a bit about the jobs.
One of the things I think came from you, Mr. Rahn, when you
talked about the amount in the stimulus bill, which we could
argue what the amount was. I think in terms of just the roads,
highways and bridges, we are talking about 3 percent, maybe up
to 5 percent if you are talking about transportation.
But that provided, of all the jobs that came from the
stimulus, 25 percent of the stimulus bill in terms of the
number of jobs that, in other words, 4 percent of the bill
provided 25 percent of the jobs. Is that accurate?
Mr. Rahn. [Remarks made off microphone.] As of December of
last year, 6 percent of the total ARRA resources, and 14
percent of the direct jobs.
Senator Inhofe. OK. Now, all right, direct jobs.
Now, one of the things that is not talked about are the
indirect jobs, the long-run jobs, the getting people to work,
getting businesses and industries so that they can operate and
not be just clogged up. Is there anything further on that that
anyone would like to say in terms of the long run jobs over and
above just that which is directly related to jobs?
Yes.
Mr. Rahn. The fact----
Senator Inhofe. Turn on your microphone, please.
Mr. Rahn. The fact is that when we talk direct jobs, that
is only measuring the people working on the project, and that
doesn't even take into account the people that are making the
steel girders or quarrying the rock or the ready-mix plants.
This number does not include this very indirect jobs support
that was created from this activity, and of course the long-
term support that is created to all of these various industries
that rely----
Senator Inhofe. Yes, that is my point. There are two things
here: the indirect jobs and then the long-term, how this helps
others. And I know there have been studies, and that is the
kind of thing that we like to hear so we can use that.
Other comments on that particular thing?
Yes, Mr. Foss.
Mr. Foss. I think the AGC, the way they put their stats
together on that information is they are saying that direct
jobs per billion of dollars invested is about 19,500, with
another 9,700 of indirect jobs, which are material suppliers of
course, but then also those are the jobs that go on, that are
the restaurants that workers eat out in and further on into the
economy. That is how AGC looks at those numbers.
Senator Inhofe. OK. That is good. Now, the last
Administration had a figure, and I have it down here. It is
34,779 jobs for every billion dollars that is invested in
highways. Do you think that figure is still good?
Mr. Rahn. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Buechner. It is still pretty good.
Senator Inhofe. OK. The other thing I wanted to ask----
Mr. Buechner. May I respond?
Senator Inhofe. Of course. I want you to.
Mr. Buechner. I think when you are looking just at the
direct and indirect jobs created by the actual transportation
projects, you really miss a very big part of the picture, which
is the impact that the improvements have on the rest of the
economy.
Senator Inhofe. No, we didn't miss that. Apparently, you
weren't listening because I said there are two things----
Mr. Buechner. No, no, I am sorry. But we haven't discussed
that yet. You discussed it, yes.
Senator Inhofe. Oh, OK. Fine.
Mr. Buechner. And you know, the fact is, as we point out,
there are a number of industries that are totally dependent on
the transportation infrastructure, almost for their existence.
And you know, in the last two or three decades we have been
losing a lot of manufacturing jobs and things like that to
China and India, where they have been beating us even with very
primitive infrastructure. But they are now doing what they need
to do to improve their infrastructure. China has embarked on a
$40 billion massive expressway program. India is also creating
massive expressways. And so they are now going to take this to
the next level.
And we have been fortunate, though, a lot of the good jobs
have still remained here, the high paying creative jobs, but
they are targeting those jobs now. And we are going to be in
even worse trouble if they succeed in getting their
infrastructure up to where ours is, and we don't take the steps
that we need to be doing.
Senator Inhofe. Yes, that is a good point.
In your statement, Mr. Poupore, I had asked them to pull
this out of your statement because you said, ``A key
consideration for the short-term infusion of infrastructure
spending is this: Every dollar invested in construction
generates another $1.59 that flows through the rest of the
economy.''
What is the source of that? That is a good one. I am
looking for talking points here, and I think that is a good
one.
Mr. Poupore. That comes from our research directors at the
Operators and the Carpenters. This multiplier effect is pretty
much what you were just talking about with every billion
dollars invested. For example, right now we are building the
extension of the Metro out to Dulles Airport. And I was just
talking to the project manager this morning, and we have about
550 direct hire people on the project.
But more importantly, they are building new rail cars and
the steel for it, and the concrete is being put together. And
everybody that is working on the project needs to have
protective equipment and shoes. And it just goes on and on and
on.
If they were sitting home without any jobs, none of those
other things get going. So that is where that $1.59 comes from.
Senator Inhofe. Good.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Boxer. Thank you so much.
Senator Klobuchar.
Senator Klobuchar. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I wanted to get your feelings on the Build America Bond
Program, how that is going. As you know, it is something that I
have been supporting and Senator Wyden and Senator Thune and
other people. Do you think it is being utilized to the fullest
extent? And what is your recommendation on how to make it
better with States where it has been slow?
It looks like, Mr. Rahn, you want to answer that.
Mr. Rahn. Senator, I believe Build America bonds have been
very successful. Missouri has issued several hundred million
dollars of debt utilizing the Build America bonds. I think that
it has provided another vehicle to us to leverage the resources
we have.
But I do need to add that ultimately the problem that we
have within infrastructure today is not ways to borrow more
money. We have pretty much borrowed everything we can. We now
need to be able to pay for the improvements that need to occur.
So Build America bonds have been positive. We have utilized
them. I know many States have utilized them, and they have
found that it has been a way to reduce borrowing costs. So it
has made the cost of our borrowing less.
But for years now, actually for the last decade and a half,
States have been borrowing money to pay for infrastructure, and
we have now tapped out the credit card, and it is now time we
need income to make those payments and to pay for the
improvements we need on our system.
Senator Klobuchar. Right. Good.
Mr. Buechner, in your testimony, you raise this interesting
point about how some States are better at getting highway
projects under construction more than others, which leads to
more efficient utilization of resources and creation of jobs.
Could you elaborate on that? And what are some of the
differences between the well performing and the poor performing
States?
Mr. Buechner. Well, clearly, States like Missouri that
anticipated this and had projects ready to go, has done an
excellent job of getting projects underway. Pennsylvania has
gotten a large number. Utah, Maine, and a number of States have
done very well in getting projects underway. There are a few
that have been laggards.
And I think it is kind of interesting that money that was
coming to the States, 100 percent federally funded projects, a
lot of the States, why some States wouldn't have actually just
gotten all that money out there and getting it going as fast as
possible.
But I think the importance of those funds is going to
continue to be felt this construction season when a lot of the
construction work will be done on projects this year. So even
though some States may not have gotten things going quite as
fast as others, everybody this year is going to be benefiting
from the Recovery Act funds.
Senator Klobuchar. I just think at some point it will be
helpful to know what States did that and how we can use those
as better examples.
Mr. Buechner. We have a monthly report that we put out. I
will send a copy to you.
Senator Klobuchar. OK. Thank you.
Mr. Foss, you note in your testimony that increasingly
companies are looking at the quality of a region's
transportation system when deciding when to relocate or expand.
Do you have any specific examples of that?
Mr. Foss. No, I don't have any specific example on that.
However, in California, just listening to the news and the
reports that come out, our industry is having a drain in
California, and a lot of that is then related back to the
plants are relocating where they can actually get to work and
get their products shipped.
Senator Klobuchar. Yes. You also talked about how, and I
know some of the panel has talked about it ahead of time, the
benefits of the long-term transportation bill will provide in
terms of certainty for workers and the industry. How does this
impact the way construction companies manage their work forces,
if you know with certainty what is happening?
Mr. Foss. Griffith Company works within our means. As a
company, we typically don't reach out to get increased volume.
But as we grow, the most important piece of our company is the
employee. And we are looking for our labor unions to provide us
with quality workers, and we have to plan long range. When you
go to pour a bridge deck, we have poured some big bridge decks
in the last year where we poured around the clock, and we had
over 120 carpenters, masons, laborers on our bridge deck at
different shifts.
We have to plan for our work force in everything we do.
Without the certainty of work, we begin to lose employees. We
can't keep them on, even valuable employees. And Griffith
Company is a very stable company. We try to keep our best
people on board all the time.
Senator Klobuchar. OK. Very good. Thank you very much.
Senator Boxer. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Voinovich.
Senator Voinovich. Mr. Buechner, you have done a good job
in your testimony to talk about the impact that transportation
construction industry have on the U.S. economy. And you have
various things that you have made reference to. But can you
capture just of the total U.S. economy, I think you have
something here where it contributes to--what?--2 percent of
GDP.
Mr. Buechner. Yes, sir.
Senator Voinovich. But it is more than something else. To
try to give us something that we can use to say to the
Administration or to anyone that if we had this
reauthorization, and it was robust, what portion of the economy
could we basically say is going to be OK and have certainty for
the next 5 years?
Mr. Buechner. Well, I think directly it is the
transportation construction sector of the U.S. economy that
would benefit immediately from this, from the State DOTs like
Pete Rahn was saying, give them an opportunity to plan long-
term projects. Contractors would have an opportunity to hire
workers, purchase equipment and things like that. So there
would be an immediate impact on the transportation construction
sector itself.
And as Senator Boxer pointed out, every billion dollar
increase in Federal funding for transportation supports 35,000
new jobs. So if you have a 6-year authorization that ramps up
Federal investment in construction in highway improvements and
transit, you will be adding tens of thousands of new jobs in
that sector each year.
At the same time, there will be a widespread impact on the
200 and some-odd industries that provide products and services
to highway contractors and to bridge contractors, airport
contractors and things like that.
But I think, as I pointed out earlier in my response to a
question by Senator Inhofe, that the long-term impact on this,
on the rest of the economy probably it dwarfs the direct impact
on the construction industry, the ability of manufacturing
firms to lower transportation costs and therefore compete more
effectively with manufacturers abroad. All throughout the U.S.
economy, the increase in competitiveness, the increase in
productivity would support even greater job growth than the
numbers that we are talking about just in the transportation.
Senator Voinovich. So the point is that it might be good on
one piece of paper, two pieces of paper. You have done it, some
good work here in your testimony. But to kind of lay it out so
that when the Chairman of the Committee--by the way, I would
like to congratulate the Chairman for the great work that she
has done and how enthusiastic she is about moving on this, on
the urgency of it.
But I think if you had that list of things in terms of the
impact on the economy and the jobs it would create, and then I
think your contrast with some of the other areas, so people
would be surprised at how much more it contributes than, say,
some of the other things that you have listed here.
And then the last half of it would be the indirect impact,
which was brought up in somebody's testimony, about truckers,
and I talked with Bill Graves, and he says his guys, they are
getting maybe 60 percent out of what they were getting maybe,
you know, 100 percent maybe 10 years ago, but what they are
running into around the country. And some of these other side
things that are real important, the competitiveness, say, with
the Chinese as they move forward. It think Senator Inhofe made
mention of that. But I think we need to really articulate that.
And then the other thing is is that from the State point of
view, and the certainty of your being able, you were mentioning
about you are going to have to back off some of the lettings
that you have done unless this thing gets worked out. And I
think that your groups should lay out the fact that they are in
trouble now, and if we don't get this thing done, what impact,
the rippling effect it is just going to have on your ability to
plan highways to the future. Because I don't think a lot of
people understand. I do as a former Governor. It takes a long
time to put one of these things together.
And so I think there are some big issue things that we need
to articulate to the public to get the kind of support that we
are going to need for this. And I think that the more that you
folks can raise this as a national priority and opportunity,
the better off we are going to be.
I think that we have a bill over in the House that I am
sure the Chairman and I are interested and everyone is
interested in what your thoughts are about that bill, because
he has put a lot of work in it, Jim Oberstar. And then to start
looking at some of the other things that we should do so that
we can put this on a fast track and get it done.
Last but not least, and that is the issue of financing. I
had some folks in yesterday that talked about how they are
doing some creative financing down in Texas and so forth. But I
would be interested in--a gas tax is something that we have
talked about, but what other types of financing would you have
in mind that we could utilize? Because we are going to have to
have kind of a smorgasbord of those things. And of course, that
is Max Baucus's job because he is over in Finance.
But honest to goodness, I think if we really pull together
this can be a really great bipartisan thing, a good thing for
our country. And we are really going to need your support. And
as the Chairman said, we would like to have you talk to every
single Member of the Senate, let them know how important this
is, and run over to the House today.
Thank you.
Senator Boxer. We have prepared a list here of all the
Democrat and Republican House Members from Missouri with their
phone numbers.
[Laughter.]
Senator Boxer. I used to be a staff member, so I have done
the staff work on this.
[Laughter.]
Senator Boxer. Senator Merkley.
Senator Merkley. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. And
thank you for bringing folks together to start paving the path
for us to figure out the reauthorization of the transportation
bill.
This is such an important issue for every State and for our
national economy. Certainly, as a member of the State
legislature, we wrestled with how to take on major bottlenecks
in the transportation system. We had a series of bills in three
subsequent sessions--Connect Oregon I, Connect Oregon II,
Connect Oregon III--trying to address mainly freight mobility,
and looking not just at the road system, but also at the
interconnectedness to our ports and to our rail.
So one of the things that I wanted to ask is: To what
degree is our transportation funding system caught in silos
where we look separately at these key components of the
transportation infrastructure? And is that perhaps not an
issue? But if it is an issue, are there ways that we could
think about how we start to make sure we are addressing the
transportation system as a coherent whole involving intermodal,
shipping, water shipping, and certainly rail shipping, as well
as highway transportation?
I will just open this up to whoever would like to comment.
Mr. Rahn. Madam Chairman, Senator, the last count I saw had
our Federal funding for transportation divided into 108
different categories. And so there are absolutely silos and
then cubicles within silos that actually make it quite complex
for us to put together a funding package for any one particular
project.
And that is one of the issues that AASHTO has been
requesting from Congress: that the next authorization bill is
less cubicle with more flexibility to allow us to utilize
funds. We do believe there is justification for some
categorization of funds, but certainly not down to the level of
108 categories, some of these representing a relatively very
small amount of money, and yet having conditions on it. For
instance requiring a full-time staffer at every State to deal
with these very small programs.
And so the idea of simplification, allowing more
flexibility, allowing States to use money for either transit or
highways, as an example, or ports. We support that concept, and
we think it would be very useful and productive to allow States
to use the flexibility to fund projects within broad areas.
Senator Merkley. Anybody else want to jump into that
conversation?
Mr. Buechner. Yes, sir. When ARTBA's members started
thinking about reauthorization, the No. 1 issue that we found
as important was freight transportation because of its great
impact on the economy. And that is kind of the lost stepchild
of important elements of, you know, what States consider when
they are thinking about what projects to do.
For example, you know, I know Pete has, no matter how much
money he gets from the Federal program, he still doesn't have
enough money to do everything that needs to be done in
Missouri. So when he is looking at projects, and he has one
project that is going to help get workers or improve travel in
St. Louis to get people to and from work, versus a project that
is going to facilitate the shipment of freight from California
to New England, I mean, he has got priorities that are going to
say, we've got to get this first project done.
So some of that may help freight, but it is not going to
focus on freight. Congestion has become a very important
obstacle to freight shipments in the U.S.
So ARTBA proposed a Critical Commerce Corridors Program
where we would separate out freight as a separate issue,
develop a national kind of a freight plan: where do we need
truck-only lanes; where do we need more capacity, not just on a
State level, but on a national level. And a proposal would be
to finance that particular kind of program through small user
fees on shippers. You know, we have $11 trillion worth of
freight shipped in the United States every year. A teeny
freight user fee would raise billions of dollars that could be
used to just improve corridors of freight in the U.S.
Senator Merkley. Madam Chair, do we have time for me to ask
one more question?
Senator Boxer. Yes, OK.
Senator Merkley. Utilizing your last comment as a segue to
the revenue side, and I am sorry if I missed this if this was
in earlier testimony, but given the propensity for folks to
drive less and to drive in more fuel efficient vehicles, has
our actual revenue from the gas tax dropped, and how
significantly, and how much of an impact will that have without
significant changes in the revenue strategy?
Mr. Rahn. Madam Chairman, Senator, the States have seen
declines in gas taxes, but overall it is a relatively stable
tax, so it has not collapsed, but it has declined. And as we
look forward, it is pretty clear that our Nation's energy
policy, which says we want to utilize less petroleum, is in
conflict with our national transportation policy which says we
use the fuel tax to pay for our transportation system. And
clearly these things are in conflict.
So we have major issues going forward as States in trying
to discern how it is we are going to pay for our transportation
system that is becoming more expensive, not less; that is
having different sorts of usage, freight being one of those
that has never been anticipated at the levels that we are
seeing; and how we are going to do that with traditional
revenue streams that are not sufficient today, let alone being
sufficient for the future.
Mr. Buechner. And it is also an issue at the Federal level,
with the gas tax revenues kind of leveling out in this
recession and a major collapse in truck sales tax revenues.
That is the second source of revenue for the Highway Trust
Fund, which is a sales tax on large trucks. And you know, with
the economy in a recession and freight shipments down for the
last couple of years, nobody has been buying new trucks.
Senator Merkley. Well, thank you very much for your
comments on both points. The silo challenge, I guess I am kind
of shocked by that 108 categories, and I am sure that every
single one of them, there was a purpose at some point, but it
certainly restricts flexibility. And thank you for your
commentary on the challenges on the revenue.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Senator Boxer. Thank you, Senator, for bringing up the
revenue stream because, clearly, I have discussed this with
Senators Inhofe and Voinovich, we are going to have to look at
all the proposals that we can in order to make sure that our
Finance Committee has every idea that is out there, because we
do want to pay as you go on this.
Did you want to add to that, Mr. Foss?
Mr. Foss. Yes. I wanted to make a comment on that. Senator
Voinovich had mentioned about creative, other ways to raise
revenue. The industry is working on lots of other ideas other
than the gas tax increase. But a lot of those ideas are future
ideas. There are a lot of ideas on bonding and things like
that, and tolls and vehicle miles traveled. There are a lot of
ideas floating out there.
But I would just like to say to the Committee, if I may,
that the gas tax is still the best way to fund this program. It
is a user fee. And as an example in California, we can
advertise this to the general population. They understand
traffic congestion. They understand their quality of life
impact based on congestion. In California, we have begun to see
a movement--it has been quite a few years now, we call them
self-help counties. These counties put together a
transportation plan for their specific county. They identify a
good solid program where they identify specific bottlenecks
that they are going to plan to improve. And those voters vote
to tax themselves in the sales tax anywhere from an additional
half to three-quarters of a cent specifically for
transportation.
The general public gets it. And I would just encourage the
Committee to have the courage to move forward on that idea. The
general public will support you on that if your program
identifies specific programs. If you get rid of earmarks, if
you get your program well identified, the general public is not
afraid to tax themselves for better transportation and a better
quality of life.
Senator Boxer. OK.
Senator Voinovich.
Senator Voinovich. I think that one of the other challenges
are big picture things that we need to communicate, but it
seems to me that ARTBA, maybe working with AASHTO, could do
some analysis statewide as to major things that need to be
taken care of. Because I think the public has to understand
that if this happens, and I assume that all of you would
support an increase in the gas tax.
Mr. Rahn. Oh, you can't do that because you are----
Mr. Rahn. I can speak as an individual from Missouri.
Senator Voinovich. But not as your Governor. Right. OK.
[Laughter.]
Senator Voinovich. All right. In your heart, you know it is
something that we might have to do.
[Laughter.]
Senator Voinovich. But I think, as the Chairman said, we
need to look at some other things. But I think that it is like
everything else. It is the need that has to be communicated out
there. And I think the other thing is that there is the number
of jobs that could be created. I mean, AASHTO right now, Madam
Chairman, is talking about, I don't know how many thousand jobs
they could turn on just like that because the need is there. It
is not like one of these, I mean, it is almost like a rocket
going up in terms of jobs. If this thing passed, boom, we would
see an increase in jobs in the country, which is something that
we need to do.
And then if you had that plus the impact that it is going
to have in terms of a portion of the economy, I think it would
be very good.
Do you all get together at all? I mean, do your
organizations talk to each other?
Mr. Buechner. Absolutely.
Senator Voinovich. I really think that is important because
the Chairman is going to need as much help as possible. The
more you can speak with one voice on things, it would be very,
very helpful, particularly if we are going to move, in terms
of--have all of you looked at the bill that came out of the
Subcommittee in the House?
Mr. Rahn. Chairman Oberstar's bill?
Senator Voinovich. Yes. Have you looked at it, Mr.
Buechner?
Mr. Buechner. Yes.
Senator Voinovich. How about AGC, have they looked at it?
Mr. Foss. AGC has looked at it. Yes, sir.
Senator Voinovich. Yes. Well, it would really help if you
got the group together, and how much of it would you agree on?
I know I have talked with the State and Local Government
Coalition. That is the Mayors, the Governors, the National
Society of State Legislators and the rest. It would be real
interesting to all of us, wouldn't it, to find out just what
you agree on with that and where you have differences.
You were talking, Mr. Rahn, about the flexibility. Could
you give us just an example or two of--what is it? How many,
Madam Chairman, 110 categories or something?
Mr. Rahn. Madam Chairman, Senator, yes, 108 categories in
the existing SAFETEA-LU bill for funding categories. It is
actually quite onerous to administer. While obviously, we are
grateful for funding that comes to us to address
transportation, it certainly could be streamlined. And there
are broad areas of Chairman Oberstar's bill that we support. We
have some areas that in fact we do believe need continued work.
I think the issues that we are very supportive of are the
need for a balanced approach that says both highways and
transit need significant funding, and as well as a balance
between urban and rural interests within that bill.
And so those would be some of the areas that we would like
to see improvement in Chairman Oberstar's bill.
Senator Voinovich. He has reduced them down into
categories. It would be interesting for us to find out just how
you groups feel about collapsing those into the categories that
are laid out and how receptive you are to those categories that
he has laid out.
Mr. Rahn. We would be happy to get that to you, Senator.
Mr. Foss. Senator, AGC and AASHTO are AASHTO are currently
doing just what you are asking. We are looking at the big
picture as an industry. And like Pete mentioned, there are some
areas, lack of flexibility, some of the micro-managing, that is
in that bill we are looking to loosen up a little bit.
The States and local agencies have done a good job working
for the Federal Government being the administrator of these
programs in the past, and we think that should continue.
Senator Boxer. I just want to say to Senator Voinovich how
much I appreciate his leadership. And I want to just say that
I, speaking for myself, I want to team up with him on asking
you to go through the Oberstar bill section by section. He has
it down to nine sections. I vow to streamline our bill to 10
sections at the most because that was the first advice of the
Special Commission, Senator Voinovich, that came back after a
year of study.
But if you could go through that literally with a pen and
let us know where you agree, where you disagree. If there is
any problems or things you especially like, it would be very
helpful. Because we are not going to start from scratch. We are
going to take that bill and work off it, which was Senator
Voinovich's idea. So we are going to look at that and go
section by section.
I just want to say to all of you how important you are to
us. There are two ways to fight for things you believe in
around here. One is an inside strategy, talk to our colleagues.
The other is an outside strategy, engage the people who are on
the ground.
Frankly, you have so much credibility. And Thursday's vote
is key. Otherwise, Mr. Rahn's State is not going to be able to
have any progress. We have got to get that year extension
behind us. And if we don't get it by a two-thirds vote, I don't
know what happens next, whether there is going to be some kind
of pay-go difference with our bill. It comes back to our
Senate, and as Senator Voinovich will attest to, nothing comes
easy over there. It is going to be more time and more time and
more time.
So I now gave Mr. Foss, poor guy, all of the California, I
gave them all of the California representatives here. And in
the hopes that the California folks from AGC could get on the
phone. You have all day tomorrow. Well, all day today to get it
done. I think if they hear that all of our States are in
trouble if we don't do this year extension, we should get the
votes.
I want to say to all of you my deepest thanks. This is the
first hearing on our way to a 5-year bill. We are very excited
about it on both sides of the aisle, and we couldn't have had a
better first day. Thanks to all of you.
And we stand adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:35 a.m. the Committee was adjourned.]
[all]