- INVESTING IN OUR NATION'S TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND WORKERS: WHY IT MATTERS

[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

INVESTING IN OUR NATION'S TRANSPORTATION
INFRASTRUCTURE AND WORKERS: WHY IT MATTERS

=======================================================================

(117-60)

REMOTELY ATTENDED HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

__________

SEPTEMBER 29, 2022

__________

Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
transportation

__________

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
51-382 PDF WASHINGTON : 2023

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon, Chair
SAM GRAVES, Missouri ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas District of Columbia
BOB GIBBS, Ohio EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida RICK LARSEN, Washington
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
JOHN KATKO, New York JOHN GARAMENDI, California
BRIAN BABIN, Texas HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana Georgia
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
MIKE BOST, Illinois DINA TITUS, Nevada
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
DOUG LaMALFA, California JARED HUFFMAN, California
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas JULIA BROWNLEY, California
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, MARK DeSAULNIER, California
Puerto Rico STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota GREG STANTON, Arizona
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas, Vice Chair
TROY E. NEHLS, Texas JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
NANCY MACE, South Carolina CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
MICHELLE STEEL, California CAROLYN BOURDEAUX, Georgia
Vacancy KAIALI`I KAHELE, Hawaii
MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
MARIE NEWMAN, Illinois
TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana
SHEILA CHERFILUS-McCORMICK,
Florida

CONTENTS

Page

Summary of Subject Matter........................................ v

STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, opening statement.............................. 5
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Texas, prepared statement............................. 107

WITNESSES

Sara Nelson, International President, Association of Flight
Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO, oral statement....................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 10
Gregory R. Regan, President, Transportation Trades Department,
AFL-CIO, oral statement........................................ 16
Prepared statement........................................... 18
Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive Officer, National Railroad
Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), oral statement................. 22
Prepared statement........................................... 24
Samuel Desue, Jr., General Manager, TriMet, oral statement....... 31
Prepared statement........................................... 33
David Ditch, Policy Analyst, The Heritage Foundation, oral
statement...................................................... 37
Prepared statement........................................... 38
Adam S. Hersh, Ph.D., Senior Economist, Economic Policy
Institute, oral statement...................................... 43
Prepared statement........................................... 45

SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD

``Examples of INFRA Projects Creating Workforce Training Programs
and Good-Paying Jobs With the Free and Fair Choice To Join a
Union,'' Fact Sheet, U.S. Department of Transportation,
Submitted for the Record by Gregory R. Regan, President,
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO...................... 17
Submissions for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio:
Letter of September 29, 2022, to Airlines for America,
Regional Airlines Association, and National Air Carrier
Association, from 70 Members of Congress................... 54
Letter of October 12, 2022, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair,
and Hon. Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, from Catherine Chase,
President, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety........... 107
Statement of the American Society of Civil Engineers......... 108
Statement of Cole Scandaglia, Senior Legislative
Representative and Policy Advisor, International
Brotherhood of Teamsters................................... 110
``Invest in Transit Equity, Invest in Transit Workers,''
Report, National Campaign for Transit Justice, February
2022....................................................... 111
Statement of Adell Louise Amos, J.D., Clayton R. Hess
Professor of Law, Executive Director, Environment
Initiative, Office of the Provost, University of Oregon.... 111
Letter of September 29, 2022, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair,
and Hon. Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure, from Judith Potter,
President, The Transportation Alliance, Submitted for the
Record by Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford....................... 58
Submissions for the Record by Hon. Thomas Massie:
``Updates on COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness During Omicron,''
PowerPoint presentation, Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention, June 28, 2022.................................. 80
``The Third Airline Bailout Is No Better Than the First Two
Bailouts,'' by Veronique de Rugy, National Review, March
12, 2021................................................... 80

APPENDIX

Questions to Sara Nelson, International President, Association of
Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO, from:
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson................................... 115
Hon. Brian K. Fitzpatrick.................................... 115
Hon. Dina Titus.............................................. 116
Hon. Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia................................ 116
Questions to Gregory R. Regan, President, Transportation Trades
Department, AFL-CIO, from:
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson................................... 117
Hon. Brian K. Fitzpatrick.................................... 117
Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr........................... 118
Hon. Dina Titus.............................................. 118
Hon. Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia................................ 120
Questions to Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive Officer, National
Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak), from:
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson................................... 121
Hon. Brian K. Fitzpatrick.................................... 121
Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr........................... 122
Questions to Samuel Desue, Jr., General Manager, TriMet, from:
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson................................... 123
Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr........................... 123
Hon. Dina Titus.............................................. 124
Questions to Adam S. Hersh, Ph.D., Senior Economist, Economic
Policy Institute, from:
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson................................... 125
Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr........................... 127

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

September 26, 2022

SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

TO: LMembers, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure
FROM: LStaff, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure
RE: LFull Committee Hearing on ``Investing in our
Nation's Transportation Infrastructure and Workers: Why it
Matters''
_______________________________________________________________________

PURPOSE

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure will
meet on Thursday, September 29, 2022, at 10:00 a.m. EDT in 2167
Rayburn House Office Building and virtually via Zoom for a
hearing titled ``Investing in our Nation's Transportation
Infrastructure and Workers: Why it Matters.'' The hearing will
provide an opportunity for Members of the committee to hear
from stakeholders about the impacts of the American Rescue Plan
Act of 2021, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and
the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 on American families,
workers, and communities.\1\ The focus will be on the
transportation-related provisions of these laws. The committee
will hear testimony from the Association of Flight Attendants--
Communication Workers of America, AFL-CIO; Transportation
Trades Department, AFL-CIO; Amtrak; TriMet; the Heritage
Foundation; and the Economic Policy Institute.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (P.L.117-2), available at
https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1319;
Infrastructure and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58), available at https://
www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684; Inflation
Reduction Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-169), available at https://
www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376/text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BACKGROUND

During the 117th Congress, America faced unprecedented
challenges. The COVID-19 pandemic continued to spread through
the nation's communities--closing downtowns, impacting workers,
and placing unprecedented stress on supply chains as demand for
goods surged. At the same time, Congress faced the expiration
of authorization for surface transportation programs and
policies.\2\ In response, Congress passed three laws: the
American Rescue Plan Act in March 2021, the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act in November 2021, and the Inflation
Reduction Act in August 2022. Each law includes investments in
America's transportation infrastructure and workers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ See the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act,
P.L. 114-94), available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-
congress/house-bill/22.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

MARCH 11, 2021: AMERICAN RESCUE PLAN ACT

On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American
Rescue Plan Act into law, about a year into the COVID-19
pandemic.\3\ Building on the work of the previous Congress,
which passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
Act (CARES Act; P.L. 116-136, enacted on March 27, 2020) and
the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021(P.L. 116-260,
enacted on December 27, 2020), the law's goal was to address
the country's immediate needs, change the course of the
pandemic, and deliver relief for American workers, including
transportation workers. Overall, the law included $1.9 trillion
in relief, including investments in programs under the
committee's jurisdiction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Public Law No. 117-2, available at https://www.congress.gov/
117/plaws/publ2/PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

RAIL

The American Rescue Plan Act provided $1.7 billion for
Amtrak, including $970.3 million for Amtrak's Northeast
Corridor and $729.6 million for the National Network, which
allowed Amtrak to recall and pay employees furloughed due to
the COVID-19 pandemic through the end of fiscal year 2021 and
restore daily long-distance service within 90 days after
enactment.\4\ This amount included set-asides of $174.8 million
to states to cover lost revenue in state-supported routes and
avoid large increases in state payments to Amtrak and $109.8
million for states and commuter rail agencies to cover their
Northeast Corridor commuter rail payments to Amtrak.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ See Sec. 7101 https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ2/PLAW-
117publ2.pdf.
\5\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also provided or enhanced and extended unemployment
benefits for freight and passenger railroad workers, ensuring
that unemployed rail workers continued to receive parity with
other enhanced unemployment benefits authorized in the law.
This specifically included an additional $300 per week to
unemployed railroad workers on top of their standard benefit,
access to additional weeks of unemployment benefits, and a
waiver of the one-week delay in benefits for newly unemployed
or sick workers.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ See Sec. 2901, 2902 and 2903 https://www.congress.gov/117/
plaws/publ2/PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

TRANSIT

Further, the law provided a total of $30.5 billion in
transit funding, which included: $26.1 billion for operating
assistance formula grants for transit agencies located in
urbanized areas; $2.2 billion in emergency relief funding for
transit agencies demonstrating additional pandemic-associated
needs; $1.7 billion in funds for ongoing New Start, Core
Capacity, and Small Start capital investment projects; $317.2
million in operating assistance formula grants for states to
support transit agencies in rural areas, of which $35 million
is for grants on Tribal lands; $50.0 million for transit
providers in communities of all sizes to provide transportation
for seniors and persons with disabilities; $100 million for
intercity bus service that provides essential connections to
rural transit; and $25 million in planning grants to help
agencies increase ridership and reduce travel times or make
service adjustments to increase the quality or frequency of
service provided to low-income riders or disadvantaged
neighborhoods or communities.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ See Sec. 3401 https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ2/PLAW-
117publ2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AIRPORTS AND AVIATION

The American Rescue Plan Act provided $8 billion in
emergency aid for sponsors of airports to prevent, prepare for,
and respond to coronavirus.\8\ Of that, $6.4 billion was made
available to primary airports for debt service payments,
personnel and other operating expenses; $600 million was
provided to airports to cover the federal cost share for any
Airport Improvement Program grant awarded in fiscal year 2021;
$100 million was set aside for general aviation and commercial
service airports for costs related to the pandemic; and $800
million was made available to concessionaires located at
primary airports, of which 80 percent was targeted toward small
businesses and minority-owned firms.\9\ The Act required
primary airports receiving assistance funds to continue to
retain at least 90 percent of their workforce as of March 27,
2020, through the end of fiscal year 2021.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ See Section 7102(a). https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ2/
PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
\9\ See Section 7102(b)). https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ2/
PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
\10\ See Section 7102(c)(2)(A). https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/
publ2/PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The American Rescue Plan Act also allocated $15 billion to
extend the Payroll Support Program (PSP) to fund payroll
support for airline workers and related contract workers.\11\
As with the original PSP authorization and its first extension,
this second extension prohibited air carriers and contractors
from involuntarily furloughing or reducing pay rates or
benefits of their workers until September 30, 2021.\12\ The
extension included similar restrictions on executive
compensation and capital distributions, such as dividend
payments, and taxpayer protections, as provided in the original
program.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See Section 7301. https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ2/
PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
\12\ Id. The original Payroll Support Program, which was included
in the CARES Act, was a $32 billion program to preserve the jobs of
employees of U.S. airlines and certain airline contractors through
September 30, 2020. The assistance provided was conditioned on
companies not involuntarily furloughing or reducing the pay rates or
benefits of workers, refraining from stock buybacks, limiting executive
compensation, and other conditions. Every major airline signed an
agreement with the U.S. Treasury to receive PSP grants. See Payroll
Support Program Payments, U.S. Treas., available at https://
home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/cares/preserving-jobs-for-american-
industry/payroll-support-program-payments.
\13\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also established a $3 billion temporary payroll
support program for the domestic aerospace manufacturing
industry administered by the U.S. Department of Transportation
(DOT).\14\ The program provided a 50 percent federal share to
eligible U.S. aerospace manufacturing companies that met
certain criteria to help cover the wages, salaries, and
benefits of manufacturing employees most at risk of being
furloughed and to facilitate the recall or rehire of such
employees furloughed during the COVID-19 pandemic.\15\ The law
prohibits program recipients from conducting involuntary
furloughs or reducing the pay rates and benefits of its
eligible employee groups.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ See Section 7202. https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ2/
PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
\15\ https://www.transportation.gov/AMJP.
\16\ See Section 7202(b). https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ2/
PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA)

The law provided FEMA $50 billion for reimbursement to
state, local, Tribal, and territorial governments dealing with
presidentially-declared disasters, available through fiscal
year 2025.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ2/PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION (EDA)

The law provided $3 billion in economic adjustment
assistance for fiscal year 2021 for the purpose of preventing,
preparing for, and responding to economic injury caused by the
COVID-19 pandemic.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ https://www.congress.gov/117/plaws/publ2/PLAW-117publ2.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

NOVEMBER 15, 2021: INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT AND JOBS ACT

On November 15, 2021, President Biden signed the bipartisan
infrastructure framework, passed as the Senate Amendment to
H.R. 3684, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
into law.\19\ This legislation provided billions of dollars for
our highway, transit, rail, airport, port, and wastewater
infrastructure. These investments are intended to help
construct, repair, and replace airports, roads, bridges,
transit systems, railroads, and pipelines; improve safety;
reduce carbon pollution from the transportation sector; reduce
congestion at ports; and improve air and water quality.\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Public Law No. 117-58, available at https://www.congress.gov/
bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684.
\20\ As described in Views and Estimates of the Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure for Fiscal Year 2023, p 1. https://
transportation.house.gov/imo/media/doc/FY23
%20Views%20and%20Estimates_Final.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The IIJA provides approximately $660 billion over five
years to be distributed by DOT through formula programs and
competitive grants to states, local governments, metropolitan
planning organizations, transit agencies, Tribes, passenger and
freight railroad carriers, ports, airports, and other eligible
recipients.\21\ This amount includes the following topline
amounts by mode:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/files/2022-01/
DOT_Infrastructure_
Investment_and_Jobs_Act_Authorization_Table_%28IIJA%29.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L$365 billion for highway programs administered by
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); \22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ More information on highway programs available at https://
www.fhwa.dot.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L$108 billion for transit programs administered by
the Federal Transit Administration (FTA); \23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\23\ More information on transit programs available at https://
www.transit.dot.gov/BIL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L$102 billion for rail programs administered by
the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA); \24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ More information on rail programs available at https://
railroads.dot.gov/BIL.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L$43 billion for multimodal project, safety, and
innovation grant programs administered by the Office of the
Secretary of Transportation (OST); \25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ More information on OST programs available at https://
www.transportation.gov/mission/budget/bipartisan-infrastructure-law-
dashboard.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L$25 billion for aviation programs administered by
the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); \26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ More information on aviation programs available at https://
www.faa.gov/bil.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L$8 billion for safety programs administered by
the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA);
\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ More information on NHTSA programs available at https://
www.nhtsa.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L$5 billion for motor carrier safety programs
administered by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
(FMCSA); \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ More information on FMCSA grant programs available at https://
www.fmcsa.dot.gov/Bipartisan-Infrastructure-Law-Grants.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L$2.3 billion for port and waterway programs
administered by the Maritime Administration (MARAD); \29\ and
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ More information on MARAD programs available at https://
www.maritime.dot.gov/about-us/bipartisan-infrastructure-law-maritime-
administration.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
L$1 billion for modernization of natural gas
distribution pipelines administered by the Pipeline and
Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ More information on pipeline grants available at https://
www.phmsa.dot.gov/news/usdot-begins-accepting-applications-president-
bidens-bipartisan-infrastructure-law-program.

The guaranteed funding provided by the IIJA flows to
funding recipients through more than 100 grant programs
authorized by the legislation and administered by DOT and
includes both formula and competitive grants.\31\ A
comprehensive list of these programs across modal agencies and
total funding available for each program can be found on DOT's
website.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ https://www.transportation.gov/bipartisan-infrastructure-law/
bipartisan-infrastructure-law-grant-programs.
\32\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The law also authorizes $35 billion in existing programs
and creates new programs to support drinking water and
wastewater infrastructure projects.\33\ A large share of this
funding is given to the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund and
the Clean Water State Revolving Fund.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3684.
\34\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AUGUST 16, 2022: INFLATION REDUCTION ACT OF 2022

On August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation
Reduction Act of 2022 into law.\35\ The law authorizes $369
billion in spending on climate and clean energy provisions,
including transportation-related programs.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/5376.
\36\ https://www.cnbc.com/2022/08/22/what-the-climate-bill-does-
for-the-nuclear-industry.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HIGHWAYS

The law invests $3.16 billion in a new Neighborhood Access
and Equity Grant Program to provide funds to reconnect
communities divided by transportation infrastructure, including
$50 million for local technical assistance grants.\37\ The law
also provides $100 million to FHWA for grants and
administrative activities to facilitate the completion of
environmental reviews for surface transportation projects.\38\
Finally, it gives $2 billion to FHWA to reimburse the cost
difference between low-embodied carbon construction materials
and traditional materials in highway construction projects.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ See Section 60501. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-
congress/house-bill/5376/text.
\38\ See section 60505 https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-
congress/house-bill/5376/text.
\39\ See section 60506. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-
congress/house-bill/5376/text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

AVIATION

The law dedicates $297 million for the Alternative Fuel and
Low-Emission Aviation Technology Program, which includes $244.5
million for sustainable aviation fuel infrastructure projects,
$46.5 million for low emission aviation technologies, and $5.9
million to administer the program.\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ See section 40007. https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-
congress/house-bill/5376/text.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION

The law provided $250 million to convert facilities of the
Administrator of General Services to high-performance green
buildings and $2.15 billion to acquire and install low-embodied
carbon materials and products for use in the construction or
alteration of buildings under the jurisdiction, custody, and
control of the General Services Administration.

WITNESS LIST

LSara Nelson, International President, Association
of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO
LGreg Regan, President, Transportation Trades
Department, AFL-CIO
LStephen Gardner, Chief Executive Officer, Amtrak
LSamuel Desue, Jr., General Manager, TriMet
(Portland, OR)
LDavid Ditch, Policy Analyst, The Heritage
Foundation
LAdam Hersh, Ph.D., Senior Economist, Economic
Policy Institute

INVESTING IN OUR NATION'S TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE AND WORKERS:
WHY IT MATTERS

----------

THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2022

House of Representatives,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m. in room
2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via Zoom, Hon. Peter A.
DeFazio (Chair of the committee) presiding.
Members present in person: Mr. DeFazio, Mr. Larsen of
Washington, Mr. Cohen, Mr. DeSaulnier, Mr. Lynch, Mr.
Malinowski, Ms. Davids of Kansas, Mr. Lamb, Mr. Auchincloss,
Mr. Kahele, Mr. Graves of Missouri, Mr. Crawford, Mr. Gibbs,
Mr. Webster of Florida, Mr. Massie, Mr. Perry, Dr. Babin, Mr.
Rouzer, Mr. LaMalfa, Mr. Fitzpatrick, Miss Gonzalez-Colon, Mr.
Balderson, Mr. Stauber, Mr. Burchett, Mr. Guest, Mr. Nehls, and
Ms. Van Duyne.
Members present remotely: Ms. Norton, Mrs. Napolitano, Mr.
Payne, Mr. Lowenthal, Mr. Carbajal, Mr. Stanton, Mr. Allred,
Mr. Garcia of Illinois, Mr. Pappas, Ms. Bourdeaux, Ms.
Strickland, Ms. Williams of Georgia, Ms. Newman, Mr. Carter of
Louisiana, Ms. Cherfilus-McCormick, Mr. Johnson of South
Dakota, and Ms. Mace.
Mr. DeFazio. The Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee will come to order.
I ask unanimous consent that the chair be authorized to
declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
As a reminder, please keep your microphone muted, unless
speaking. If you make background noise, I will shout at you.
To insert a document into the record, please email it to
[email protected].
With that, I recognize myself for my opening statement.
Today's hearing gives us the chance to hear from
stakeholders about the impacts of transportation legislation
passed in the 117th Congress.
Thirty-six years I have been here working these issues, and
the forces of inertia and not getting things done in Washington
are quite strong. And I am proud of the work of this committee
and this Congress, as a whole, for these last 2 years to break
through that inertia and deliver for the American people.
We delivered on the challenges to the transportation sector
from COVID-19. When faced with crumbling transportation
infrastructure that had been neglected for years, we delivered.
And when faced with a climate crisis and a desperate need for
Government leadership in order to decarbonize, again, we
delivered with separate legislation.
This Congress passed three bills that will grow the
economy, strengthen global competitiveness, create good-paying
union jobs, can't be sent overseas, and make our communities
more resilient: the American Rescue Plan Act; the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, so-called IIJA; and the
Inflation Reduction Act.
Almost 4 years ago, the committee held a hearing to kick
off the 116th Congress, and we called it ``The Cost of Doing
Nothing.'' We looked at what would happen to the U.S. if we
continued to kick the can down the road on the major
investments needed for infrastructure. I started an attempt to
get a major increase in surface transportation back under
President Obama. He killed it, because he was afraid of us
raising the gas tax. Donald Trump came in and promised us $2
trillion, delivered nothing.
And then finally, under this President, we passed, twice,
legislation out of the House through a real legislative
process, many hundreds of amendments, many hours in committee,
many hours on the floor. And then, unfortunately, because of
the dysfunction of the Senate, the President had to resort to a
negotiated deal. It basically matched the funding we had put
forward and incorporated some of the work we did. It did not
incorporate other parts, but that is where it is when you are
dealing with one body that is totally dysfunctional and
incapable of legislating. So, we got it done, the biggest
investment in transportation infrastructure since the
Eisenhower era--actually larger than that, and very long
overdue.
The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates the
deterioration to have a pricetag of over $2 trillion just to
bring it up to a state of good repair and to begin to address
future needs, begin to build in more resilience for severe
weather events, sea level rise, and other things. So, that is
something of which the committee and the Congress can be proud:
the money is rolling out.
Then, of course, there was the COVID-19 pandemic, and we
had amazing problems with transit, aviation, and others. And
again, Congress stepped up, first passed the CARES Act, then
the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021, and then the
American Rescue Plan Act. We managed to keep the trains, buses,
and subways running. We saved the aviation industry by keeping
the employees paid and in status, not directing money as a
bailout to the airlines themselves, as was done in 2001 and
2008. We prohibited the airlines from stock buybacks,
furloughs, and executive compensation, and the corporate
stockholders would not directly benefit from the Federal funds.
Obviously, we had people actually continue to work in
transit, and some actually contracted COVID and died providing
critical services. We had people in aviation contract COVID and
die, but we maintained those vital industries through a very,
very dark time.
I look forward to hearing from Sara Nelson with the
Association of Flight Attendants and Greg Regan of the
Transportation Trades Department about how they came through
and their members came through the pandemic.
I already referenced the surface transportation bill. We
have a $100 billion deficit to bring transit up to a state of
good repair, let alone providing new transit options to people
to help them get out of congestion, get out of their single
occupancy vehicles, and get to work in a timely fashion.
We have 42,966 bridges on the National Highway System in
need of substantial repair or replacement, and there is $40
billion dedicated in the IIJA. It is not going to take care of
all of them, but we are finally going to begin to address that,
and not see the number growing, but see the number of bridges
going down.
So, we will hear today from Dr. Adam Hersh, who estimates
that the IIJA's additional infrastructure spending will
support--pretty precise here--772,400 jobs, not 772,000. Not
one more or less, I am not sure. But anyway, that is a lot of
jobs, and there is a multiplier effect to the economic benefits
for the communities where projects take place and these good-
paying jobs--it trickles down through the whole economy,
particularly small businesses, Main Street businesses, and
others.
And then climate and the transportation sector--and this is
a point of some difference--we do a lot of things bipartisan on
this committee, but I believe we must address the issues
regarding climate through transportation issues. Surface
transportation is the largest single contributor of greenhouse
gases in the United States, and we need to begin to
meaningfully address those. We had provisions in the bill
passed out of the House that would have been more effective,
but there is still significant investment being made through
the IIJA with what will be done, and also through the
investment IRA bill in terms of tax credits for EVs, charging
stations, more money for transit, more money for rail, and then
actually looking for alternate fuels, working with the industry
for alternate fuels for aviation and other sectors.
So, I think it has been one heck of a ride for the last
couple of years here, or make that starting 3 years ago with
the pandemic, and I think we can be very proud of what we have
accomplished, and in good part, generated by this committee.
[Ms. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Today's hearing gives us the chance to hear from stakeholders about
the impacts of transportation legislation passed by the 117th Congress.
After 36 years in Congress, I have fought enough uphill battles to know
that the forces of apathy and inertia are strong. But I am proud of the
work of this committee, and this Congress as a whole, these last two
years--to defeat that sense of inertia and deliver for the American
people.
When faced with the unprecedented challenges to the transportation
industry from the COVID-19 pandemic--we delivered. When faced with
crumbling transportation infrastructure that had been neglected for
years--we delivered. When faced with a climate crisis and a desperate
need for government leadership in order to decarbonize--we delivered.
This Congress, we passed three bills that will grow the economy,
strengthen our global competitiveness, create good-paying union jobs
that can't be sent overseas, and make our communities more resilient--
the American Rescue Plan Act, the Infrastructure Investments and Jobs
Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act.
Almost four years ago in February 2019, the committee held a
hearing to kick off the 116th Congress and we called it ``The Cost of
Doing Nothing: Why Investing in Our Nation's Infrastructure Cannot
Wait.'' Over the course of nearly seven hours, we heard from
stakeholders about the urgent need to invest in transportation
infrastructure projects across the country and across transportation
modes.
At that time, transportation demand was booming, and our existing
infrastructure was not able to keep up with user demand. In fact, the
American Society of Civil Engineers estimated an investment gap of $2
trillion over 10 years to fix existing infrastructure, meet future
needs, and restore global competitiveness.
Then, the COVID-19 pandemic hit. Of course, the pandemic had
massive impacts on transportation--it disrupted business and leisure
travel, and upended many Americans' daily work routines and commutes.
But for essential and frontline workers, the need for safe and reliable
transit options was greater than ever. In the face of this challenge,
we passed COVID relief: first the CARES Act, and then the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2021, and then the American Rescue Plan Act.
Among other benefits to the country, these bills managed to keep
the nation's trains, buses, and subways running. We rescued the
aviation industry and Amtrak, but we kept workers at the center of the
recovery effort--refusing to allow entities taking these funds to
impose involuntary furloughs and stock buy-backs--focusing benefits
towards American workers, not corporate shareholders.
And this nation's transportation workers quickly became the heroes
of the pandemic, as flight attendants bravely faced hostility from
passengers in the midst of a stressful flying environment, transit
workers kept buses and subways running so that other essential workers
could get to their jobs, and freight workers and truck drivers
delivered food and other essentials to communities at a time of great
turmoil. These essential workers delivered for our nation.
We appreciate and thank them, and I look forward to hearing from
Sara Nelson of the Association of Flight Attendants and Greg Regan of
the Transportation Trades Department about how their members overcame
obstacles to keep our transportation systems running.
The 117th Congress also passed a surface transportation
authorization bill that included truly transformative investments: the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, enacted in November 2021. The
long-overdue investments included in this legislation will grow the
economy, strengthen our global competitiveness, create good-paying
union jobs that can't be sent overseas, and make our communities more
resilient, livable, and equitable. In particular, this bipartisan
infrastructure law makes badly-needed improvements to our rail systems,
bridges and highways, transit, water, and broadband infrastructure, as
well as our ports and airports--investments I have championed for
years, both in the minority and majority, and under Republican and
Democratic administrations.
To give just one example, the bill will tackle the over $100
billion transit state of good repair backlog through a 30 percent
increase in transit formula grants in year one alone, a new railcar
replacement program, and an unprecedented investment in new, cleaner
buses and bus facilities.
Right now, 42,966 of the nation's bridges are in poor condition.
That's why the IIJA provided more than $40 billion in dedicated funding
for bridge repair, rehabilitation, and replacement. The law tackles
every aspect of the problem by authorizing a flexible formula bridge
program, providing dedicated funding for small, rural bridge repairs,
and establishing a new grant program to reconstruct the largest and
most complex bridges that will stand for a century to come. This money
is already being put to work across the country. According to the
American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA), more than
300 projects are already underway using funds from the new FHWA Bridge
Formula Program alone.
All of these infrastructure investments support good-paying jobs,
too--today's witness Dr. Adam Hersh estimates that IIJA's additional
infrastructure spending will support 772,400 jobs annually. And there's
a multiplier effect to the economic benefits for the communities where
projects take place--ARTBA has estimated that IIJA funds would have a
three-fold multiplier effect.
But the IIJA doesn't just build for the sake of building. It puts
us on a path towards addressing our greatest challenges--strengthening
America's position on the world stage; building a transportation system
that is equitable and provides access for all; and addressing the
existential threat of climate change.
Humans are causing climate change in a number of ways--most notably
through burning coal, gasoline and other fossil fuels.
The transportation sector is the largest contributor to greenhouse
gas emissions in the United States. Over the last three decades, those
emissions have risen 24 percent, more than any other sector. Passenger
and freight vehicles account for 82 percent of transportation sector
emissions--yet Congress did little to address it. A lot of the climate
change policy action has been in the courts and in the private sector,
as businesses look to manage their climate risks and comply with laws
in the European Union, Canada, and other countries that have actually
passed legislation to do something. Until now.
Now, with the Inflation Reduction Act, we are finally seeing
Congress take action on climate change. For transportation, this means
supporting greener materials in highway construction and the adoption
of sustainable aviation fuels. The law also includes substantial tax
incentives for electric vehicles. And the IIJA's support for passenger
rail, transit, and pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure will make a
difference in providing climate-friendly transportation options that
will reduce congestion for everyone. As I've said many times, climate
change is an existential threat to our nation and the world, and I'm
glad we're finally taking action.
Looking back over my 36 years in Congress and on this committee,
there is a lot to be proud of. But, serving as Chair of the
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for the last four years has
been an honor of a lifetime. We've accomplished so much together, and
I'm glad we have this last full committee hearing to focus on the
incredible accomplishments of the 117th Congress.
Thank you to each of our witnesses for being here today. I know
your time is valuable, and this committee is grateful for your
participation.

Mr. DeFazio. With that, I would be happy to recognize the
ranking member.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you to our witnesses for being here today.
Today's hearing is going to focus on the three pieces of
legislation that were signed into law by President Biden over
the course of this Congress.
First, let's be clear where we are today. The economy and
the American people are not better off since the President took
office. Rather, the current 8.3 percent inflation is nearly 400
percent higher than when the President first took office, and
Americans are struggling with the heightened cost of everyday
items. Inflation, and many of the other crises we are facing
today, are a result of the cumulative impact of overspending,
overregulating, and overall failed leadership.
The first of the three bills we are here to talk about
today passed in early 2021, costing a whopping $2 trillion. The
American Rescue Plan, or ARP, as it was called, was forced
through Congress using the partisan budget reconciliation
process under the guise of helping the Nation combat and
recover from the COVID-19 pandemic. However, it was passed when
the economy was already well into recovery, and only 9 percent
of the bill's funds went to COVID-related assistance, not to
mention it was the only COVID package developed and passed in a
completely partisan way since the onset of the public health
crisis.
The second bill, which is of pivotal interest to this
committee, is the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act, or IIJA. The chair and I both were critical of the
fact that this bill was written and negotiated in the Senate
along with the administration while the House was completely
shut out of the process. In November 2021, when the bill came
over to the House, Members were left with the choice of this
flawed piece of legislation or nothing, which frustrated all
sides.
The third bill, recently passed, is the $750 billion
Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA. Despite its clever name, it
actually makes inflation worse.
All together, these massive spending bills total nearly $4
trillion, most of which was paid for through deficit spending.
I look forward to discussing the very serious effects and
consequences that are plaguing Americans in no small part due
to the totality of all the massive spending over the last 2
years.
Problem number one isn't hard to identify: the injection of
nearly $4 trillion into the economy in only 17 months
contributed to the highest inflation in four decades. In fact,
economists estimate that inflation is costing the average
American family nearly $8,000 more this year for everyday
necessities. Inflation is also causing States and local
governments to scrap, or at least push off, some very important
transportation projects. And we have heard that in this
committee.
If inflation continues, it could entirely wipe out the
funding increases in the IIJA. But let's remember that
Democratic economist Larry Summers warned us, and the majority
time and time again dismissed the warnings.
Aside from focusing on the damage these bills did to our
economy, another concern of mine is how the administration is
implementing laws that have passed, including the IIJA. This
administration is not following the letter of the law. Instead,
they are using rules and guidance materials to impose partisan
policies throughout the process.
Looking forward, my focus is going to be on oversight of
IIJA, as well as the transportation-related provisions in the
ARP and the IRA to ensure that taxpayer funding is spent wisely
and according to the letter of the law, or the way the law was
passed.
[Mr. Graves of Missouri's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Chair DeFazio, and thank you to our witnesses for being
here today.
Today's hearing will focus on three pieces of legislation signed
into law by President Biden over the course of this Congress.
But first let's be clear with where we are today--the economy and
the American people are not better off since the President took office.
Rather, the current 8.3 percent inflation is nearly 400 percent higher
than when President Biden first took office and Americans are
struggling with the heightened cost of everyday items.
Inflation, and many of the other crises we are facing today, are a
result of the cumulative impact of the overspending, overregulating,
and overall failed leadership of the President.
The first of the three bills we are here to talk about today passed
in early 2021, costing a whopping $2 trillion. The American Rescue Plan
(ARP), as it was called, was forced through Congress using the partisan
budget reconciliation process under the guise of helping the Nation
combat and recover from the COVID-19 pandemic.
However, it was passed when the economy was already well into
recovery, and only nine percent of the bill's funds went to COVID-
related assistance. Not to mention, it was the only COVID package
developed and passed in a completely partisan way since the onset of
the public health crisis.
The second bill, which is of pivotal interest to this Committee, is
the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA).
The Chair and I both were critical of the fact that this bill was
written and negotiated in the Senate along with the Administration
while the House was completely shut out of the process. In November
2021 when the bill came over to the House, Members were left with the
choice of this flawed bill or nothing, which frustrated all sides.
The third bill, recently passed, is the $750 billion Inflation
Reduction Act (IRA) that, despite its clever name, actually makes
inflation worse.
All together, these massive spending bills total nearly $4
trillion, most of which was paid for with deficit spending.
I look forward to discussing the very serious effects and
consequences that are plaguing Americans in no small part due to the
totality of all the massive spending over the last two years.
Problem number one isn't hard to identify--the injection of nearly
$4 trillion dollars into the economy in only 17 months contributed to
the highest inflation in four decades. In fact, economists estimate
that inflation is costing the average American family nearly $8,000
more this year for everyday necessities. Inflation also is causing
states and local governments to scrap or push off important
transportation projects.
If inflation continues, it could entirely wipe out the funding
increases in IIJA. But let's remember that Democrat Economist Larry
Summers warned us--and the Majority, time and again, dismissed these
warnings.
Aside from focusing on the damage these bills did to our economy,
another concern of mine is how the Administration is implementing laws
Congress has passed, including IIJA. This Administration is not
following the letter of the law and is instead using rules and guidance
materials to impose partisan policies throughout the process.
Looking forward, my focus will be on oversight of IIJA as well as
the transportation-related provisions in the ARP and the IRA to ensure
taxpayer funding is spent wisely and according to the letter of the
law.

Mr. Graves of Missouri. Again, I look forward to hearing
from the witnesses today, and I want to thank you, Mr.
Chairman, and I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentleman for his statement. I
would now like to welcome the witnesses on our panel: Sara
Nelson, international president, the Association of Flight
Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO; Greg Regan, president, the
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO; Stephen Gardner,
chief executive officer, Amtrak; Samuel Desue, general manager
of TriMet; David Ditch, policy analyst, The Heritage
Foundation; and Adam Hersh, senior economist at the Economic
Policy Institute.
Thanks for being here today. Thanks for some who traveled
all the way across the country to do that, and I think this is
the first hearing we have had where all the witnesses are
actually here in person. I can't think of another one, right?
Oh, we have one online. Well, close. All right. This is the
closest we have come to having all of the witnesses here.
Without objection, your full statements will be included in
the record. And since that has been done, we ask you to limit
yourself to 5 minutes, best in terms of summarizing the most
cogent parts, or relevant parts, or even if you want to depart
and comment on what someone else on the panel said, that is
always more interesting.
So, with that, I would recognize President Nelson of the
AFA for 5 minutes.

TESTIMONY OF SARA NELSON, INTERNATIONAL PRESIDENT, ASSOCIATION
OF FLIGHT ATTENDANTS--CWA, AFL-CIO; GREGORY R. REGAN,
PRESIDENT, TRANSPORTATION TRADES DEPARTMENT, AFL-CIO; STEPHEN
GARDNER, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER
CORPORATION (AMTRAK); SAMUEL DESUE, Jr., GENERAL MANAGER,
TriMet; DAVID DITCH, POLICY ANALYST, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION;
AND ADAM S. HERSH, Ph.D., SENIOR ECONOMIST, ECONOMIC POLICY
INSTITUTE

Ms. Nelson. Thank you, Chair DeFazio. It is great to have
two of you looking down on us at this hearing.
And Ranking Member Graves and members of the committee, we
really appreciate the opportunity to talk about the importance
of investing in our Nation's transportation and infrastructure
and its workers.
I am a 26-year union flight attendant and the president of
the Association of Flight Attendants, AFL-CIO. And we represent
flight attendants at 19 airlines across the industry. We also
coordinate closely with our partner union, CWA; our sister
union, APFA; and all the transportation union affiliates of the
Transportation Trades Department of the AFL-CIO. We are
grateful for the opportunity to testify on the benefits of the
American Rescue Plan, Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act,
and the Inflation Reduction Act.
In past crises, we were the bailout. Aviation workers were
the bailout. But thanks to Chair DeFazio and coordination
between unions and industry and the bipartisan action of this
committee, that was not the case this time. Enacting the PSP,
the Payroll Support Program, in the CARES Act and extending it
in the American Rescue Plan meant that we kept critical service
in place to all of our communities and hundreds of thousands of
aviation workers out of the unemployment line.
We stayed connected to our healthcare and retirement
contributions while continuing to pay taxes that supported our
State and local budgets, maintained contributions to Social
Security, Medicare, and other long-term programs, as well as
supporting other jobs by paying the cable bill and rent,
keeping the lights on, and staying warm in our homes and food
on the table. PSP kept all systems in place, and didn't strain
other public assistance programs that people needed during the
crisis.
The program that Chair DeFazio championed was the most
effective and transparent jobs program in COVID relief. It is
an example of problem-solving that industry and unions and
bipartisan action can do together. It is recognized around the
world as the gold standard for the critical aviation sector,
and it is easy to recognize its success as headlines come from
Europe about halting service and turning airlines and
passengers away from airports.
The program halted the greed of Wall Street by banning
stock buybacks and dividends until September 30th of 2022, and
reined in the worst of corporate behavior by capping executive
compensation through March of 2023. It is the only industry
where inequality did not grow during the crisis.
This hearing is very timely because tomorrow the provision
banning airlines from initiating stock buybacks does expire.
And while airlines are just now starting to make a profit, the
recovery is not complete, and the austerity of 20 years prior
has not been corrected for airline jobs. We can't allow $1 to
go to Wall Street before fixing operational issues and
concluding contract negotiations.
That is why we also appreciate Chair DeFazio's letter,
along with 70 signatures, that went to airline trade
associations this morning, asking them to take the pledge not
to send any cash to Wall Street with stock buybacks on October
1st, 2022.
The Payroll Support Program worked, full stop. But now we
have to fix the imperfect system that existed before this
pandemic. And if we use what we did during the pandemic by
working together, we can do that.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provided $25
billion in our Nation's air transportation system over 5 years.
This helps with concessions of the airport, and grants to small
businesses, as well. This is important to flight attendants
because, when passengers cannot get food, it increases anxiety,
increases conflict on board, and then people get on our planes
and it creates bigger problems. Concessionaires have had hot
coffee thrown in their face and been abused in other ways. We
have to stop that from happening, and we have to support our
airports as much as possible to do that.
We also are happy that $15 billion was set aside for
airport infrastructure for runways, gates, taxiways, safety and
sustainability projects, airport transit connections, and
roadway projects. And these are important. There was a Ryanair
flight attendant who was hit by a private vehicle walking home
late at night, because she did not have access to public
transportation. This is inexcusable, and this is what we can
avoid when we invest in our infrastructure in this way.
The sum of $5 billion is provided to our air traffic
control facilities that badly need this investment. And this
also has key provisions championed by labor unions, including
local hiring preferences, Buy America provisions, and
prevailing wage requirements.
The Inflation Reduction Act was another step forward, and I
want to highlight the investments in addressing the climate
crisis, both with the NOAA climate research and the Gulfstream
G550 Hurricane Hunter. This will improve weather forecasts and
have a profound impact on saving lives, jobs, businesses, and
communities.
Finding the sustainable aviation fuel is important. We
appreciate United Airlines' investment to sustainable aviation
fuels, but we hope that this will speed up the rest of the
industry and make this a reality sooner than 2050, as they have
promised.
Now, finally, we applaud the efforts of this committee and
its incredible staff for your action to invest both in our
Nation's infrastructure and its workers. It is hard to imagine
this committee without its inimitable chair, Peter DeFazio, who
has transformed safety for our profession. From stopping flags
of convenience in aviation, to fines and penalties for
disruptive passengers and sexual assault, to evacuation
standards and staffing requirements, to stopping the spraying
of poisonous pesticides in the aircraft cabin, to certification
oversight that ensures aircraft are safe and increasing flight
attendant minimum rest to fight fatigue, he has been relentless
in championing our jobs and the health and safety of the
passengers and crew on board every single day.
Chair DeFazio broke the mold, remembering where he came
from, and using his commitment to everyday people to drive his
relentless advocacy, policy wonk curiosity, and strategic
smarts to get results. His legacy will live on in the countless
positive changes he has made for our profession, his mentorship
of all of us who have the privilege to work with him, our
industry, and our country.
We congratulate honorary AFA member Chair DeFazio on his
retirement, but his work and leadership will endure with every
flight, ship, port, truck, and train that moves with the power
of the American worker. Thank you, and I look forward to your
questions.
[Ms. Nelson's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Sara Nelson, International President, Association
of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO
Introduction
Thank you Chair DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves and members of the
House Transportation & Infrastructure for convening this hearing on the
importance of investing in our nation's transportation infrastructure
and its workers.
I am a twenty-six year union Flight Attendant and president of the
Association of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO (AFA), representing
Flight Attendants at 19 airlines across the industry. We also
coordinate closely with our partner union the Communications Workers of
America, the Association of Professional Flight Attendants and all of
the transportation union affiliates of the Transportation Trades
Department, AFL-CIO.
My testimony will cover various provisions included in the American
Rescue Plan (P.L. 117-2), Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L.
117-58), and the Inflation Reduction Act (P.L. 117-169) that
demonstrate why investments in our transportation infrastructure are a
force multiplier for creating a strong, safe, stable and equitable
aviation industry now and in the future.
Aviation is all about bringing people together all around the
globe. Our job and our agenda is to continue to make that possible.
That means a living wage, a secure home, respect and safety on the job,
with time to enjoy life for all of the people who make it possible for
our planes to fly. And it means doing our part to protect our earth
with clean air, water and smooth jet streams. Transportation workers
are united and organizing with urgency to ensure sustainable aviation
with good union jobs is our collective future.
The American Rescue Plan (P.L. 117-2)
A year after the World Health Organization declared a pandemic,
President Biden signed into law the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan
(ARP) Act of 2021 (P.L. 117-2) to provide immediate relief to American
workers. The rescue package put the needs of working families first and
addressed the burdens placed on our transportation networks during the
worst public health and economic crisis in living memory.
All Americans need a living wage, access to healthcare, education,
housing, and a secure retirement and thankfully, this time, due to the
leadership and experience of Chair DeFazio and many on this committee,
the transportation workers didn't pay for this crisis and the horrific
deficits exposed by the pandemic. The ARP provided more than $49
billion in federal funding to keep all of America's transportation
systems operational.
Especially important to Flight Attendants and aviation workers was
$15 billion extended for the worker-first airline Payroll Support
Program to finish what we started in the CARES Act. Without a doubt, we
owe our jobs and a functioning airline industry to Peter DeFazio. He
used years of experience in dealing with one crisis after another to
keep workers at the center of any recovery.
We Couldn't Allow a Repeat of the Fallout from 9/11
``Hold all other communications on pay cuts, base closures, and
previously announced furloughs. United just called me. They're
furloughing another 2,500 Flight Attendants. We need to deal with that
first.''
I'll never forget that call. It was 2003, and our union was six
months into a 38-month bankruptcy at United Airlines that followed
September 11th.
Nearly one in three United employees--30,000 all told--lost our
jobs during that bankruptcy. Our pension was gutted. And those who
remained took two massive pay cuts. When United came out of bankruptcy,
nearly 45% of the savings the corporation showed Wall Street came off
the backs of workers.
Wall Street was ecstatic. Workers were devastated.
That time was the formative experience in my career. And that's why
our union worked with urgency to craft a relief plan that ultimately
became the Payroll Support Program.
We refused to follow the old ``blank check for corporations''
bailout playbook, especially for airlines. Our union had spent recent
years protesting stock buybacks that pay out Wall Street and top
executives while our staffing levels were cut to minimums and we had to
work more just to make ends meet. Twenty years after the events of
September 11, 2001, we were still feeling the effects of austerity and
cost cutting while Wall Street had become more emboldened to take cash
from the profits made by our hard work and sacrifice. Prior to the
pandemic inequality was felt in our paychecks, eroded retirement
security, longer days with shorter nights, staffing cuts resulting in
fewer of us with more passengers than ever, and the configuration of
the seats and service on our planes. Consumers experienced these cuts
too. Austerity also meant job loss and years of no hiring. Initiatives
to promote diversity and inclusion suffered at the same rate that
mature workers felt the sting of 25, 30, and 35 years on Reserve status
and little ability to control our schedules even after decades on the
job.
I know from personal experience: the people who benefit if airlines
go under are corporate executives, bankruptcy lawyers, and corporate
management consultants who under corporate bankruptcy law get to walk
away with hundreds of millions in bonuses.
We knew it would be immediate devastation for two million aviation
workers if we couldn't get relief, but there was no way we were going
to agree to a bailout for airlines. That's why our program, made
possible through the relentless leadership of Chair DeFazio and
continued to finish the job under the Biden Administration with the
ARP, demanded the requirements of no involuntary furloughs, no cuts to
hourly rates of pay, continued service to all of our communities and a
ban on stock buybacks and dividends along with caps on the executive
compensation even after the relief period was complete.
A Historic Workers First Program: PSP
Enacting the PSP in the Act CARES Act and extending it in the
American Rescue Plan meant we kept critical service in place to all
communities and hundreds of thousands of aviation workers out of the
unemployment line. We stayed connected to our healthcare, retirement
contributions, while continuing to pay taxes that supported our state
and local budgets, maintained contributions to social security,
medicare and other long term programs--as well as supporting other jobs
by paying the cable bill, rent, keeping the lights on and staying warm
in our homes with food on the table. The PSP program kept all systems
in place and didn't strain other public assistance programs so many
people needed during the crisis. This was a simple, but necessary
solution that protected and shored up people on the frontlines of our
economy, both during the crisis and for our future.
The program that Chair DeFazio championed was the most effective
and transparent jobs program in COVID relief. It is recognized around
the world as the gold standard for the critical aviation sector, and
it's easy to recognize its success as headlines come from Europe about
halting service and turning airlines and passengers away from airports.
The program halted the greed of Wall Street by banning stock buybacks
and dividends until September 30, 2022 and reined in the worst of
corporate behavior by capping executive compensation through March
2023. This was purposely done so federal funding would be directed to
frontline workers for our pay and benefits and to prevent growing
inequality by stopping taxpayer money from going to airline
shareholders and investors during this economic crisis.
This hearing is very timely because tomorrow the provision banning
airlines from initiating stock buybacks expires. While airlines are
just now starting to make a profit, the recovery is not complete and
the austerity of twenty years prior has not been corrected for airline
jobs. We can't allow CEOs to send one dollar to Wall Street before
fixing operational issues and concluding contract negotiations. We need
investments in the operation, staffing, and pay and benefits to keep
and attract people to aviation jobs.
That is why our union, along with the Air Line Pilots Association,
Int'l (ALPA), the Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA),
the Communications Workers of America (CWA), International Association
of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW), the International
Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT), Transport Workers Union of America
(TWU), and Service Employees International Union (SEIU), representing
hundreds of thousands of aviation workers, announced the launch of
nostockbuybacks.org. The campaign demands pledges from the CEOs of U.S.
airlines to extend the COVID relief ban on stock buybacks until:
1. operational meltdowns are not the norm and staffing and flight
schedules are aligned to support public demand; and
2. labor contract negotiations are concluded.

Emphasizing the concerns we're raising, Chair DeFazio and many
members on this committee, are sending a letter to the trade
associations who represent commercial airlines, urging their members to
publicly pledge that they will not engage in stock buybacks on October
1, 2022. Millions of frontline transportation workers have worked
through the devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and many put
contract negotiations on hold during the crisis. Minimum staffing and
high productivity put in place pre-pandemic exacerbate problems now
until we can address these issues in bargaining and/or legislation. We
appreciate this committee's efforts to solicit the concerns of airline
workers who continue to bear the brunt of chronic understaffing and
languishing labor contracts.
PSP: Freezing an Imperfect System
While aviation workers came together through our unions, found
common ground with airlines and worked with allies in Congress to pass
and extend this critical aid, we froze an imperfect system for 16
months with legislative constraints tied to COVID relief. However, the
greed that ran rampant before COVID created an industry that was
already stretched thin with minimum staffing and heavily reliant on
high overtime hours in order to meet basic operational metrics.
The economic fallout of September 11th in the airline industry
meant bankruptcies and mergers where the courts abrogated our
contracts, eliminated our pensions, and changed our jobs forever.
Before September 11th, airlines regularly staffed flights with Flight
Attendants above FAA minimums, two or more passenger service agents to
board a flight and more throughout the airport to handle delays and
cancellations.
Now, flights are staffed with minimum Flight Attendants, so when
something goes wrong there's no additional crew to pull from. Passenger
service agents are left to board full planes by themselves creating
communication issues during the boarding process. And when a flight
gets delayed or canceled? That same agent or worse no one is left in
the terminal to assist passengers--making an already difficult
situation worse.
Hiring is important but maintaining employees is also important.
Delta Air Lines was touting the ``juniority'' benefit from the pandemic
last year, but on a recent earrings call CEO Ed Bastian said Delta's
operation was suffering from a training/inexperience gap.
Some have questioned the use of the relief dollars in the wake of
some operational meltdowns. Staffing is above pre-pandemic levels if
compared to the number of flight hours airlines are flying, but this is
a problem created pre-pandemic and exacerbated by the immediate return
to an unpredictable destination demand and other pandemic effects. More
than anything though, American worker productivity was higher than any
developed country in the pre-pandemic world. This is also true in
aviation, but it is not sustainable anywhere. Aviation workers are not
able to pick up as many overtime hours due to COVID infections,
difficulties with commuting to work, and fatigue exacerbated by high
instances of combative passengers.
It's important to note that earlier airline operational meltdowns
were the result of:
1. The lapse in PSP funding from October 1, 2020-December 28,
2020, as we warned would happen due to a backlog in retraining,
certification, and security credentials.
2. Airlines planned operations based on pre-pandemic overtime
hours, but workers were no longer willing to pick up overtime at the
same rate because of the conditions at work.
3. COVID infections, although generally affecting the vaccinated
population for shorter time periods, decrease the rate of workers who
are able to work.
4. Operational support staff at airlines were also cut or jobs
outsourced leaving crew on hold for assignments or release from duty
for hours at a time.

Unions have negotiated with management to put in place financial
incentives to pick up time, and in some cases address issues with
traveling to work. This helped, but it's not a long term fix like we'll
experience with the conclusion of contract negotiations and
encouragement for other investments in infrastructure rather than
pressure to send cash to Wall Street.
Put simply there is minimal give in our system. When something goes
wrong, like a massive weather system moving up the east coast, the
operations fall apart quickly leaving passengers and crews stranded.
Airlines can't control weather, but management can build a system that
has more to recover from operational challenges that arise.
That's what we saw this summer--it was worse than pre-pandemic 2019
when looking at delays and cancellations. But because of the critical
work of this committee and the Payroll Support Program it was only
worse by a couple percentage points. Our sisters and brothers across
the Atlantic have suffered far worse because their governments failed
to meet the moment of this crisis. Heathrow has made unprecedented
moves telling airlines they had to cut or cap capacity for months.
Amsterdam, Dublin and more airports in Europe suffered security queues
for 4 plus hours. Thanks to our federalized TSA we did not suffer the
same fate.
The Payroll Support Program worked. Full stop. But now we have to
fix the imperfect system that existed before this pandemic.
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (P.L. 117-58)
The bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) is
another critical investment in the quality and safety of our nation's
infrastructure that will drive the creation of good-paying union jobs,
increase equity in transportation and help fight climate change.
In total, the Law provided $25 billion for the nation's air
transportation system over five years.
First, $5 billion is designated for airport terminals, including
the concessions and multimodal terminal projects. Flight Attendants
(and everyone on this committee) see first hand the terminals that need
to be upgraded and more accessible for individuals with disabilities.
The ease of getting from one terminal to another should be the norm in
2022 and this bill will help make this a reality. Further, many
airports sadly have few healthy dining options (without to-go
alcohol!). This is a problem for crew having access to food as well. We
are pleased the Airport Terminal Program allows concessions, who are
often small business owners, to apply for these grants as well. When
concessions are down or poorly staffed passengers cannot as easily get
a meal before a flight. This increases anxiety, medical issues, and
sometimes leads to violence. Concession workers have had hot coffee
thrown back in their face and faced incredible abuse while trying
desperately to meet demand. These conflicts are rarely caught and then
passengers already behaving badly abuse a gate agent or board our
airplanes increasing the potential for violence in the cabin when
there's nowhere to go and no way to remove the threat from our
workspace.
Second, $15 billion was set aside for airport infrastructure, such
as the runways, gates, taxiways, safety and sustainability projects,
airport transit connections, and roadway projects. A tragic example
comes to mind of the importance of airport transit projects after
learning about a Ryanair (UK and Ireland based airline) Flight
Attendant, Cinzia Ceravolo \1\, who was hit by a car and died. She was
trying to walk home in the dark from the airport after her shift
because she could not afford a taxi and there was no public
transportation option. Had public transit been available to get her
safely off the airport road to connect her to a bus stop or to subway,
she would still be alive today.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-merseyside-62700831
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, $5 billion is provided for air traffic control facilities
to improve their physical condition. Sadly, the FAA has more than 100
aging control towers \2\ at regional and municipal airports across the
United States that will eventually need to be replaced. Many control
towers built 20 years ago are incompatible with today's operational
requirements. The average age of a tower is 27 years, and some are up
to 40 years old \3\. The upgrades and repairs on air traffic control
facilities around the country will create jobs for local suppliers,
construction workers and communities. All of these jobs should be good
union jobs to make sure they are done right and get the most out of
lifting conditions for the people in all of our communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.faa.gov/newsroom/faa-launches-nationwide-
solicitation-design-air-traffic-control-towers-future
\3\ https://www.volpe.dot.gov/NAS-infrastructure
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The IIJA also includes many other key provisions championed by
labor unions, including local hiring preferences, Buy America
provisions, and prevailing wage requirements.
Inflation Reduction Act (P.L. 117-169)
Most recently, Congress passed and the President signed into law
the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), an incredible step forward for every
working family towards lowering energy and healthcare costs, requiring
strong labor standards in order to claim clean energy tax credits,
creating millions of construction and manufacturing jobs in America
\4\, and fighting climate change that threatens our jobs and our safety
at work and at home.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/26/business/factory-jobs-
workers-rebound.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Severe turbulence is happening more frequently and is more intense
due in part to climate change. This summer, eight people were
hospitalized after an American Airlines flight from Tampa, Florida, to
Nashville, Tennessee, experienced severe, unexpected turbulence and was
forced to land in Alabama \5\. This incident happened a few weeks
following a flight from Chicago to Salt Lake City that caused minor
injuries to three Southwest Airlines flight attendants and one
passenger when their flight experienced moderate turbulence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/what-is-turbulence-and-why-
climate-change-could-be-making-it-more-common/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Flight Attendants, these incidents pose a serious occupational
risk. And as extreme weather events become more common, more and more
flights never take off at all. When the polar vortex plunged most of
the U.S. into a deep freeze in January 2019, airlines canceled
thousands of flights \6\. Heatwaves, thunderstorms, and other effects
of climate change similarly make it impossible for airplanes to fly.
Simply put, grounded flights mean lost pay for flight attendants, who
earn an hourly wage while we're in the air, and more and more it's hard
to go to work when our homes are destroyed in the wake of more frequent
natural disasters.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ https://www.businessinsider.com/flight-cancellation-cold-
weather-storm-blizzard-closing-
airports-2019-
2#::text=When%20a%20nasty%20polar%20vortex,start%20dropping%2C
%20everything%20slows%20down.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We appreciate the leadership of Chair Maria Cantwell, Senate
Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, to author key
provisions in the IRA such as increased funding for the National
Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) to fund climate research for
atmospheric processes to examine the causes and impacts of extreme
weather. These investments will support the development of more
accurate/timely weather forecasts, and improved climate change
predictions. In addition, NOAA also received funding to acquire a new
Gulfstream G550 Hurricane Hunter to collect data when large storms
appear, which is vital for knowing where storms will hit and how strong
they will be. Improved weather forecasts can have a profound impact on
saving lives, jobs, businesses and communities.
Another key climate provision included in the IRA that is critical
for reducing carbon emissions from air travel is funding for the new
Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) and Low-Emissions Aviation Technology
Grant Program. We can't think that carbon offsets are a solution that
makes any difference at all. Our union is proud of the commitment \7\
United Airlines made to be 100% green by 2050 by reducing greenhouse
gas emissions by 100%, and we hope to work further with this committee
to help speed this action up more. The IRA provided a huge step
forward. United and other airlines will benefit from the SAF grant
program, and so will we all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ https://www.united.com/ual/en/us/fly/company/global-
citizenship/environment.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chairman DeFazio's Contributions to the Lives of Aviation Workers
During the time Congressman DeFazio (D-OR) has been Chair of the
House Transportation and Infrastructure during the 117th Congress, we
have seen many important aviation health and safety bills introduced or
passed by the full House under his leadership.
First, the National Aviation Preparedness Act, H.R. 884, championed
by House Aviation Subcommittee Chair Rick Larsen and Congressman Don
Beyer (D-VA), that directs federal agencies and aviation stakeholders
to develop a national strategy on health and safety protections for
future pandemics. From the beginning of the pandemic, our union was
urging DOT and other agencies to come together to develop effective
mitigations to ensure the health and safety of passengers and aviation
employees during the pandemic, and a follow-on plan to put the industry
on a path to recovery. We believe the health of our nation's aviation
workforce is vital to maintaining our transportation network in times
of crisis, as we've seen throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
Second, the Fair and Open Skies, H.R. 3095 and a narrower version
that was included this year as an amendment to the House Appropriations
Bill, are already having an impact on new airline entrants, such as
Norse Atlantic Airways, a Norwegian low-cost, long-haul airline
headquartered in Arendal, Norway. Norse employs nearly 250 U.S.-based
Flight Attendants with crew bases in JFK and FLL, and expects to
continue to grow and increase Flight Attendant jobs in the U.S. Norse
is playing by the rules that make Open Skies fair and this legislation
would ensure other airlines do as well. AFA has been working with
Chairman DeFazio, Chairman Larsen and many members of this committee
since 2016 to prevent foreign airlines from using ``flags of
convenience'' to avoid the regulations of their home countries or
otherwise undermining labor standards.
Third, the Stop Sexual Assault and Harassment in Transportation
Act, H.R. 5706 passed the full House in March 2022. It will help
prevent sexual assaults and sexual harassment on airplanes, buses,
passenger vessels, commuter and intercity passenger railroads, taxis
and ridesharing vehicles. Chair DeFazio has always held this important
value that when it comes to the transportation of people, safety must
always come first, and that includes protecting people from sexual
harassment and assault.
Fourth, the Healthy Flights Act of 2021, H.R. 2770, which was
introduced in 2021. The bill (1) sets forth requirements relating to
the use of masks and other protective equipment for airline passengers
and certain airline employees; (2) requires the FAA to provide certain
employees, including any air traffic controller and airway
transportation systems specialists, with masks and other protective
equipment; and (3) mandates the development of a national aviation
preparedness plan to ensure the aviation system is prepared to respond
to epidemics and pandemics of infectious diseases. Each of these
provisions are things aviation workers have been calling for to feel
safe at work. We are thankful for Chair DeFazio's leadership and
recognition that we are essential frontline workers who come to work
each day to keep our nation's safe and efficient air transportation
system operational.
Finally, we have greatly appreciated the unwavering support from
Chair DeFazio and members of this committee to urge the U.S. DOT to
finalize the congressionally mandated 10 hours of minimum irreducible
rest for Flight Attendants passed in October 2018. Chair DeFazio has
never stopped fighting on this. The Trump Administration put this law
on a path to kill it. But thanks to Chair DeFazio's relentless efforts,
the bipartisan support from this committee, and the commitment of the
Biden Administration, we will see this rule finally implemented before
the end of this year.
Conclusion
We thank Congress, and especially the efforts of this Committee,
for your leadership in enacting many of the provisions I covered in my
testimony that invested both in our nation's infrastructure and its
workers. These laws are having a positive impact on our economy and
instead of another twenty years of austerity, workers have the ability
to push forward to maintain and create good jobs in aviation and
beyond.
I also want to touch on how Chair DeFazio has transformed the
safety of our profession. From fines and penalties for disruptive
passengers and sexual assault, to evacuation standards and staffing
requirements to stopping the spraying of poisonous pesticides in the
cabin to fighting for child restraint seats for our youngest passengers
to aircraft certification standards and oversight to ensure aircraft
are safe and increasing Flight Attendant minimum rest to fight fatigue,
he's been a champion for our jobs and the health and safety of
passengers and crew onboard every day of his extraordinary career.
Over the years, I've known Chair DeFazio as our greatest champion
in Congress. He is an honorary member of our union, and I am proud to
call him my friend. We can't imagine Congress without the
representative who broke the mold remembering where he came from and
using his commitment to everyday people to drive his relentless
advocacy, policy wonk curiosity, and strategic smarts to get results.
Chair DeFazio has never been afraid to speak the truth or take on a
righteous fight for the people. His legacy will live on in the
countless positive changes he's made for our profession, his mentorship
of all of us who've had the privilege to work with him, our industry
and our country. He may be retiring from an amazing career we all have
benefited from, but Chair DeFazio's work and leadership will endure
with every flight, ship, port, truck, and train that moves with the
power of the American worker.
Thank you and I look forward to answering your questions.

Mr. DeFazio. The witness' time has expired. Thank you so
much.
We are going to get the flight attendant duty time over the
line before I am retired. It has only been 5 years, after all.
I now recognize Greg Regan, president of the Transportation
Trades Department at AFL-CIO. Thank you.
Mr. Regan. Good morning. I am Greg Regan, president of the
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO. We are a federation
of 37 unions whose members work in every corner of America's
transportation network.
I want to thank Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves
for inviting me to testify today. And it is truly an honor to
be asked to testify at Chairman DeFazio's final full committee
hearing, and it feels appropriate that I get to do it with my
friend, Sara, here, as well.
Mr. Chairman, you have a proud and historic legacy of
fighting for sound transportation policies and investments that
create good union jobs by pairing these investments with the
strongest possible worker protections.
To those of you who supported working Americans with your
votes this Congress, I want to thank you for your leadership
and your support. Your votes will be an incredible legacy in
your careers in public service, and I am proud to be here with
you today celebrating these achievements that are changing
lives and transforming our economy. I want to share with you
some of your legacy's impact on the working people you
represent back home in your districts.
First, TTD has long advocated for a generational investment
that would finally bring our transportation infrastructure into
the 21st century, the kind of investment that leaves a legacy
for future generations, the way that our parents and
grandparents did for us. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, or
BIL, positions us to turn the page away from the lost
generation that watched its infrastructure fall apart and fail
the Nation.
At $1.2 trillion in total funding, including $550 billion
in new spending for transportation, the bill helps correct
years of chronic underinvestment in our systems and our
infrastructure. Importantly, it does so while creating and
sustaining hundreds of thousands of good union jobs. And I
cannot overstate the importance of this last point. The
increased wages, job stability, and benefits that unions bring
to workers means that expanding union membership and creating
new, high-quality union jobs will deliver immediate results in
lifting up working families in every single one of your
districts.
Union jobs are creating a more equitable economy and
providing new opportunities to earn higher wages and better
benefits. When paired with policies like local hire provisions,
these new jobs are expanding pathways to trade careers that
have been historically inaccessible for many communities,
including women and people of color.
Across industries and communities, we know that high union
density not only benefits those union workers, but it also
lifts the wages and benefits for others who are not in a union.
It is truly the tide that lifts all boats. So, this legislation
will have far-reaching effects, helping rebuild an American
middle class that has seemed out of reach for far too many.
Beyond historic levels of funding, we have championed an
aggressive policy agenda to ensure the infrastructure law is
improving workplace conditions in all modes of transportation.
Just to name a few, the bill better protects public transit and
passenger rail workers from the scourge of assaults they faced
at work; it eliminates the ban on local hire preferences,
ensuring that these investments create good union jobs in the
communities in which they are being built; it strengthens
Amtrak, improves quality of service for riders; and it also, on
the freight side, helps shed light on some of the most
dangerous practices in the freight rail industry today. And
finally, it ensures that our public infrastructure investments
put more Americans to work through inclusion of the Build
America, Buy America Act.
What's more, thanks to the leadership of President Biden
and his administration, the bill is being implemented with a
pro-union focus that is unprecedented in American history.
Under the leadership of Transportation Secretary Buttigieg, we
have seen historically strong premiums placed on projects that
have support from unions that enforce high labor standards,
including the free and fair choice to join a union; that
demonstrate they will advance equity and inclusion; and solicit
participation for workers that live in the communities where
these projects are being built. This is a prime example of how
good transportation policy can alter the lives of millions of
Americans. Already, we have seen project sponsors touting their
project labor agreements, local hire agreements,
apprenticeships, and other workforce development programs.
I would like to submit for the record this DOT fact sheet
from the most recent INFRA grant awards, which highlights the
many grants with strong labor components.
[The information follows:]

Mr. Regan. I want to end on this thought. I know that the
bill is not perfect, and certainly at times the process left
much to be desired. And it did not have the same funding levels
or lofty policy achievements that Chairman DeFazio envisioned
in the INVEST in America Act. And while the bill is a
significant step forward for the Nation and the workers we
represent, it still left a number of our critical priorities on
the cutting room floor. I assure you that our advocacy for
those policies will not stop.
But it should be noted that just about every single one of
the worker-centered policies that we fought to keep in the
final law originated right here in this committee. They were
the results of the hard work that you put into the INVEST Act,
and the contributions that you made to it through pro-worker
amendments, many of which were bipartisan, by the way.
You and your staff should know that you have changed
people's lives. You have made the largest investment in public
transportation and passenger rail in our Nation's history. You
have made our airports and ports and our supply chain more
competitive, and you did it while putting workers first. This
achievement, in addition to the American Recovery Act and the
recently passed Inflation Reduction Act, ensures that this
Congress will have a lasting effect for millions of workers in
this country. You should all be proud of these accomplishments.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[Mr. Regan's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Gregory R. Regan, President, Transportation
Trades Department, AFL-CIO
Good morning. Thank you, Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves
for inviting me to testify before the committee today. It is truly an
honor to be asked to testify at Chairman DeFazio's final full committee
hearing. The Chairman has a proud and historic legacy of fighting for
sound transportation policy, new investments in a modern transportation
system and infrastructure that create good union jobs, and the
strongest transportation and construction worker protections in our
laws and regulations.
I speak today on behalf of 37 unions who collectively represent
millions of frontline workers across every mode and every sector of
America's transportation network.
I am one of no doubt hundreds of witnesses who have sat before this
committee in the past and practically begged for the kinds of historic
investments in our transportation infrastructure and services that have
been made over the course of this Congress. And now that we are here,
there's a surrealness to it. That surrealness stems in part from the
deep unfairness that it took a global catastrophe and death on the
scale of millions to help us get across the finish line. Among the dead
are thousands of frontline transportation workers who never asked to be
put in harm's way but who heroically showed up to work every day
through the worst of the pandemic. They went to work every day while
the majority of us sheltered at home waiting for our health system to
deliver life-saving therapeutics.
For those of you who supported the American Rescue Plan, the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law (BIL), and the Inflation Reduction Act, I
want to thank you for your leadership and support. Your votes are your
legacy as we celebrate these legislative achievements that are changing
lives and transforming our economy. Today I want to share with you some
of the impacts of your legacy on the working people you represent.
The American Rescue Plan
Last year, I testified before this committee on the federal
government's COVID-19 relief and response efforts, and their impact on
workers in this country. I made this point clear then, and I will make
it again today: the three COVID federal relief packages, including the
American Rescue Plan, saved the lives of the workers we fight for every
day at TTD and saved our country from calamity. By authorizing critical
federal support, you helped save vital industries during one of the
worst economic and public health crises the world has ever known. And
most importantly, by pairing federal support for transportation
industries with an extraordinary focus on the welfare of the workforce,
you kept millions of workers on the payroll and saved families from
financial collapse.
Looking back a year later, it is still remarkable to see the
effects of that investment. For decades we saw too many so-called
relief bills enacted in response to crises that failed to provide
relief to the actual employees. You changed that model. While there are
still significant workforce challenges stemming from the pandemic and
from bad employer practices and behavior, there can be no doubt that
the American Rescue Plan put us in the greatest possible position for
economic success and for the implementation of the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Bill that would follow in its footsteps.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
TTD has long advocated for a generational investment that would
finally bring our transportation infrastructure into the 21st century.
The kind of investment that goes beyond just the status quo, and that
finally addresses some of the most pressing needs facing our country.
The kind that leaves a legacy for future generations, the way our
parents and grandparents did for us. At $1.2 trillion in total funding,
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law positions us to turn the page away
from the lost generation that watched its infrastructure fall apart and
fail the nation.
The BIL helps right years of chronic underinvestment in
transportation infrastructure by providing historic funding levels
across all modes of transportation infrastructure. Included in the law
is new spending to the tune of $110 billion for highways and bridges;
$66 billion for rail, including $22 billion in dedicated funding for
Amtrak; $39.2 billion for public transportation; $16.6 billion for
ports and waterways; $25 billion for airports; $7.5 billion for clean
school buses & ferries; $7.5 billion for electric vehicle charging.
These investments will help expand much-needed highway and bridge
capacity while bringing into a state of good repair existing highway
assets that were quite literally crumbling away under our feet. They
will help expand public transportation services, and at the same time,
modernize our fleets with clean transit vehicles that will create
healthier communities. They will improve capacity on existing passenger
rail corridors while expanding transportation services to new
communities. They will improve airport runways, gates, taxiways,
airport terminals, concessions, and multimodal connections. And they
will improve port infrastructure to support the efficient movement of
commerce that our economy relies on.
Because of the strong labor protections that are tied to federal
investments in infrastructure, they will do all of this while creating
and maintaining hundreds of thousands of good-paying union jobs. I
cannot understate the importance of the jobs supported by the BIL being
union jobs. From the direct benefit to workers of earning fair wages
and benefits for their labor, and a union's power to overcome economic
inequities, to the secondary benefits in communities of unionization on
non-members' economic well-being, these jobs will help rebuild an
American middle-class that for too long has seemed beyond our reach.
Beyond just much-needed funding, we have championed an aggressive
policy agenda to ensure the infrastructure law is creating and
maintaining good union jobs across the board, and that it isn't used to
undercut public sector jobs in the interest of profits. It is a policy
agenda that protects workers from low-road, perverse business models,
the risks of assault, being overworked, and from being exposed to
unsafe workplace practices. That ensures we are preparing the current
workforce for the jobs of the future, and that we have pipelines in
place for the next generation of transportation workers.
From the perspective of working people, the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law was not just another extension of MAP-21 or FAST
surface transportation laws. Rather, this was arguably the most pro-
worker infrastructure law ever passed out of Congress. It contained
priorities that we have been fighting for, in some cases, for decades.
To name just a few:
The BIL overturns the ban on local-hire preferences,
ensuring that infrastructure projects will create good union jobs in
the communities in which they are being built.
The BIL provides unprecedented levels of funding for
public transit workforce training, ensuring that the transition to
zero-emission buses won't displace the current maintenance workforce or
lead to low-road labor models like contracted-out repair work.
The BIL includes transit worker protections that ensure
frontline transit workers are given an equal voice in safety planning
and will help put a stop to the scourge of assaults they have been
facing in increasing numbers for decades.
The BIL includes a number of Amtrak reforms that will
strengthen the carrier and improve the quality of service for riders.
These include: eliminating harmful language on food and beverage
revenues that stunted growth of onboard options; requiring Amtrak to
have station agent positions at many Amtrak stations; making employees
who have been assaulted eligible for the attendant benefits of Critical
Incident Stress Plans; and making it more difficult for Congress to
threaten service and good jobs by eliminating long-distance routes.
The BIL also took the first step toward reforming the
Amtrak Board of Directors in order to ensure the Board represents all
of its stakeholders. While the reforms, unfortunately, do not include a
seat for a labor representative as TTD and rail labor unions requested,
the reforms do represent a positive step in the right direction and TTD
will continue to advocate for a labor representative on the Board.
The BIL has several provisions to help shed light on some
of the most dangerous practices in the freight rail industry today,
including:
+ A requirement for a National Academies study on the safety of
trains longer than 7,500 feet, which present unique safety and training
challenges, and disrupt communities when behemoth trains block grade
crossings.
+ A requirement that FRA accident reports include information on
train length and number of cars, as well as the size of the crew on
board;
+ A requirement that DOT create a process that better involves
stakeholders, including rail labor representatives, in freight rail
accident and incident investigations.
+ A requirement for quarterly reporting on failures and
functions of Positive Train Control technology, including cutouts,
malfunctions, and enforcements where an accident was actually
prevented.
+ Increased transparency for regulatory waiver requests,
including suspensions of rules.
The BIL includes an expansion of Buy America/Buy American
rules that were supported for years by this committee, paving the way
for the inclusion of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act in the
BIL. BABA enhances existing Buy America requirements by applying
domestic content preferences for iron, steel, manufactured products,
and construction materials to all federal aid assistance infrastructure
programs. Because of this bill, the era of flagrant misuse of waivers
and egregious loopholes is over. We urge the committee and
administration to ensure the durability of these landmark provisions
are properly implemented.
The BIL also improves good jobs in trucking by including
provisions that will bring together stakeholders to develop pathways to
recruit, retain, or advance women into the trucking industry; creating
a new task force that will take on predatory truck leasing schemes that
trap drivers in impossible economic conditions; creating a new process
to ensures that unsafe operators are taken off the road expeditiously;
and requiring a study on the impacts of various methods of driver
compensation on safety and driver retention.

Taken on their own, the BIL's investments, paired with these strong
workforce protections, are significant accomplishments for the working
people of this country. But I would be remiss if I didn't also
highlight the work of this administration, under the leadership of
President Biden and Vice President Harris, in its implementation.
Even before the BIL was signed into law, the Biden-Harris
administration showed historic leadership and a laser focus on tying
federal investment to good jobs. Consider just the following actions
taken before and after passage of the BIL:

Executive Order on Worker Organizing and Empowerment
On April 26, 2021, President Biden signed an Executive Order
establishing the White House Task Force on Worker Organizing
and Empowerment. The task force was tasked with mobilizing the
federal government's policies, programs, and practices to
empower workers to organize and successfully bargain with their
employers. [Executive Order, 04/26/21]

Worker Organizing and Empowerment Task Force Recommendations
On February 07, 2022, the White House Task Force on Worker
Organizing and Empowerment issued its report, which called for
incorporating labor standards into transportation discretionary
grant programs, promoting apprenticeships, and making sure
taxpayer dollars that are spent on American-made goods will
lift up workers and strengthen our economy. [Task Force Report,
02/07/22]

Executive Order on Implementation of the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act
On November 15, 2021, President Biden issued an Executive Order
on the Implementation of the BIL. In it, he directed agencies
to improve job opportunities by prioritizing high labor
standards and the free and fair choice to join a union, and to
invest public dollars equitably. With this Executive Order, the
president set a new standard for tying federal dollars to the
creation of good union jobs and lifting up the voice of workers
on the projects they are delivering, operating, and
maintaining. [Executive Order, 11/15/21]

Executive Order on Use of Project Labor Agreements for Federal
Construction Projects
On February 4, 2022, President Biden signed an Executive Order
requiring Project Labor Agreements on federal construction
projects that cost more than $35 million, a move that is
expected to affect $262 billion in federal construction
contracting and improve job quality for nearly 200,000 workers.
[Executive Order, 02/04/22]

DOL-DOT MOU
On February 7, 2022, Secretaries Buttigieg and Walsh signed a
DOT-DOL Memorandum of Understanding to promote cooperative
efforts between the DOT and DOL to create and support pathways
to millions of good-paying infrastructure and transportation
jobs with the free choice to form a union as increased funding
from the BIL ramp up. [MOU, 02/07/22]

Those of us with cynical tendencies may see federal task forces or
inter-departmental MOUs and assume they are nothing more than political
window dressing. But that could not be further from the truth with this
administration. Just a glance at the funding notices issued by this DOT
under the leadership of Secretary Buttigieg shows a historically strong
premium on projects that have support from unions; enforce high labor
standards, including the free and fair choice to join a union;
demonstrate they will advance equity and inclusion; and solicit
participation from workers that live in the communities the projects
seek to serve. This premium on workers is already resulting in grants
with project labor agreements, local hire agreements, apprenticeship
programs, and other workforce development programs.
I thank President Biden and his administration for their vision and
leadership in the implementation of the BIL. We look forward to our
continued work with them over the life of this law.
I also want to thank Chairman DeFazio in particular for his work in
shaping this legislation. I know the BIL--and the process that led to
its development--is not the one you would have picked. Between friends,
it's not the one we would have picked either. I know it does not
achieve everything you sought in the INVEST In America Act and leaves a
significant amount of policy that you and your incredibly dedicated
staff worked tirelessly to craft.
But many, if not all, of the worker-centered policies that we
fought to keep in the law that ultimately passed originated first in
this committee. You and your staff should know that you have changed
people's lives. You have better-protected transit workers from the
threat of assault at work. You have made jobs on Amtrak safer and more
secure. You have cast light on the dangerous practices of the freight
rail industry that put workers in harm's way every day. You have made
our ports more competitive. You should all be proud of that and I hope,
if nothing else, you take that with you for the rest of your lives.
The Inflation Reduction Act
Finally, while the Inflation Reduction Act had only narrow amounts
of additional funding for transportation infrastructure, I would be
remiss if I did not acknowledge this very important victory for working
people. By improving healthcare affordability, including for seniors,
boosting the domestic job market for clean energy, imposing tax
fairness on corporations, and creating a more equitable economy, the
lives of all working-class people and those of our future generations
will be improved. We have every confidence that the Biden
Administration will implement the IRA with the same rigorous pro-worker
requirements that they have held as the standard for the BIL.
Where We Go From Here Matters
While these are significant achievements, I would like to conclude
with two thoughts:
First, largely due to the unusual way the BIL was crafted outside
of normal order, many of our priorities that were fought for by this
committee were ultimately not included in the final bill. We are
working with this administration to make forward steps where possible
and will work with future congresses to continue improving the working
lives of everyone in this country. There is no good reason to sideline
the health, safety, and wellbeing of working people in this country, or
to undermine the opportunity for good union jobs right here at home
where they're needed the most, and we will always stand firm in
fighting for those priorities.
Second, when my brother and our leader, Larry Willis, testified
before this committee four years ago, he said, ``we must not find
ourselves back at this table in 10 or 30 years asking what went wrong.
Why nobody rose to meet the challenge.'' This Congress has met part of
that challenge. But what happens at the end of the BIL's life remains
unknown. The same fiscal cliffs that existed before the BIL still exist
today, and they will exist in four years. A return to old baselines
means a return to old deferred maintenance, a return to old levels of
service, a return to old infrastructure that is never replaced or
modernized, and a return to old questions about how things got this
way.
We must not let that be the case. I challenge those of you
continuing into the next Congress to look deep into the heart of this
country and see all the greatness that becomes possible when you invest
back into it, the way previous generations did for our benefit.
I once again thank Chair DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves for
having me here today, and I look forward to answering any questions you
may have.

Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentleman for his testimony. Now
we would move to Stephen Gardner, the chief executive officer
of Amtrak.
You are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Gardner. Good morning, Chair DeFazio, Ranking Member
Graves, Ranking Member Crawford, members of the committee. My
name is Stephen Gardner, and I am Amtrak's CEO. Thank you for
having me here today to describe the accomplishments of this
Congress, and how the American Rescue Plan Act has helped
Amtrak emerge from the pandemic, and how the IIJA will allow us
to improve and expand Amtrak's service while creating thousands
of skilled jobs.
First, I would like to thank Chairman DeFazio for his
incredible 36 years of service to the Nation, and in particular
for his championship of Amtrak intercity and high-speed
passenger rail.
You have been a tireless advocate for improved
infrastructure, innovation, and safety for American workers and
for the traveling public, never afraid to speak your mind,
always curious, with a well-earned reputation of being both
tough and fair. You have pushed us all to do better for the
American people. Amtrak and millions of our riders are better
for it. So, on behalf of everyone here at Amtrak, thank you for
your leadership. Congratulations on all of your
accomplishments, and we wish you the best in your next phase.
Let me now turn to two accomplishments that were vital to
Amtrak. As you know, we began 2021 in a state of crisis, with
our ridership and revenue in tatters, employees furloughed, and
many trains suspended because we were running out of the
initial COVID-19 funding to support operations. Fortunately,
you and many of your colleagues stepped up and provided
emergency assistance to Amtrak through ARPA, allowing us to
stay afloat, recall workers, restore service, and begin the
hiring and training that was so necessary for our future.
Simply put, ARPA is why we are still here today. And
through your support and the hard work of Amtrak employees, we
are now experiencing strong recovery, with approximately 80
percent of our pre-COVID ridership back, and many new customers
choosing our trains.
While ARPA enabled us to survive, the IIJA is now providing
Amtrak and our partners with the chance to thrive. With $22
billion in direct investment in Amtrak and another $36 billion
in grants available to the FRA, the IIJA is a massive
downpayment on the improvements and expansion of intercity
passenger rail that Amtrak has argued for since our inception
in 1971.
Already, several of the largest capital projects that I
have testified about at last December's Railroads, Pipelines,
and Hazardous Materials Subcommittee hearing that will use IIJA
funding are now moving forward. These projects are creating
jobs for Amtrak employees, construction firms, and suppliers
around the Nation right now. To name just a few, we have broken
ground on the Gateway Program's Portal North Bridge, and we
have launched the procurement phase of the B&P Tunnel
replacement project in Maryland.
Over the past few months, Amtrak and its State partners
have received several grants that position vital projects for
upcoming IIJA funding, and we started to apply for the various
IIJA-funded DOT competitive grant programs. For example, design
concourse work in Chicago Union Station is being funded by the
Federal-State Partnership program, while North Carolina just
received a CRISI grant for the S-Line project. And we and our
partners in Illinois have submitted a significant Mega
application for the Chicago hub improvement program.
Furthermore, IIJA funds will allow Amtrak to accelerate our
plans to acquire new trains, funding the replacement of our
conventional corridor fleet and a new generation of long-
distance trains serving the Nation to replace the hundreds of
cars and locomotives that are at the end of their useful lives.
IIJA funding will also ensure that we can bring the
benefits of rail travel to more Americans by fully funding the
$1.1 billion program we have to bring our stations into ADA
compliance.
While the primary beneficiaries of all this investment, of
course, will be our customers, each of these efforts creates
well-paying jobs and supports the broader economy. Between
rebuilding our workforce to restore service and gearing up for
these massive capital programs, Amtrak alone hired more than
3,200 people in fiscal year 2022, and we plan to hire roughly
4,000 employees in fiscal year 2023.
Additionally, I am pleased to report that Amtrak in
Delaware just received an $11 million grant to establish a
Railroading 101 program that will provide needed training
skills for railroad jobs.
In addition to these infrastructure projects, IIJA has
jumpstarted the expansion of our network, as we and our State
partners can now confidently begin planning and advancing
projects to bring more trains to more people across the Nation.
Signifying this momentum, just over the past few months, we
have added several new services with State partners in Vermont,
Massachusetts, and Virginia. But this is a prelude to the huge
opportunities ahead through the IIJA-created Corridor
Development Program being led by the FRA, which will create a
pipeline of projects to expand Amtrak service.
Thanks to the IIJA, this is the most exciting time in
Amtrak's history. Like all of our employees, I am thrilled to
be a part of it and grateful for the opportunity you have given
us.
The additional jobs we have created and the projects we are
now advancing just represent a tiny fraction of the benefits
the IIJA will produce for Amtrak in the years ahead, and we
will need continued support from this committee to ensure the
authorizations that were enacted for annual funding are
achieved, so we can continue to operate the company while we
modernize our assets and operate the network.
Thanks again for your support over these many years and for
your time this morning. I look forward to your questions.
[Mr. Gardner's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Stephen Gardner, Chief Executive Officer,
National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)
Good morning, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, and Members
of this Committee. My name is Stephen Gardner, and I am the Chief
Executive Officer of Amtrak. Thank you for inviting me to appear before
you today to describe how Amtrak is emerging from the COVID-19
pandemic, in no small part due to the funding provided in the American
Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), and how we are utilizing the unprecedented
levels of funding the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA)
provides for vital investments that will improve and expand our service
throughout the United States while creating thousands of skilled, well-
paying jobs.
I'd like to begin my testimony by expressing Amtrak's gratitude to
each of you--and especially to Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves,
and Railroads Subcommittee Chairman Payne and Ranking Member Crawford--
for the interest in and support for Amtrak you have demonstrated during
the soon to conclude 117th Congress, which produced two of the most
important pieces of legislation in our 51-year history: ARPA and the
IIJA. We are particularly grateful to Chairman DeFazio for his
consistent dedication to improving intercity passenger rail service and
Amtrak during the 36 years he has served in the House of
Representatives, and we are pleased that he ends his time in Congress
on such a high note.
The American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) and Pandemic Recovery
ARPA, enacted in March of 2021, provided desperately needed
emergency funding to Amtrak at a terrible time. Our ridership and
ticket revenues were nearly 75% below pre-pandemic levels. No one knew
then when, or to what extent, travel demand would return. We were
dramatically reducing expenses but still burning through the previous
emergency CARES Act funding and appropriations Congress had provided to
keep us afloat, while struggling to provide service during a pandemic
for those who needed to travel. ARPA funding allowed us to maintain the
reduced levels of service we were operating on the Northeast Corridor
(NEC) and state-supported routes, and to restore our long-distance
trains to daily operation.
Most importantly, ARPA funding enabled us to preserve our most
important asset: our workforce. With the funding ARPA provided, we were
able to recall all of the workers we had to furlough indefinitely in
October of 2020 because we did not have enough money to pay them.
Fortunately, the vast majority of them returned to Amtrak employment.
Among train and engine crews, 96% of furloughed engineers and 91% of
furloughed conductors returned: only five engineers and 32 conductors
did not come back (we did not furlough any Mechanical or Engineering
employees).
Additionally, the ARPA funds allowed us to restart our hiring and
training pipeline that we had suspended at the onset of the COVID-19
pandemic because of the challenges of training new employees during a
pandemic and uncertainty regarding federal funding. Once we received
ARPA funding and recalled our employees, we were able to restart this
work, which gave us a path to sufficient staffing when travel demand
returned. Because it takes so long to train employees for our most-
skilled positions, the ability to resume hiring and training last year
was absolutely critical to our recovery during FY 2022 and will be very
instrumental in our plans for FY 2023. I shudder to think of where we
would be today without the funding ARPA provided that enabled us to
perform these vital activities.
Thanks to ARPA and the hard work of our employees during the most
challenging time in Amtrak's history, we are experiencing a strong
recovery from the devastating impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. During
August, we carried more than 2.3 million passengers, nearly 80% of our
August 2019 ridership, and our ticket revenues were almost 90% of
August 2019 levels. What is particularly noteworthy is that our
capacity is only 82% of what it was in August 2019, which means that
we're actually filling about the same percentage of available seats
that we did then. Ridership on our Virginia state-supported services
reached an all-time high for the second consecutive month; our
Northeast Regional service is approaching pre-pandemic ridership levels
despite reduced capacity; and our long-distance trains are achieving
near record revenues as domestic tourism and desire for private rooms
have increased.
These gains have come as a result of hard work by the great team at
Amtrak and our state partners, who have had to rethink many of our
business and commercial strategies in the face of very different travel
needs and a constantly shifting landscape. We have utilized a variety
of different marketing and pricing approaches during this period to
support business recovery, many of which have been very successful.
These strategies have helped us attract many customers who are new to
Amtrak, and more leisure travelers on Acela trains to replace business
travelers who are not traveling at pre-pandemic levels. That
development is very timely because our new Acela trainsets, which will
begin entering service next year, will increase our Acela capacity by
about 75%. That will give us the opportunity to carry many more
passengers on our Acela trains, which for many years have not had
enough seats to meet demand.
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
While the American Rescue Plan enabled Amtrak to survive, the IIJA
is providing the funding that will allow us to thrive.
The IIJA provides $58 billion in advance appropriations for
investments in Amtrak and intercity passenger rail. It also
appropriates or authorizes significant additional funding for Amtrak
and for competitive grant programs for which Amtrak projects are
eligible. The IIJA's funding represents the down payment on the
expansion and improvement of service that Amtrak and its stakeholders
have dreamed of since Amtrak's inception in 1971, but never had the
funding to pursue.
Amtrak passengers will not be the only beneficiaries of the IIJA.
It will produce thousands of jobs, both within Amtrak and for the
suppliers and contractors who will provide many billions of dollars in
goods and services required for IIJA-funded projects. The IIJA will
enhance communities small and large throughout the United States that
will benefit from the new and expanded Amtrak service it will produce,
and the station and other infrastructure projects it will fund that
will spur local development. Furthermore, the IIJA will help address
climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by allowing more
travelers to use rail, the sustainable transportation mode.
Amtrak and its state and commuter partners were ready for the
opportunities the IIJA has given us. Just prior to its enactment,
Amtrak created a new Capital Delivery Department that will be
responsible for carrying out IIJA-funded infrastructure and equipment
projects. We are staffing it with Amtrak employees experienced in
delivering railroad capital projects and rail and construction industry
leaders from outside the company attracted by the once-in-a-generation
opportunities the IIJA will create.
Amtrak and our partners were also well prepared for participation
in the NEC Project Pipeline and the Corridor Identification and
Development Program the IIJA establishes, which create Federal Railroad
Administration (FRA)-led frameworks for prioritizing, advancing and
funding capital projects that intercity passenger rail has lacked.
Working with other stakeholders, we developed a long-term capital
investment plan, the NEC Commission's 15-year CONNECT NEC 2035 plan
released last year, which is currently being updated, that will inform
our participation in the development of the NEC Project Pipeline.
Amtrak and our partners also advanced pre-construction activities for
key projects so they would be ready to go when funding for construction
became available.
Amtrak was also prepared for the expansion of our network that the
IIJA contemplates. In April of 2021 we issued Amtrak Connects US,
Amtrak's 15-year vision for corridor development that would bring
service to 160 new communities, attract 20 million more passengers
annually, and produce 26,000 permanent jobs. The response we received
from states and communities throughout the United States far exceeded
our expectations. Many of them have been working with us to advance
proposed new or expanded Amtrak service.
Advancing Infrastructure Investments with the IIJA
When I testified before the Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous
Materials Subcommittee last December, I described our initial plans to
use the funding the IIJA provides. I would like to take this
opportunity to bring you up to date on what we have accomplished since
then, and to briefly describe some of the things we will be focusing on
in the months ahead.
I am pleased to report that several of the major capital projects
that will utilize IIJA funding provided by Amtrak or through
competitive grants are moving forward. These projects are already
creating jobs for both Amtrak employees and contractors and
contributing to our nation's economic recovery from the COVID-19
pandemic.
In August, Amtrak participated in the groundbreaking for the
construction of the Portal North Bridge. That New Jersey Transit-led
project is the first of the major rail infrastructure projects between
Newark and New York City included in the Gateway Program. Construction
of the new bridge is projected to create approximately 15,000 jobs and
add billions of dollars to the local economy.
Thanks to the enactment of the IIJA, the Gateway Program, including
the Hudson Tunnel Project that many have characterized as the most
important infrastructure program in the United States, is going to
happen. I'm pleased to report that the Gateway Development Commission,
led by new CEO Kris Kolluri, recently assumed the role of Project
Sponsor for the Hudson Tunnel Project. With the full engagement of the
Governors of New York and New Jersey, the project partners are
accelerating towards a full funding grant agreement that will finally
allow construction to begin.
Enactment of the IIJA has allowed Amtrak to launch the procurement
phase of the B&P Tunnel Replacement Project. It will replace the B&P
Tunnel in Baltimore--a nearly 150-year-old bottleneck through which
Acelas crawl at 30 miles per hour--with the new Frederick Douglass
Tunnel. Recent Federal-State Partnership for State of Good Repair (Fed-
State Partnership) grants to Amtrak and the Connecticut Department of
Transportation will help fund the replacement of two ancient bridges
along the NEC in Connecticut: the Connecticut River Bridge between Old
Saybrook and Old Lyme, and the Walk Bridge in Norwalk. Amtrak expects
to use funding provided by the IIJA to cover costs of these projects.
We are also moving ahead with our Major Station Amtrak Development
Programs for which we also expect to use IIJA funds. We recently
commenced construction on the rehabilitation of Baltimore Penn Station,
a project that will be transformative for both Amtrak and MARC
passengers and the surrounding community. In New York City, the
Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Amtrak, and New Jersey Transit
have just selected a joint venture to design an equally transformative
and much larger project: the reconstruction of New York Penn Station.
That project, along with track and platform expansion under the Gateway
Program, will transform Penn Station into a world-class facility with
much needed capacity for more passengers and trains.
We are continuing to advance Major Station Amtrak Development
Programs at other stations. At William H. Gray III 30th Street Station
in Philadelphia, construction for state of good repair and station
retail projects is scheduled to begin early next year. At Washington
Union Station, we have begun construction on several near-term state-
of-good-repair, safety, and platform capacity expansion projects,
including restoration of an unused platform for revenue service, and
will soon begin reconfiguration of Amtrak facilities located next to
the tracks on the west side of the terminal.
By providing assured, multi-year funding that Amtrak can commit to
match local government, transit agency, and private sector investments,
the IIJA will allow us to pursue opportunities for public-private
partnerships for station development projects. Likewise, the knowledge
that there will be federal funding available to match state investments
in intercity passenger rail projects encourages states to expend
resources to develop plans for rail projects, as they have long done
for highway and mass transit projects.
The IIJA will also create a multitude of new opportunities for
Amtrak to contract with small businesses and Disadvantaged Business
Enterprises (DBEs) to provide goods and services for IIJA-funded
projects. In anticipation of this, we have increased staffing in our
Supplier Diversity Office, are providing internal training on
identifying and using diverse suppliers for Amtrak employees involved
in procurements, and have hosted or participated in more than 30
supplier outreach events throughout the country during the past year.
We also recently opened a Small Business Resource Center in
Philadelphia that provides networking, technical assistance and
training opportunities for diverse suppliers and small businesses.
Pursuing IIJA Competitive Grants
Over the past few months, FRA has awarded a number of grants,
funded by FY 2021 appropriations, to Amtrak and its state partners
under the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure & Safety Improvements
(CRISI) and Fed-State Partnership programs. These grants will fund pre-
construction activities such as preliminary engineering, design and
environmental reviews, and initial construction work, for key
infrastructure projects, preparing them for construction when funding
is provided. Among the NEC projects receiving such grants are the
replacement of the Sawtooth Bridge in New Jersey, a component of the
Gateway Program; the Susquehanna River Bridge replacement in Maryland;
and the East River Tunnel Rehabilitation project and the Pelham Bay
Bridge Replacement project in New York City.
Two very important National Network projects received Fed-State
Partnership grants for pre-construction activities. One is for the
design of concourse improvements at Chicago Union Station (CUS). The
other, a $57.9 million grant that Amtrak and North Carolina are
matching, will fund preliminary engineering and initial construction
work on the North Carolina portion of the Petersburg, Virginia to
Raleigh, North Carolina S-Line, furthering a project that will provide
a direct connection along the federally designated Southeast High-Speed
Rail Corridor between Virginia's and North Carolina's growing state-
supported services.
The substantial, multi-year funding provided by the IIJA is what
will transform each of these projects from construction drawings into
reality. Over the next few years, they will be eligible for CRISI, the
Fed-State Partnership program that the IIJA has expanded, and other
competitive grants. The IIJA provides major increases in funding for
these programs in FY 2022 through FY 2026, including $7.2 billion in
each year for Fed-State Partnership grants and $1.5 billion annually
for CRISI grants, and authorizes additional appropriations. The $22
billion in advance appropriations to Amtrak and the $39 billion in new
funding for public transit that the IIJA provides will also help Amtrak
and its commuter partners provide funding for these and other
transformative projects, the need for which has long been recognized,
that are at last coming to fruition as a result of the IIJA.
Amtrak is already pursuing IIJA-funded grants. Amtrak, the City of
Chicago, Metra, and the Illinois and Michigan Departments of
Transportation recently applied for an FY 2022 Mega grant for CUS, the
hub of Amtrak's long-distance network and Midwest state-supported
services. The grant would fund a portion of a $418 million project that
would provide a faster and more direct access route to CUS for four
Amtrak routes; convert an unused mail platform at CUS into the
station's first high-level passenger platform to accommodate increased
train operations and provide better accessibility; improve Amtrak and
Metra passenger flows within the often-congested station; and add 16
miles of second track along the Amtrak-owned Michigan Line served by
Amtrak's state-supported Chicago-Detroit/Pontiac and Chicago-Port Huron
trains. Amtrak and its state partners also intend to apply for multiple
FY 2022 CRISI grants for which FRA recently issued a Notice of Funding
Opportunity.
Acquiring New Equipment
IIJA funding is allowing Amtrak to advance and accelerate plans to
acquire new equipment to replace locomotives and cars, some of which
are approaching 50 years old, that have reached the end of their useful
lives.
Following enactment of the IIJA, we exercised an option
for 50 additional ALC-42 locomotives for long distance service.
IIJA funding will be used for the new Intercity
Trainsets, for which we awarded a contract last year, that will replace
the Amfleet I cars operating on Northeast Regional and other Northeast
Corridor and Eastern corridor services, and will also reequip Amtrak
Cascades service in the Pacific Northwest.
We recently commenced the refurbishment of the 450 bi-
level Superliner cars and single-level Viewliner I sleeping cars used
on our long-distance trains.
We are developing design specifications and customer
requirements for new long-distance equipment in preparation for
initiating a formal procurement process to replace the vintage
equipment in our long-distance fleet.

New equipment acquisitions will also create thousands of jobs
throughout the United States. By way of illustration, the construction
of our new Acela trainsets by Alstom in Hornell, New York has created
400 direct jobs at Alstom and more than 1,300 new jobs at 170 suppliers
across 29 states and 90 cities.
As we acquire new equipment, we will also be using IIJA funds to
construct, upgrade and expand equipment maintenance facilities to
accommodate our expanded equipment fleet and facilitate adoption of
best practices in equipment maintenance. The new and improved
facilities will make our operations more efficient, and their
construction will create additional jobs.
Enhancing Accessibility
IIJA funding provided is also fueling our efforts to bring all of
our stations into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act
(ADA), on which we plan to spend $1.1 billion over the next six years.
We have completed ADA work at 173 stations and have over 250 more ADA
projects in design or construction around the country.
Within the last few months, we have completed ADA improvements at:
The Westerly, Rhode Island station on the Northeast
Corridor in partnership with the Rhode Island Department of
Transportation;
Ashland, Virginia, which is served by our state-supported
Virginia services in partnership with the Virginia Passenger Rail
Authority; Macomb, Illinois on the state-supported Illinois Zephyr/Carl
Sandburg routes; and Effingham, Illinois on the state-supported Illini/
Saluki and City of New Orleans long-distance routes; and
Five other stations on long-distance routes: Hutchinson
and Dodge City, Kansas on our Southwest Chief route; Greenwood,
Mississippi on the City of New Orleans route; Longview, Texas on the
Texas Eagle route; and Crawfordsville, Indiana on the Cardinal route.

In addition:
We have begun construction of an additional accessible
entrance at New York Penn Station that is being funded by a unique
public-private partnership with the owner of the office building above
the station; and
Amtrak is contributing funding for new ADA-compliant
stations at Windsor Locks Connecticut, Coatesville, Pennsylvania and
Newark, Delaware that are being constructed by the Departments of
Transportation of those states and will serve Amtrak and commuter rail
passengers.

While enhancing accessibility is what drives our ADA station
projects, every one of them also produces many other significant public
benefits. They create well-paid construction jobs, as well as jobs at
companies that supply materials and components for station construction
projects in both the local community where the station is located and
throughout the country. The improvements in facilities these station
projects include, such as new platforms, improved restrooms and waiting
areas, and Passenger Information Display Systems (PIDS), enhance the
station experience for all our customers.
Adding New Services
Over the past few months, we have added several new, extended or
expanded state-supported corridor services, and advanced plans for
others, that will utilize the on-order IIJA-funded Intercity Trainsets
when they are delivered and/or IIJA funding for infrastructure.
In July, we initiated two new state-supported services:
the extension of the existing New York City to Rutland Ethan Allen to
Burlington, Vermont and a seasonal weekend service from New York City
to Pittsfield, Massachusetts.
In partnership with the Commonwealth of Virginia, we
recently began operating additional trains from Washington to Norfolk
and Roanoke. This service expansion, which created many additional
engineer and conductor jobs, is the first of many service additions
that will result from the groundbreaking agreement Amtrak and Virginia
reached with CSX last year that will transform Virginia's passenger
rail service. Amtrak and Virginia plan to pursue IIJA-funded grants for
projects that agreement will make possible.
We recently reached an agreement with host railroad
Canadian Pacific for their support of the operation of new trains from
Chicago to Milwaukee and St. Paul and on a new route from New Orleans
to Baton Rouge.
We are eagerly awaiting a decision by the Surface
Transportation Board that would allow restoration of service along the
Gulf Coast between New Orleans and Mobile, which we have not served
since Hurricane Katrina in 2005.

We look forward to working with FRA and our state partners to
initiate the Corridor ID Program created by the IIJA. Already, states,
regional transportation authorities, cities and other entities have
submitted expressions of interest to FRA for inclusion of approximately
50 corridors in the Corridor ID Program. What is particularly
encouraging is that enactment of the IIJA has triggered strong interest
in developing Amtrak service in states such as Georgia, Idaho, Kansas
and Colorado, and in places like Western Massachusetts and Reading/
Berks County, Pennsylvania, where there is not a history of state
funding support and Amtrak has little or no service today.
The IIJA also directs FRA to undertake a two-year study, in
consultation with Amtrak, states, host railroads and other
stakeholders, of increasing service frequency on, restoring, and adding
long distance routes. Here again, we have already seen a great deal of
interest in restored or new Amtrak service from states and communities
throughout the country, and we look forward to participating in the
study.
Building the Amtrak Workforce of the Future
Since the enactment of the IIJA, we have accelerated the efforts we
already had underway to recruit, hire and train the thousands of
employees we will need to restore all services to pre-pandemic levels,
manage and construct the capital projects the IIJA will fund, and
operate the additional Amtrak trains throughout the country that the
IIJA will make possible. That is a challenging task in the current
labor market--but we are accomplishing it.
We have hired 3,200 new employees at Amtrak since the beginning of
FY 2022 in October of 2021. That is a record number for us, even though
the fiscal year is not over.
We are working aggressively to hire and train new engineers and
conductors, and mechanical employees who maintain our equipment, so
that we can restore service frequency on all of routes to pre-pandemic
service frequency and provide additional passenger capacity to
accommodate growth. During the first 11 months of FY 2022, we hired 88
engineer trainees, 280 conductor trainees, and 312 mechanical employees
(excluding coach cleaners). Additionally, we brought on almost 800 new
maintenance-of-way employees, project managers, and professional
engineers with the critical skills to support the huge increase in
capital projects and state of good repair work called for under the
CONNECT NEC 2035 program on Amtrak's portion of the NEC. While we are
making great strides in filling open and newly created positions,
enactment of Congressman Crawford's Retirees to Rail Act, which would
allow railroad retirees to temporarily return to work during the labor
shortage the railroad industry is currently experiencing without loss
of Railroad Retirement benefits, would be very beneficial in helping us
restore service over the next few months.
We are pursuing innovative approaches to find the employees we need
to fully restore service and utilize the funding the IIJA provides.
Since June, we have held 11 hiring events at major Amtrak facilities
and crew bases around the country. These events have been very
successful: at the Los Angeles Career Fair we conducted 230 interviews
and extended 132 offers that were accepted. We plan to hold 54 hiring
events during FY 2023, during which our goal is to make approximately
6,000 offers resulting in 4,000 additional hires.
We are also pursuing new ways to attract members of the military
community to work at Amtrak. In partnership with the U.S. Chamber of
Commerce's ``Hiring our Heroes'' program, we are hosting a group of
cohorts, comprised of service members, military spouses, and veterans,
as Department of Defense Skillbridge Interns. Individuals participating
in this program work with Amtrak in a temporary position for 12 weeks,
after which we hope to retain them as full-time employees. Amtrak's
participation in this program also advances our goal of creating a more
diverse workforce.
We recognize that we are going to need new ways to train our
workforce of the future. We are currently working on a template Project
Labor Agreement in line with the Memorandum of Understanding we entered
into last year with North America's Building Trades Unions (NABTU), the
labor organization representing more than three million skilled craft
professionals. Once that agreement is in place, Amtrak and NABTU will
work together to ensure a consistent construction workforce pipeline
that will accelerate apprenticeship readiness programs, promote
diversity, and ensure fair wages and benefits for the workers who will
build the infrastructure that IIJA funding will allow Amtrak to
construct.
In March, we began a Mechanical Apprenticeship Program at our heavy
maintenance facility in Beech Grove, Indiana. I am pleased to report
that FRA, under the excellent leadership of Administrator Bose,
recently awarded an $8 million CRISI grant to Amtrak that will allow us
to expand that program to include multiple crafts at other maintenance
facilities throughout the country. Twenty-six apprentices are
participating in the first expansion of that program in Wilmington,
Delaware, which began on September 12. We plan to create additional
apprenticeship positions at Beech Grove, and to implement the program
at our maintenance facilities in Washington, D.C., New York City, and
Los Angeles. We are also seeking, along with the Delaware Department of
Transportation, a grant from the U.S. Department of Labor for an
innovative program to teach railroading basics to individuals whose
employment has been impacted by COVID-19 in order to make them
competitive for railroad jobs.
We are also working to engage with potential future Amtrak
employees at a younger age. We recently began partnering with the New
York City Department of Education to build talent pipelines with high
school graduates throughout the city.
The IIJA also led us to expand our internship program, which brings
current college and graduate students to work at Amtrak, and our
management training and management associate programs, which provide
recent graduates with the opportunity to rotate among different Amtrak
groups before transitioning into permanent positions. We currently have
36 management trainees or management associates, and 144 interns. These
programs serve as a pipeline for bringing in the people we need for our
future workforce--I know that from personal experience, because I began
my Amtrak career as an intern. Internships and training programs are
particularly effective at attracting individuals entering the workforce
who have the professional training we need in areas such as engineering
and information technology, and who would not otherwise have considered
a railroad career. These programs also connect us with the colleges and
universities that participants attend.
One of the challenges that Amtrak and the railroad industry face is
that the number of U.S. colleges and universities that offer any
railroad engineering or operations courses can literally be counted on
the fingers of one hand. For that reason, we are pleased that FRA
recently awarded a CRISI grant to the University of Delaware, one of
the few U.S. educational institutions that offers railway engineering
courses, to create a railway engineering program at Morgan State
University, a historically black college and university. Like the
University of Delaware, Morgan State is located along the Northeast
Corridor, a short distance from Baltimore Penn Station. We look forward
to providing future employment opportunities to students who enroll in
its program.
Looking ahead, we plan to apply for additional CRISI grants this
fall that would allow further expansion of our Mechanical
Apprenticeship Program, and to develop apprenticeship programs in other
crafts. We will also continue to aggressively seek other opportunities
to partner with labor organizations, states and communities, and
educational institutions on programs to engage, recruit, hire and train
new Amtrak employees. By doing that, we can hire the many new employees
we need to carry out the objectives of the IIJA, while providing
stronger pathways to employment for a diverse, 21st Century passenger
rail workforce.
The IIJA and Sustainability
In addition to enhancing mobility and creating jobs, the
investments we are making with funding provided by the IIJA will
advance sustainability and help us reach our goals of reducing
greenhouse gas emissions by 40% by 2030 and achieving net-zero
emissions by 2045.
The new ALC-42 locomotives we are acquiring for our long-
distance trains emit 89% less nitrogen oxide and 95% less particulate
matter than the 1990s era diesel locomotives they are replacing.
The 17 diesel-hybrid Intercity Trainsets we are acquiring
for our Empire Service trains will be the first Amtrak equipment
designed to utilize battery power for propulsion.
IIJA-funded investments we will be making to advance our
Major Station Amtrak Development Programs will increase energy
efficiency, reduce water consumption and improve station resiliency.
The expansion and improvement of Amtrak service the IIJA
makes possible will attract many new passengers to our trains, which
will significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. On average,
traveling by Amtrak is 46% more energy efficient than traveling by car
and 34% more energy efficient than domestic air travel. On the
electrified Northeast Corridor, taking Amtrak reduces greenhouse gas
emissions by up to 83% compared to driving, and by up to 72% compared
to flying.
Looking to the Future
The enactment of the IIJA has been extraordinarily impactful for
Amtrak. The additional jobs the IIJA has already created, and the many
long needed projects it has allowed to advance, represent just a tiny
fraction of the multitude of benefits it will produce in the years
ahead. However, future action by Congress, particularly with respect to
annual appropriations and long-term, dedicated funding, will play an
important part in ensuring that the benefits of the IIJA are fully
realized and amplified.
The IIJA's advance appropriations were intended to supplement, not
replace, Amtrak's annual appropriations, and can only be used for
limited purposes. It is important that Amtrak continue to receive, in
addition to IIJA advance appropriations, annual appropriations at
levels that are sufficient to operate all of our existing routes at
pre-pandemic service frequencies and maintain our assets and equipment,
as contemplated in the IIJA's authorizations.
It is also important that reauthorization of the STB reflect the
vital role passenger rail plays in our national rail network, as the
reauthorization bill recently introduced by Chairman DeFazio and Rail
Subcommittee Chairman Payne does.
What is most important, of course, is developing a sustainable,
long-term approach to funding intercity passenger rail. While the
funding provided by the IIJA has jumpstarted the expansion and
improvement of Amtrak service, the five years of advance appropriations
and authorizations it provides will not get us all the way down the
tracks. Like other transportation modes, intercity passenger rail needs
adequate, assured, long-term funding that will allow it to fully
realize its potential. Because of the dedicated, multi-year funding
provided through the IIJA, Amtrak is already hiring thousands of new
employees to support the work that will occur over the next few years.
For the first time in our history, we can properly plan and staff for
our needs with certainty that we will have the financial resources to
carry out projects. Amtrak looks forward to working with the members of
the Committee and Committee staff to make this a permanent reality.
Thanks to the IIJA, this is the most exciting time in the history
of Amtrak. Like all of our employees, I am thrilled to be a part of it,
and grateful for the opportunity you have given us. We look forward to
working with our stakeholders and the Committee to turn the vision
embodied in the IIJA into reality, and to providing those who live in
every region of our country with the intercity passenger rail service
they need and deserve.

National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

Federal Awards
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentleman. We would now turn to
the general manager of TriMet in Portland, Oregon: Samuel
Desue.
Mr. Desue, you have 5 minutes.
Mr. Desue. Thank you and good morning, Chairman DeFazio,
Ranking Member Graves, and members of the committee. I am Sam
Desue, Jr., the general manager of TriMet, Oregon's largest
transit agency, serving the beautiful Portland metro region.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here with you today to
discuss the critical importance of Federal investment in the
mobility service provided by TriMet and our workforce, and
thank you for ensuring we had the resources to maintain those
services and continue to plan for future mobility in our
region.
Prior to the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, TriMet launched
about 1.9 million trips a week. During the height of the
pandemic, that number plummeted. But the rides TriMet provided
during the frightened and confusing early months of the
pandemic were critical. We kept essential workers and people
who needed to get to stores and services moving. As I sit here
before you today, I can say with 100 percent certainty that we
would not have been able to do that without you. The actions
Congress took, your foresight of the valuable and vital role of
transit in America's communities, saved us.
Like other transit agencies, TriMet focused on bus and rail
services to get nurses, doctors, and other frontline workers to
hospitals and clinics, along with transporting those who need
dialysis, chemotherapy, and other lifesaving services. Other
frontline workers, like grocery store staff and the food
industry, needed to get to work. They helped kept us all fed,
and TriMet was there for them. Riders who were transit-
dependent, often getting by on low incomes, needed to reach
those stores, and we were there to get them there. We were
there for them because you were there for us.
At TriMet, we used relief funds to maintain service safety
for those who needed to ride to jobs. TriMet was able to avoid
layoffs related to the pandemic only because of the support you
provided us. Three thousand people stayed employed.
Other operators, mechanics, and customer service staff who
are proud members of the Amalgamated Transit Union 757, along
with other mission-critical workers, had jobs to come to, and
they bravely did. They, too, are essential workers. When the
rest of the world stopped, they kept going and they kept going
to keep life moving. And I mean that accurately. When
volunteers had to stay home to protect themselves, TriMet
customer service workers and operators filled the void,
delivering for Meals on Wheels so our seniors and others did
not go hungry.
The pandemic brought a loss of normalcy, a loss of
connection, and the fear of economic toil. Your support has not
just been about keeping communities functioning in the moment.
What Congress has done to avoid the economic meltdown is
nothing short of a miracle. Your investments kept people
employed and commerce operating.
As businesses and venues fully open, our ridership is
returning. We are averaging 6,000 new returning riders a week.
As people's fears give way to the desires for normalcy and the
responsibility to save our planet for generations, more people
will turn to transit. We are ready for that, and building
service for the future because Congress cared enough to do the
right things.
As I close today, as an Army veteran and a drill sergeant,
I would like to acknowledge, in addition to those who served in
the military, my heroes are TriMet workers and American transit
workers that are here at this table. Never underestimate their
contribution to the American economy and their contribution to
our Nation.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting me to speak for
TriMet and our fellow transit agencies across the United
States, of the critical importance of the COVID relief
emergency funding, and historic investments in public
transportation contained in the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act. These investments have been and will be critical to
ensuring that we can meet challenges we face during this
unprecedented COVID public health crisis, and will allow TriMet
to position itself to make the operational and capital
investments necessary to meet future mobility and accessibility
needs in the Portland metro region. Thank you.
[Mr. Desue's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Samuel Desue, Jr., General Manager, TriMet
Chair DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves and Members of the Committee
on Transportation and Infrastructure, my name is Sam Desue Jr., and I
am General Manager of TriMet, the regional transit agency serving the
beautiful Portland Metropolitan area in Oregon--a metropolitan area of
about 2.5 million people.
I appreciate the opportunity to be here today to discuss the
critical importance of Federal investment in the mobility service
provided by TriMet and our workforce, and to thank you for ensuring we
had the resources to maintain those services and continue to plan for
the future of mobility in our region.
TriMet's service district includes Multnomah, Washington, and
Clackamas counties, encompassing an area of about 533 square miles that
includes nearly 40 cities. We operate 5 light rail lines, 82 bus lines,
1 commuter rail line and LIFT paratransit service. All our buses and
railcars are American-made. TriMet employs over 3,000 people and over
2,400 members of our workforce are union jobs directly supporting
operations, maintenance and safety of our transit system. Without our
workforce we could not provide these vital services to the Portland
region.
Our system provides essential transportation and mobility options
that connect people with their community, while easing traffic
congestion and reducing air pollution--facilitating economic growth,
transit-oriented development and livability.
Prior to the pandemic, TriMet provided an average of over 1.9
million transit rides every week. Portland is the 25th largest U.S.
metro area, and TriMet's service outpaces its population base by
ranking 17th in transit ridership and 11th in ridership per capita.
TriMet has been a leader in innovation for American transit. From
our open-sourced data that led to Google Transit to our light rail
design and construction. Over 100 transit agencies in America and 35
cities from around the world have come to us to learn from our
successes. Every major light rail line has been delivered on time and
on budget--or earlier and under budget.
We have bold goals for growing transit ridership, transitioning to
a zero emissions fleet and supporting transit investments to build more
livable communities.
We are here today to primarily say thank you and to share some
examples of the impact of recent federal investment for our transit
agency. In particular, I want to thank you for COVID relief emergency
funding and historic investment in public transportation contained in
the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA). These investments
have been, and will be, critical to ensuring that we can meet the
challenges we faced during the unprecedented COVID public health
crisis. They allow TriMet to position itself to meet future mobility
and accessibility needs of the greater Portland region.
COVID-19
Like all transit agencies, the COVID-19 pandemic had a severe
impact on TriMet's operations and revenue. When ridership, and our
projected revenues, fell dramatically in the spring of 2020, TriMet
acted quickly to reallocate service and save resources until demand
returned. We focused on minimizing cuts to service for our equity
communities, transit-dependent riders and essential workers. We
redirected resources in a variety of ways that I'd like to share with
you today. None of this would have been possible without the ongoing
support from the federal government.
We are so appreciative for Congress providing this critical
emergency relief funding to allow us to maintain operations and
continue to provide vital and lifeline transportation services to our
region. Emergency funding provided through CARES, CRRSA Act, ARP
allowed us to avoid furloughs and layoffs so that we could keep our
cities and counties moving and functioning. All CARES and CRRSA Act
funds allocated to TriMet have been spent and all ARP funds have been
spent or obligated.
We are proud to say that not one TriMet employee was furloughed
during the pandemic, and these funds allowed us to keep our highly-
skilled, trained workforce. As you are all aware, hiring, and re-
hiring, has been quite a challenge for many industries since early
2021. The ability to retain our workforce was critical to our being
able to provide transportation services to essential workers and access
to vital services to transit dependent riders. Federal COVID emergency
funding made this possible.
These funds also ensured that riders and TriMet operators remained
safe while using our system, by putting additional public health
measures into place to prevent the spread of COVID. We were able to
adjust our service to meet demand, ensuring essential workers could get
to work and people who are transit-dependent continued to have access
to jobs and services. We learned immediately that essential workers
were critical to addressing the pandemic and recovering from it. We
prioritized service to hospitals and other medical facilities. With
physical distancing limiting capacity on transit, we added extra buses
to we wouldn't have to leave anyone behind on lines that served our
essential workers like nurses, technicians and doctors.
We made sure that people who often rely exclusively on transit
always had service. These are the people essential to keeping society
working. People who stock our grocery stores supply us with essential
products that communities need to function, and they need transit.
While essential workers and those making lower wages may not always get
recognition, the pandemic proved how vital they are in a time of
crisis. We were here for them--and are here for them. Had transit not
been there, the shortages and supply chain nightmares we have
experienced would have been significantly worse. Transit kept people
and commerce moving!
Our team truly went above and beyond to ensure that TriMet service
could support those who needed it most during the pandemic. Initially,
we had to innovate to ensure we had the equipment and tools we needed
to keep people safe on our system. We called it MacGyvering. We reached
out to businesses, asked them to innovate. First, we needed masks. We
searched the internet for mask designs. Marketplace innovation sprang
into action, as fabric stores opened to get us materials. Small, women-
owned businesses started churning out masks in our district with scores
of people producing masks at home with sewing machines. TriMet didn't
have hand sanitizer. No one did early in the pandemic. We figured out
how to produce it ourselves. We worked with breweries, which we have a
lot of in Portland, as Chair DeFazio is familiar with, to generate
alcohol for our own sanitizer. Pretty quickly, we were supplying others
with sanitizer, when the supply wasn't meeting the demand.
TriMet continued to innovate with our resources. We supported
overloaded hospitals and developed a partnership between our LIFT
paratransit team and Oregon Health & Science University when hospitals
were approaching capacity. TriMet came in to help to transport patients
who no longer needed hospital care to their home or to a care facility.
We brought people to vaccine appointments. We delivered groceries to
LIFT customers who were at high risk of contracting COVID and unable to
leave their homes. TriMet redeployed our on-street customer service
team to partner with Meals on Wheels. As volunteers stayed home, our
staff helped meet the increased demand for food for children, families
and seniors who would have otherwise gone hungry. We were truly
providing a lifeline to so many of our region's residents.
Pandemic relief allowed us to proceed with planned critical safety
and maintenance projects that would have had to be cancelled or
postponed when faced such a severe and unexpected funding shortfall.
Like all transit agencies, TriMet has a significant deferred
maintenance backlog. We have been and remain committed to addressing
this backlog. The significant decline in revenues threatened these
ongoing efforts to maintain and upgrade our existing assets to ensure
and improve the safety and reliability of our system.
The projects included replacing rail switches that were over 35
years old and worn out. Signalization of the same era was replaced with
new technologies and computerization that we didn't have when TriMet's
first light rail line--the third in the nation--was built.
TriMet was able to implement a critical rail safety project on the
oldest section of our light rail system, in a high-speed curved area,
replacing old wooden rail ties, doubling the useful life of the system.
What otherwise would have been an incredibly disruptive project was
able to be carried out efficiently to reduce project costs and long-
term maintenance costs.
We advanced a project to make critical improvements on the Steel
Bridge--every one of our light rail trains goes across this lift bridge
(along with freight rail, passenger vehicles, buses, bikes and
pedestrians). We were able to essentially replace and rebuild the light
rail system across the bridge at a time of reduced ridership. The
funding provided through COVID relief meant the project could be done
more efficiently, and we were able to accomplish all the safety,
reliability and system resiliency elements necessary, rather than
scaling them back and stretching them out over time.
The infusion of federal funds also put TriMet in a better position
to meet our climate goals and implement a change in fuel sources. We
had done a renewable/sustainability study but had to delay it due to
the costs. But because we had those dollars available, we were able to
implement our goals and transition our entire fleet to renewable
diesel. By switching to renewable diesel, and to renewable electricity
for our light rail system and all TriMet-owned facilities, we reduced
our greenhouse gas emissions by about 70% in a year's time.
These are just a few examples of just how critical the Emergency
COVID relief funds provided by Congress were in allowing TriMet to
retain its workforce, provide mobility to essential workers,
accessibility to vital services for vulnerable communities and riders,
and continue to invest in making our system safer and more prepared to
provide reliable transit as ridership returns.
Plans for the future--Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
While the COVID relief funding was critical to allowing TriMet to
continue to be a lifeline to many in our region throughout the public
health emergency, the historic investments in public transportation
infrastructure contained in the IIJA will be a game-changer that will
help transform the Portland/Vancouver region's transportation network.
The significant increase in investment levels contained in IIJA filled
the gap in funding ongoing maintenance needs, as well as allowing us to
continue to advance capital projects to upgrade our system to expand
service and address our region's mobility, quality of life, and
environmental challenges.
IIJA will provide a total of $503.6 million for the Portland/
Vancouver region in FTA formula funding over the 5 years of the bill.
This increased FTA formula funding is critical to allowing us to begin
addressing our deferred and preventive maintenance needs, as well as to
begin making investments for future growth. This unprecedented funding
and the increases in federal discretionary grant opportunities under
the IIJA give us a lot to look forward to. The opportunities provided
by the IIJA are critical to our agency's goals to rebuild transit
ridership and address the climate crisis. Investing in efforts to
support ridership recovery is one of the agency's biggest priorities.
We have some success stories to share on our progress.
Like many agencies, TriMet's ridership has been steadily returning
throughout 2022. We're seeing an average growth of nearly 6,000 riders
per week. This is especially encouraging because, like many industries,
we've been facing an operator shortage and have not been able to
restore service to pre-pandemic levels because of that shortage. More
people are riding again, and we're growing our workforce and planning
for service and ridership growth in the future.
As ridership returns, we are planning for how TriMet can best
address the region's future mobility needs. Just yesterday, we released
a new transit network concept to plan for service growth and address
the changing travel patterns we've analyzed during the pandemic.
Working with the community, we will further define this concept for how
best to restore and grow transit while emphasizing building ridership
and expanding transit options across our region. This effort is
supported by an FTA Route Planning Restoration grant.
A key step in our path towards ridership recovery was the September
18th launch of the Division Transit Project, TriMet's new FX^TM
high-capacity bus service. Funded by an FTA Small Starts grant and
local partners, this project improves travel along a 13-mile corridor
that is one of TriMet's most popular bus lines, with more than 10,000
daily rides between Downtown Portland and Gresham. Prior to the opening
of this FX service, riders on this bus line crowded buses, full buses
passing riders waiting at stops, and traffic congestion behind buses
making frequent stops to pick up riders.
The Division Transit Project will provide riders with easier,
faster, and more reliable service. This project features all-door
boarding, improved stations, and transit priority improvements to speed
up transit trips, while addressing congestion along the Division Street
Corridor.
Our ridership recovery initiatives are also about more than service
improvements and capital projects.
TriMet would like to highlight the work we have done to reimagine
safety and security on our transit system. TriMet began this process in
June of 2020 after hearing calls for racial equity and social justice
following the murders of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, Ahmaud Arbery
and many others. TriMet responded by exploring community-based
approaches to public safety. We engaged in comprehensive outreach with
riders, community groups, local leaders, the public, and our frontline
workers and security staff and have begun agency-wide implementation of
those recommendations. We've launched safety response teams to provide
information, first aid, mental health support and conflict resolution
across our transit system.
TriMet has expanded our fare discount programs to support more
people who are struggling financially, seniors, veterans, youth, people
with disabilities--the communities who need transit most, and who we've
provided a lifeline to throughout the pandemic.
We've also launched a program to rehabilitate, expand and improve
operator and customer amenities at our busiest transit centers. These
investments make a difference for everyday riders, who just need a safe
and comfortable place to wait or transfer to help them get to where
they are going reliably.
We are also primed to take advantage of the growth in federal
discretionary grant programs to support the expansion of our MAX
network and to grow our bus rapid transit network with more (FX)
Frequent Express service on our highest ridership bus lines.
We are working towards pursuing federal funding for the 82nd Avenue
Bus Rapid Transit project. The bus line serving 82nd Avenue has the
highest ridership of any bus line in greater Portland. Though it
carries more people than some of the region's light rail lines, it
shares the road with commuters, freight, and local deliveries--and is
often stuck in traffic significant increasing travel time and degrading
reliability.
We are currently partnering with Metro, the City of Portland and
Clackamas County to undertake a transit alternatives analysis for
potential bus rapid transit service along 82nd Avenue from Clackamas
Town Center to Portland's Roseway and Sumner neighborhoods. BRT on this
route would significantly improve travel time, reliability, and comfort
by allowing the bus to separate from or bypass other vehicle traffic in
key areas along the route and improving stations. This transit project
will also be highly coordinated with a community-led Equitable
Development Strategy to support business and community stabilization
and enhancement. The transit analysis is being developed in
coordination with the City of Portland's ``Building a Better 82nd''
program, which is investing $80 million in near-term safety
improvements and another $105 million to enact a vision to improve the
corridor.
We are also excited about the many opportunities in the IIJA to
support and advance TriMet's Zero Emission Bus transition plan to make
the investments we need to meet the goals of our own Climate Action
Plan and our state and region's goals to increase transit usage and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Earlier this year, TriMet made our
first bulk purchase of 24 American-made, battery electric buses. TriMet
is committed to being part of the solution to climate change, and the
funds now available through the IIJA are a game changer to make an
immediate impact in reducing TriMet's emissions and working with our
state and local partners to address climate change.
TriMet had 700 diesel buses in our fleet as of June 2021, and we
were the largest purchaser of diesel fuel in Oregon. Working in
partnership with the two electric providers in our region--Portland
General Electric and Pacific Power--we are well on the way to changing
that. We are committed to having a 100 percent zero-emission fleet by
2040, and the funding provided through the IIJA will help us achieve
this goal.
The conversion to zero emission buses is the most significant
technological change TriMet has ever faced. TriMet is prepared to make
significant investments in transitioning our fleet and facilities, but
a strong federal funding partnership is critical to the success of this
program. TriMet has identified local and state funds to help cover the
costs of transitioning to zero emission buses. We estimate a
significant funding gap to upgrade the entire fleet and facilities to
charge and maintain the zero emissions fleet by 2040. TriMet is working
to concurrently invest in charging infrastructure and facilities
improvements across our service area to prepare for this transition.
We are working to develop a zero-emissions maintenance facility and
charging infrastructure at Beaverton's Merlo Garage in order to expand
TriMet's zero emissions fleet on Portland's westside. TriMet's new
Columbia Bus Base will help as the lynchpin to accelerate the TriMet's
transition to a fully zero emission bus fleet by 2040, and to meet
state and regional climate goals. This site is well-situated in an
industrial area within TriMet's service district, allowing buses to
begin and end their routes close to their home base and minimize their
time in traffic. Master planning and design efforts are in progress,
focused on the Columbia site's pivotal role in TriMet's transition to
zero-emission buses and planned service growth. Advancing TriMet's
Columbia Bus Base project is the key to not only advance our Zero
Emissions Fleet Transition but also to increase transit service to meet
demand across the growing region.
As you can see, we have big plans to help address the Portland
region's mobility needs. This would not be possible without the actions
this committee took to lead the effort to ensure public transit
agencies had the resources to retain their workforce and continue to
provide the vital services throughout the COVID-19 public health
emergency. The transit services supported by federal investment are
transformative to support mobility, reduce congestion, spur economic
development and make an immediate impact in fighting the climate
crisis.
In closing, I want to say thank you to this Committee, to Congress,
and to Federal agencies for stepping in quickly to keep services like
transit afloat, both through Covid relief funds and through the IIJA.
Had Congress not acted decisively we would be in a much different
place. But you acted and averted a potential great depression.

Mr. DeFazio. Thank you for your testimony. We would now
turn to David Ditch, policy analyst with The Heritage
Foundation.
Mr. Ditch. Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to
testify. The views I express in this testimony are my own and
should not be construed as representing any official position
of The Heritage Foundation.
We hear frequently from those who benefit from Federal
spending. Unfortunately, little consideration is given to the
costs to or value for taxpayers. There has been an exponential
growth in the size and scope of the Federal Government over the
last 100 years. In recent years, this growth has led to three
troubling trends in Federal policy in general, and
infrastructure policy specifically.
The first trend is inflation. While many factors are
causing the current inflation surge, two of the most important
flow from Washington: massive deficit spending and loose
monetary policy. The Federal spending spree that began in March
2020, aided by the Federal Reserve absorbing trillions in
Federal debt, has meant more dollars chasing the same supply of
goods. That is a recipe for inflation.
Unfortunately, Congress and the Biden administration
continue to make choices that increase deficits, threatening to
worsen and prolong the inflation crisis. Even the
infrastructure sector has been struck by inflation, with prices
for construction inputs skyrocketing over the last 2 years.
Since spending increases in the Infrastructure Act are only
starting to go out now, higher demand for inputs could cause
sustained inflation in the sector.
The second trend is false advertising. The American people
have been misled about major pieces of legislation, both
proposed and enacted, to an astonishing degree. The March 2021
stimulus package was supposedly about responding to the
pandemic and its related effects on the economy. However, it
contained a relatively tiny amount of public health spending
alongside massive handouts to heavily unionized political
constituencies.
Next, the Biden administration unveiled a proposal that
sought to use infrastructure as a camouflage for a wide range
of progressive priorities, even though only about 4 percent of
the proposed funding was designated for roads and bridges.
After that approach was finally abandoned, the Infrastructure
Act was sold as a generational investment. However, many of the
law's investments will yield minimal economic benefit. For
Amtrak and urban transit, subsidized expansions will create
long-term liabilities in the form of higher operations and
maintenance costs for these relatively low-demand services.
Most recently, nonpartisan analysis of the so-called
Inflation Reduction Act shows that it will not, in fact, reduce
inflation.
The third trend is the Biden administration's aggressive
use of executive actions to pursue its agenda, sometimes
flouting the rule of law. Shortly after passage of the
Infrastructure Act, the Department of Transportation attempted
to make it harder for States to expand highways. This was not
about implementing the law as passed, but an attempt to
implement provisions that failed to pass. The administration
backpedaled only after strenuous pushback from Governors and
Members of Congress.
On labor policy, the administration has gone out of its way
to increase the cost of federally funded infrastructure
projects. An Executive order on project labor agreements and a
proposed rule to strengthen wage mandates will further decrease
the public value of spending from the Infrastructure Act.
Artificially paying more for labor is not investing in
workers. Rather, it is yet another instance of maximizing
benefits for a political constituency at the public's expense.
Fortunately, Congress has options for addressing these
problems.
First, Congress should reform or eliminate rules and
regulations that needlessly and excessively add to the cost of
infrastructure projects.
Second, Congress should reject the use of bloated spending
packages that make public debate and legislative deliberation
more difficult.
Relatedly, Congress should reduce or eliminate spending on
local and regional infrastructure, since this merely moves
costs around and encourages overspending. This would also bring
the Highway Trust Fund close to balance.
Third, Congress should rein in executive overreach by using
oversight and legal remedies to combat instances of extra-legal
action, reducing the amount of discretion and authority
delegated to executive agencies, and reforming or repealing
outdated statutes.
Reining in the relentless growth of Federal spending would
reduce the intensity of political fights, move Government off
the road to bankruptcy, and enhance America's prosperity. Thank
you.
[Mr. Ditch's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of David Ditch, Policy Analyst, The Heritage
Foundation
Costly Federal Failures: Overspending, Overpromising, and
Overregulating
My name is David Ditch. I am a policy analyst at The Heritage
Foundation. The views I express in this testimony are my own and should
not be construed as representing any official position of The Heritage
Foundation.
Each year, Americans pay trillions of dollars in taxes to fund
government services. Despite this, federal elected officials have
increased spending so far beyond these annual tax hauls that the gross
national debt has grown by over $25 trillion since the year 2000.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Department of the Treasury, ``Debt to the Penny,'' https:/
/fiscaldata.treasury.gov/datasets/debt-to-the-penny/debt-to-the-penny
(accessed September 22, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the start of the pandemic in the U.S. in March 2020, the
federal government has added $7.5 trillion in gross debt.\2\ For
perspective, that is the amount of debt the nation accumulated from
1789 through late 2004.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The scale of these numbers is nearly incomprehensible, yet it is
vitally important for members of Congress and the American public to
recognize that federal ``investments'' come with very real costs.
Over the past 30 months, Congress has engaged in a seemingly
endless spending spree.\3\ The purported rationales behind the
individual laws tend to be uncontroversial: addressing public health,
preventing a deep recession, enhancing the nation's infrastructure.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ David Ditch, ``Congress' Wasteful Spending Spree Must End With
Infrastructure Bill,'' Heritage Foundation Commentary, November 12,
2021, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/congress-
wasteful-spending-spree-must-end-infrastructure-bill, and David Ditch,
``Despite Raging Inflation, Congress Bent on Continuing Spending
Spree,'' Heritage Foundation Commentary, April 21, 2022, https://
www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/despite-raging-
inflation-congress-bent-continuing-spending-spree.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, a combination of policy flaws and political opportunism
has meant that the components of the spending spree have had much
higher costs than were necessary, resulting in a variety of harmful
consequences and trends. This is the case for both the spending spree
as a whole and for infrastructure provisions in particular.
Overspending
First, the spending spree is a substantial cause of the current
inflation surge.
An analysis published in March 2022 by the Federal Reserve of San
Francisco found that excessive stimulus spending in the U.S. accounted
for inflation that would not be explained by other factors.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Oscar Jorda et al., ``Why Is U.S. Inflation Higher than in
Other Countries?'' Federal Reserve of San Francisco Economic Letter,
March 28, 2022, https://www.frbsf.org/economic-research/publications/
economic-letter/2022/march/why-is-us-inflation-higher-than-in-other-
countries/ (accessed September 22, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES)
Act was passed in March 2020 at a time of surging unemployment and
tremendous uncertainty, stimulus packages passed in December 2020 and
March 2021 came when unemployment levels were already well below their
peak.\5\ Worse, the bills were larded with handouts to narrow political
constituencies.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Bureau of Labor Statistics, ``Labor Force Statistics from the
Current Population Survey,'' https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/
LNS14000000 (accessed September 22, 2022).
\6\ Matt D. Dickerson and David Ditch, ``9 Things You Need to Know
About the $1.4 Trillion Fiscal Year 2021 Omnibus and $900 Billion
COVID-19 Package,'' Heritage Foundation Commentary, December 22, 2020,
https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/9-things-you-
need-know-about-the-14-trillion-fiscal-year-2021, and David Ditch et
al., ``COVID-19 Proposals Should Focus on Disease, Not Wasteful
Spending Increases,'' Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3588,
February 25, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/report/
covid-19-proposals-should-focus-disease-not-wasteful-spending-
increases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trillions of dollars in wasteful and unnecessary deficit spending
served as kindling fuel for today's inflationary fire by increasing
demand without increasing supply, while also adding to the nation's
mounting long-term fiscal liabilities.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ David Ditch, ``These 7 Charts Show Why Congress Must Get
Spending Under Control Immediately,'' Heritage Foundation Commentary,
July 7, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/
these-7-charts-show-why-congress-must-get-spending-under-control.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Inflation has also had dramatic effects on infrastructure
development.
According to the American Road and Transportation Builders
Association, costs for highway and street construction inputs increased
by 43 percent from May 2020 through August 2022--and this despite
declines since a peak in June 2022. For comparison, there was less than
3 percent inflation for the same inputs from May 2017 through May
2020.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ American Road and Transportation Builders Association,
``National Materials Dashboard,'' https://www.artba.org/economics/
materials-dashboard/ (accessed September 22, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The November 2021 infrastructure package stands to significantly
increase federal spending on infrastructure.\9\ Accordingly, it will
lead to an increase in demand for related construction inputs as the
authorizations become outlays. This will put sustained upward pressure
on prices, which would reduce the public value of the spending increase
\10\ while also causing harmful spillover effects for private
construction projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ David Ditch et al., ``9 Things to Know About Senate's $1.1
Trillion Infrastructure Bill,'' Heritage Foundation Commentary, August
5, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/9-
things-know-about-senates-11-trillion-infrastructure-bill.
\10\ Jeff Davis, ``How Much Could Inflation Erode IIJA Buying
Power?'' Eno Center for Transportation, April 27, 2022, https://
www.enotrans.org/article/how-much-could-inflation-erode-iija-buying-
power/ (accessed September 23, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is not the only way that federal infrastructure policy
interacts with inflation. Congress has repeatedly bailed out the
Highway Trust Fund rather than bring spending and revenue into
alignment.\11\ To fund the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act's
(IIJA's) spending increases, Congress used a combination of budget
gimmicks and inflationary deficit spending.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Tax Policy Center, ``What Is the Highway Trust Fund, and How
Is it Financed?'' Briefing Book, May 2020, https://
www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-highway-trust-fund-and-how-
it-financed (accessed September 23, 2022), and Jeff Davis, ``Treasury
Deposits $118 Billion Bailout in Highway Trust Fund,'' Eno Center for
Transportation, January 14, 2022, https://www.enotrans.org/article/
treasury-deposits-118-billion-bailout-in-highway-trust-fund/ (accessed
September 23, 2022).
\12\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rather than worsening both general and infrastructure-specific
inflation trends with yet another surge of deficit spending,
legislators should have focused on reforms to improve the value (rather
than the quantity) of infrastructure spending. Examples include
removing mandates that increase costs for labor and supplies,
eliminating wasteful slush funds, and reforming permitting rules that
add both costs and delays to projects.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ David Ditch and Nicolas Loris, ``Improving Surface
Transportation Through Federalism,'' Heritage Foundation Backgrounder
No. 3450, November 12, 2019, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-
spending/report/improving-surface-transportation-through-federalism.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overpromising
The second harmful trend that has affected both federal spending
measures in general and infrastructure policy in particular is the use
of false advertising and political spin to obscure the contents of
legislative packages.
The March 2021 stimulus package was sold as a response to the
ongoing pandemic and the associated economic downturn. While the bill
did contain a token amount of public health funding, it gave more
legislative attention to superfluous funding of state and local
governments, handouts for heavily unionized sectors, such as public
transit and public K-12 schools, and a bailout of private-sector union
pensions.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ Ditch et al., ``COVID-19 Proposals Should Focus on Disease,
Not Wasteful Spending Increases.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The handout to transit agencies was especially egregious,
accounting for a considerable share of the bill's transportation-
related spending despite transit's relatively tiny share of travel.\15\
Between March 2020 and March 2021, legislators handed transit agencies
a total of $67 billion, which amounts to over three years' worth of
self-generated revenue for all transit systems in the country. This
will allow agencies to temporarily avoid politically sensitive
decisions relating to bloated labor costs.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ David Ditch, ``Call Transportation Bailouts What They Are:
More Welfare for Labor Unions,'' Heritage Foundation Commentary,
February 11, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/
commentary/call-transportation-bailouts-what-they-are-more-welfare-
labor-unions.
\16\ David Ditch, ``Public Transit: Bloated Compensation Highlights
Excessive Subsidization,'' Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3639,
July 22, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/transportation/report/public-
transit-bloated-compensation-highlights-excessive-subsidization.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following passage of the so-called rescue plan, the Biden
Administration released a so-called infrastructure plan. The initial
proposal sought to leverage high public approval of infrastructure as
camouflage for an expansive tax-and-spend agenda. In fact, only about 4
percent of the plan's proposed spending would have gone toward roads
and bridges.\17\ Fortunately, the attempt to expand the concept of
infrastructure to include social benefits and components of the Green
New Deal eventually foundered.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ David Ditch, ``9 Things You Need to Know About Biden's
`Infrastructure' Spending Plan,'' Heritage Foundation Commentary, April
8, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/9-
things-you-need-know-about-bidens-infrastructure-spending-plan.
\18\ David Ditch, ``Even Some Democrats Sound Alarm on Radical $3.5
Trillion Spending Bill,'' Heritage Foundation Commentary, September 16,
2021, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/commentary/even-
some-democrats-sound-alarm-radical-35-trillion-spending-bill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The IIJA was promoted as a generational investment that would
bolster economic growth. However, the package heavily increased
subsidies for low-demand transportation modes, such as transit and
Amtrak, and other provisions involve the federal government funding
infrastructure that is primarily the domain of local governments and
the private sector.\19\ Maintenance costs for marginal infrastructure
and dubious new programs will add to long-term liabilities, serving to
slow rather than accelerate growth.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ Ditch et al., ``9 Things to Know About Senate's $1.1 Trillion
Infrastructure Bill.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reconciliation package marketed as the ``Inflation Reduction
Act'' \20\ is perhaps the most egregious example of false advertising.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ The title of the legislation, as passed, is ``To provide for
reconciliation pursuant to title II of S. Con. Res. 14.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the bill would
increase deficit spending for fiscal years 2023 through 2026,\21\ even
though deficit reduction is most needed in the short term. The
independent Penn-Wharton Budget Model estimates that, ``The impact on
inflation is statistically indistinguishable from zero.'' \22\ Thus,
the ``Inflation Reduction Act'' fails to actually reduce inflation, in
addition to a myriad of other policy flaws.\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ Congressional Budget Office,``Estimated Budgetary Effects of
Public Law 117-169, to Provide for Reconciliation Pursuant to Title II
of S. Con. Res. 14,'' Cost Estimate, September 7, 2022, https://
www.cbo.gov/publication/58455 (accessed September 23, 2022).
\22\ Penn-Wharton Budget Model, ``Senate-passed Inflation Reduction
Act: Estimates of Budgetary and Macroeconomic Effects,'' August 12,
2022, https://budgetmodel.wharton.upenn.edu/issues/2022/8/12/senate-
passed-inflation-reduction-act (accessed September 23, 2022).
\23\ Daren Bakst et al., `` `Inflation Reduction Act' Is Euphemism
for Big Government Socialism, Higher Prices,'' Heritage Foundation
Commentary, August 2, 2022, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-
spending/commentary/7-ways-inflation-reduction-act-would-wallop-your-
wallet.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Overregulating
A third concerning policy trend is the increasing concentration of
power in the federal executive branch. The Biden Administration's
approach to infrastructure provides many examples of why this is a
problem.
In December, shortly after passage of the IIJA, the Federal Highway
Administration issued a ``guidance'' memo to state governments that
sought to prioritize certain types of infrastructure projects above
others. Notably, the memo de-prioritized adding highway capacity.
This guidance did not flow from IIJA statute. Instead, it was
strongly similar to text from a bill produced by Representative Peter
DeFazio (D-OR), even though DeFazio's bill did not become law.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\ David Ditch, ``Road to Nowhere: How Biden and Congress Detour
Highway Funds,'' Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3697, April 5,
2022, https://www.heritage.org/transportation/report/road-nowhere-how-
biden-and-congress-detour-highway-funds.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
While there is a legitimate ongoing debate about the wisdom of
using federal funding to add highway capacity,\25\ Congress has chosen
not to directly or indirectly oppose new capacity. As such, the
Administration should not use ``guidance'' documents to pressure states
to avoid highway capacity projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ Ditch and Loris, ``Improving Surface Transportation Through
Federalism.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the Administration eventually walked the memo back a bit,
this was only done after sharp criticism from elected Republicans.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\ Ditch, ``Road to Nowhere: How Biden and Congress Detour
Highway Funds.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Biden Administration has also sought to overextend its
authority using Equity Action Plans (EAPs) throughout the federal
government.\27\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\ David Ditch, Mike Gonzalez, Hans von Spakovsky and Erin
Dwinell, ``President Biden's `Equity Action Plans' Reveal Radical,
Divisive Agenda,'' Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3710, May 25,
2022, https://www.heritage.org/progressivism/report/president-bidens-
equity-action-plans-reveal-radical-divisive-agenda.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For the Department of Transportation, this means potentially
steering valuable infrastructure contracts based on innate
characteristics of the contractors rather than selecting them based
purely on merit, raising the specter of de facto identity-group quotas.
The department's EAP also calls for micromanaging regional
transportation plans based on ``equity'' concerns, which would mean
putting the whims of diversity bureaucrats ahead of practical
considerations, while also expanding opportunities for environmental
activists to delay projects.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ Ibid.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In areas where the Biden Administration has clearer legal
discretion, it has consistently chosen to make infrastructure projects
more expensive and less economically valuable.
When it comes to labor policy, the Administration's mandates stand
to increase costs by billions of dollars per year.
An executive order on project-labor agreements imposes union-style
work rules on projects that receive federal funding, undermining the
ability of non-unionized contractors to compete.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Ditch, ``Road to Nowhere: How Biden and Congress Detour
Highway Funds.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A proposed regulatory change to federal construction wages under
the Davis-Bacon Act could increase costs further by lowering the
threshold at which union-based compensation levels are considered
``prevailing'' and thus required. This would further inflate
construction costs, especially in right-to-work states, on top of
already high inflation in the sector.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ David Ditch, ``Updating the Davis-Bacon and Related Acts
Regulations [RIN 1235-AA40],'' comment on proposed rule to Jessica
Looman, U.S. Department of Labor, May 17, 2022, http://
thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2022/Regulatory_Comments/DavidDitch_Comment_
5172022.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Proponents of these labor policy changes claim that they equate to
``investing'' in workers. In reality, arbitrarily increasing
compensation for a politically favored group at the expense of the
public good is an exercise in cronyism.
This is an example of the economic problem of concentrated benefits
and dispersed costs. Few members of the public are aware of the
distortions caused by the rules, whereas labor groups are highly
motivated to lobby in support of them.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\ Ditch, ``Public Transit: Bloated Compensation Highlights
Excessive Subsidization.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, where the Biden Administration has full discretion over
project selection, it has prioritized infrastructure projects favored
by left-wing activists over the types of projects that would provide
the most economic benefit.
The Rebuilding American Infrastructure with Sustainability and
Equity (RAISE) grant program was known as Better Utilizing Investments
to Leverage Development (BUILD) during the Trump Administration and as
Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) under
the Obama Administration. Under the Biden Administration, the RAISE
program largely avoids highway projects in favor of low-yield local
projects, such as transit extensions, bike lanes, and ``road diets''
that actively reduce capacity.\32\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Laura Bliss, ``Car-Free Transportation Gets Boost from U.S.
Grant Program,'' Bloomberg CityLab, November 29, 2021, https://
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-29/bike-pedestrian-
infrastructure-favored-in-raise-grants (accessed September 26, 2022);
Mischa Wanek-Libman, ``Transit Specific Projects Land More than $476
Million in RAISE Grants,'' Mass Transit, August 12, 2022, https://
www.masstransitmag.com/management/article/21277191/transit-specific-
projects-land-more-than-476-million-in-raise-grants (accessed September
26, 2022); Department of Transportation, ``RAISE Grants Capital Awards
FY 2021,'' November 2021, https://www.transportation.gov/sites/dot.gov/
files/2021-11/RaiseGrants_Capital%20Fact%20Sheets.pdf (accessed
September 26, 2021); and Ditch, ``Road to Nowhere: How Biden and
Congress Detour Highway Funds.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not only will these ``investments'' yield minimal economic effect,
they also mark an increasing federal involvement in purely local-level
projects. The worsening dependence of state and local governments on
Washington, DC, is corrosive to governance in a nation as large and
diverse as the U.S.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\ Diane Katz, ``Federalism in Crisis: Urgent Action Required to
Preserve Self-Government,'' Heritage Foundation Special Report No. 248,
November 30, 2021, https://www.heritage.org/conservatism/report/
federalism-crisis-urgent-action-required-preserve-self-government.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Recommendations
Congress has many avenues for addressing the policy problems
referenced in this testimony.
With regards to infrastructure spending, Congress should recognize
that the year is 2022, not 1956. States, localities, and the private
sector have more than sufficient resources and capacity with which to
manage and plan the nation's infrastructure needs.
If cities want to build bike lanes, they should pay for the bike
lanes directly. If a state wants to add highway segments in an attempt
to boost economic development in a particular region, or to expand an
airport, that state should bear the costs--and have more leeway on
financing.\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ David Ditch, Nicolas Loris, Adam Michel, and Kevin Dayaratna,
``Paying for Surface Transportation Infrastructure: Four Wrong Routes,
Four Good Paths,'' Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. 3422, July 17,
2019, https://www.heritage.org/budget-and-spending/report/paying-
surface-transportation-infrastructure-four-wrong-routes-four-good.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reducing federal infrastructure spending and taxes would benefit
the federal government's finances, improving both the long-term budget
picture and the short-term need to combat inflation.\35\ This would
also reduce bureaucratic and regulatory inefficiencies that add costs
and delays to projects. Federal spending on local or regional projects,
such as hiking paths and mass transit, should be eliminated
entirely.\36\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Since federal taxes that fund infrastructure do not fully
cover federal infrastructure spending, spending reductions would need
to exceed the size of tax cuts.
\36\ Ditch and Loris, ``Improving Surface Transportation Through
Federalism.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For both infrastructure legislation and other spending bills,
shifting away from omnibus-style packages would improve transparency,
accountability, and deliberation.
Regarding regulations, Congress should reform or eliminate the
thicket of flawed and often archaic laws, such as the Davis-Bacon Act
and the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964, that needlessly increase
the cost of building and maintaining infrastructure.\37\ The National
Environmental Policy Act, which has become an anti-development
nightmare, should either be substantially reformed or repealed
entirely.\38\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\37\ Ditch, ``Road to Nowhere: How Biden and Congress Detour
Highway Funds.''
\38\ Diane Katz, ``Time to Repeal the Obsolete National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA),'' Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No.
3293, March 14, 2018, https://www.heritage.org/government-regulation/
report/time-repeal-the-obsolete-national-environmental-policy-act-nepa.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Congress can fight back against the growth of executive power by
narrowing executive agency discretion, using oversight and legal
remedies to combat instances of overreach, and reforming or repealing
statutes that are being used to justify power grabs outside their
original intent.\39\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ For example, the Biden Administration's citation of the 2003
Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES Act)
when issuing its recent student loan write-off. See Lindsey M. Burke
and Jack Fitzhenry, ``Biden's Student Loan Bailout Boondoggle Is on
Shaky Legal Footing,'' Heritage Foundation Commentary, September 1,
2022, https://www.heritage.org/education/commentary/bidens-student-
loan-bailout-boondoggle-shaky-legal-footing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reining in the relentless growth of federal spending and control
would reduce the intensity of political fights, move the government off
the road to bankruptcy, and enhance our economic prosperity.
Thank you.

Mr. DeFazio. I now recognize Adam Hersh, senior economist
of the Economic Policy Institute.
Mr. Hersh, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Hersh. Thank you, Chair DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves,
committee members. Thank you for inviting me to talk with you
today.
I apologize that I couldn't be there in person, although I
started having COVID symptoms yesterday, so, it is probably all
for the best for all of us.
I am a senior economist at the Economic Policy Institute, a
nonpartisan 501(c)(3) nonprofit think tank in Washington, DC.
Our mission is to make the economy work for working people.
Today I want to talk about two things: number one, why
infrastructure matters; and number two, what impacts we can see
and expect from recent major legislation to expand
infrastructure investment.
First, I want to recognize that this Congress has passed
three critical pieces of legislation for American
transportation and infrastructure. And by doing so, you have
steered us down a path to higher, or broadly shared, and more
sustainable prosperity. These pieces of legislation are the
American Rescue Plan, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act.
Now, considering that the previous administration and the
115th and 116th Congresses before you talked a big game and
repeatedly held infrastructure weeks but failed to deliver any
infrastructure agenda, I think these will be remembered as
monumental legislative achievements that fundamentally
transformed the U.S. economy and improved everybody's quality
of life.
When the plans are fulfilled, Americans will have upgraded
and expanded access to safer roads, waste less fuel and time in
traffic congestion, drink cleaner water, and breathe cleaner
air, send their kids to safer, modernized schools, access low-
cost sustainable energy and high-speed internet, enjoy the
lower cost of doing business, and keep more money in their
pockets because of the productivity and economic opportunities
that these laws create.
That said, we still need to be doing much more to meet the
needs of our current economy and to provide the foundation for
America's future prosperity and security. You, Congress, need
to be doing much more here. Our country faces a staggering
infrastructure gap, an incipient climate crisis, and
intensifying international competition, where partners take
more seriously the significance of infrastructure for economic
growth and inclusion, as well as the risks of breaching the
ecological boundaries that we need to sustain life on this
planet.
America has a choice: we can rise to this challenge and
continue the work this Congress has started, or we can relegate
ourselves to a long-term decline.
So, why does infrastructure matter? Policy debates tend to
focus on infrastructure only when we face an economic downturn
and are looking for ways to stimulate investment and sustain
employment. Infrastructure investment does this.
Every job created directly with infrastructure projects
creates, on average, an additional 17.8 jobs in other sectors
of the economy, and supports our domestic manufacturing base.
But infrastructure is even more fundamental to overall economic
prosperity. It constitutes the essential public goods at the
heart of our economy that allow people, goods, and ideas to be
more easily exchanged, as well as to address the cost of
negative externalities in such a large, complex, social
organization. This is the truck, barter, and trade that Adam
Smith famously wrote about in ``The Wealth of Nations.''
Infrastructure lowers the cost of moving people and goods
around, as well as creating more opportunities to trade
information and spark innovation. It creates opportunity and
higher productivity that underpins economic growth, and will
yield dividends for years to come.
Consider something as basic as bridges. You may have
crossed a dozen or more to get to this hearing today, and you
probably cross even more every time you go home to your
district for your work periods. You likely barely notice that
they are there. But this and other infrastructure assets are
essential to everyday life for American families and
businesses.
A DOT inventory of roughly 620,000 U.S. bridges found that
3 in 5 were in less than ``good'' condition. This means that
most American bridges have reached or are approaching
structural deficiency or functional obsolescence. Table 1 in my
testimony reports the details of these for each State.
And bridges are just one type of critical infrastructure.
In addition to surface transportation assets, we have drinking,
wastewater, and irrigation water systems; energy generation and
transmission; public transit; passenger rail and aviation
systems; coastal and inland waterways and ports; and high-speed
internet and telecommunications, just to name a few classes of
infrastructure.
Economic life without these systems, or with a decaying
infrastructure system, is unimaginable until catastrophe
strikes: a collapsing bridge in Pittsburgh, a failing water
system in Jackson, flooding of major communities. We can look
forward to more of these things unless we continue to increase
our resources going to infrastructure.
Research on the longer term return on investment from
public infrastructure finds, on average, every $100 spent
generates an additional $17 to $73 of benefits throughout the
rest of the economy. The benefits may be larger still than
these estimates suggest. Typical economic models, such as those
used by CBO, can paint misleading pictures by accounting for
costs but not the full range of real-world benefits, making
unrealistic assumptions about how people and markets behave and
assessing investment returns over too short a time horizon.
New research also shows that the economic return on
infrastructure investment is higher, and the extent to which we
begin from a sub-optimal level of capital stock, which is
certainly the case for the United States. The American Society
of Civil Engineers projects the U.S. economy will need an
additional $6 trillion in infrastructure investment sustained
over 10 years to close our infrastructure gap. The loss of
functionality from infrastructure depreciation and
underinvestment will cost the United States $10 trillion in
GDP, 3 million jobs, and $2.4 trillion in lost exports by 2039.
Mr. DeFazio [interrupting]. Could you summarize at this
point, quickly? Your time is expired.
Mr. Hersh. Yes, excuse me.
I think there is a lot more to get into in this discussion.
Let me just conclude by stressing that achieving our economic
goals will require not just Congress allocating more resources
to these problems, but also embracing new approaches to how we
fund and incentivize infrastructure and technological
investments.
Thank you. I look forward to the discussion.
[Mr. Hersh's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Adam S. Hersh, Ph.D., Senior Economist, Economic
Policy Institute
Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Graves, committee members, thank
you for inviting me to talk with you today. I am Adam Hersh, Ph.D.,
Senior Economist at the Economic Policy Institute, a non-partisan,
501(c)3 nonprofit think tank in Washington, DC.
Today, I will talk about 2 things:
1. Why infrastructure matters, and
2. What impacts we can see and expect from recent major
legislation to expand infrastructure investment.

First, I want to recognize that this Congress, over the past 18
months, passed 3 monumental pieces of legislation that are critical for
American transportation and infrastructure and by so doing have started
America on a path to higher, more broadly shared, and more sustainable
prosperity. These are the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), and the Inflation
Reduction Act (IRA).
Considering that the previous administration along the 115th and
116th Congresses failed to advance any new infrastructure agenda--
despite grandiose pledges and repeated ``Infrastructure Weeks''--these
3 acts mark not just monumental political achievements, but also the
promise to fundamentally transform the American economy and improve
everyone's quality of life.\i\ When these spending plans are fulfilled,
you will have touched the lives of every single person in America with
upgraded and expanded access to safer roads, less time spent in traffic
congestion, cleaner drinking water and sanitation, modernized schools,
dependable and sustainable energy grids, cleaner air and better health,
lower costs of doing business, a revitalized manufacturing sector, more
money in their pockets because of the investments in America this
Congress has made.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\i\ Emily Cochrane and Eileen Sullivan. 2020. ``The Many Times It's
Been `Infrastructure Week' in Washington.'' New York Times. April 1.
Accessed September 15, 2022. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/01/us/
politics/coronavirus-infrastructure-week-timeline.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Still, all you have done is far from enough. We need to be doing
much more to meet the needs of our current economy and provide the
foundation for America's future prosperity and security. America faces
a yawning infrastructure deficit and if we don't rise to meet this
moment, we risk being left behind economically.
1. Why Infrastructure Matters
Infrastructure constitutes the essential public goods at the heart
of our economy that allow people, goods, and ideas to be more easily
exchanged, as well as to address the costs of negative externalities
arising in such complex social organization.\ii\ This is the ``truck,
barter, and trade,'' that Adam Smith wrote about in his book, The
Wealth of Nations; infrastructure lowers the cost of moving people and
goods as well as creating more opportunities to trade information and
spark innovation. Policy debates often focus on infrastructure's impact
in terms of the jobs and investment that can be created today. Yes,
every job created directly in infrastructure construction creates an
additional 17.8 jobs in other sectors of the economy and fuel domestic
manufacturing.\iii\ But infrastructure is even more essential to
creating the opportunity and productivity that propels economic
activity into the future, yielding economic dividends for years to come
by connecting people, goods, and information together more efficiently.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\ii\ Technically, economists define a ``public good'' as non-rival
and non-excludable, although in common usage public goods may also
refer to rival, non-excludable goods.
\iii\ Bivens, L. Josh. 2019. ``Updated employment multipliers for
the U.S. economy.'' Economic Policy Institute. January 23.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consider your own consumption of a very basic infrastructure good
like bridges. You may have crossed a dozen or more to get to this
hearing today. You probably cross dozens more on every trip home for
your district work periods. You probably don't notice them passing by
while you are busy on your mobile phone, but they are essential to
everyday life in America and they are in trouble. A Department of
Transportation survey of nearly 620,000 bridges nationally finds that 3
in 5 in less than ``good'' condition, while 2 in 5 are more than 50
years old.\iv\ Practically, this means most American bridges have
reached or are approaching structural deficiency or functional
obsolescence. Some states are significantly worse off than the average:
in West Virginia 79% of bridges are in less than good condition, 74% in
Kentucky, and 66% in Pennsylvania (see Table 1). Even in relatively
well-situated states like Ohio and Florida, 39% and 38% of bridges,
respectively, are still problematic--totaling more than 15,000 bridges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\iv\ EPI analysis of Department of Transportation. 2022. National
Bridge Inventory: Bridge Condition by County 2022. June 15. Accessed
September 15, 2022. https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/nbi/no10/
county22.cfm; ASCE. 2021. Making the Grade: America's Infrastructure
Report Card 2021: Bridges. Accessed September 15, 2022. https://
infrastructurereportcard.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Bridges-
2021.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bridges are just one type of critical infrastructure. There are
many more that are also essential in everyday life for American
families and businesses. Until now, Congress has allowed America's
infrastructure to go to rot, failed to supply it in adequate amounts,
and--whether by design or malign neglect--too often forced select
communities most in need of affordable transportation to bear the costs
of infrastructure projects while excluding them from the benefits.
These include:
Roads and other surface transportation assets
Drinking, waste, and irrigation water systems
Energy generation and transmission
Public transit, passenger rail, and airports and aviation
systems
Coastal and inland waterways and ports
Access to high-speed internet
Conservation and public recreation space

America has been disinvesting in infrastructure assets for years,
and our growing deficiencies impose staggering economic costs.\v\ The
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) estimates that the loss of
functionality from America's depreciated infrastructure assets will
cost the United States $10 trillion in GDP, 3 million jobs, and $2.4
trillion in lost exports by 2039 due to increased costs of doing
business, lost time and wasted fuel, health impacts, and other
individual costs that add up to a big deal in the aggregate.\vi\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\v\ Ayres Steinberg, Sarah, and Adam Hersh. 2013. ``New Ryan Budget
Cuts Investments in America's Future.'' Center for American Progress.
March 13. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/new-ryan-budget-
cuts-investments-in-americas-future/; Bivens, L. Josh. 2017. ``The
potential macroeconomic benefits from increasing infrastructure
investment.'' Economic Policy Institute. July 18.
\vi\ ASCE. 2021. Infrastructure Report Card. Accessed https://
infrastructurereportcard.org/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The ASCE projects that the U.S. economy will need $6 trillion in
infrastructure investment, sustained over 10 years, may be too low. The
aging infrastructure we have is ill-prepared to cope with increasingly
frequent severe weather events, wildfires, and flooding we can expect
moving forward as the climate warms--and certainly if we fail to limit
that warming to 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels--which
will cause it to deteriorate faster. And the ASCE analysis did not
factor in additional investments that will be needed to deploy
decarbonization technologies at the ambitious pace and scale needed to
meet emissions targets. The U.S. Global Change Research Program
estimated that, if unabated, climate change will permanently reduce
U.S. GDP by 10 percent.\vii\ Economic losses will result from harm to
physical assets, reduced industrial and agricultural productivity,
increased mortality and health impacts on labor force participation,
and socio-political destabilization around the world. Other researchers
estimate an additional $400-600 billion investment a year is needed to
achieve carbon net neutrality.\viii\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\vii\ U.S. Global Change Research Program (USGCRP) 2018. Impacts,
Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate
Assessment, Volume II. https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/.
\viii\ Pollin, Robert, Shouvik Chakraborty, and Jeanette Wicks-Lim.
2021. ``Employment Impacts of Proposed U.S. Economic Stimulus Programs:
Job Creation, Job Quality, and Demographic Distribution Measures.''
Political Economy Research Institute. https://peri.umass.edu/
publication/item/1397-employment-impacts-of-proposed-u-s-economic-
stimulus-programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The good news is that you have the power to change this in ways
that will yield outsized effects on the U.S. economy and the lives of
families across this country. Research on the longer-term return on
investment from public infrastructure finds that, on average, every
$100 spent on infrastructure generates an additional $17 benefit,
though some research finds a return on investment as high as 73
percent.\ix\ The broad economic benefits may be even larger than these
estimates suggest. Typical economic models, such as those used by the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to score legislation, can paint a
misleading picture by accounting for costs but not the full range of
real-world benefits, making unrealistic assumptions about how people
and markets behave, and assessing investment returns over too short a
time horizon.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\ix\ See Bivens, L. Josh. 2017. ``The potential macroeconomic
benefits from increasing infrastructure investment.'' Economic Policy
Institute. July 18. https://www.epi.org/publication/the-potential-
macroeconomic-benefits-from-increasing-infrastructure-investment/;
Heintz, James. 2010. ``The Impact of Public Capital on the U.S. Private
Economy: New Evidence and Analysis.'' International Review of Applied
Economics. Vol. 24, no. 5, 619-32; Berechman, Joseph, Dilruba Ozmen,
and Kaan Ozbay. 2006. ``Empirical analysis of transportation investment
and economic development at state, county and municipality levels.''
Transportation. Vol. 33, pp. 537-551.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the real world, infrastructure investments deliver an immediate
economic surge, but also simultaneously achieve other objectives, for
example:
Expanding broadband internet access to rural and other
neglected communities will not only create immediate jobs installing
communications equipment, but will help bring to every corner of the
country employment, education, health care, and social opportunities
afforded by connectivity.
Overhauling public water systems to eliminate lead and
other toxics not only will create a lot of jobs and lower utility
prices for families and businesses, but also yield lifelong impacts on
educational attainment, earnings, and productivity for those living in
affected communities.
Reinvesting in and expanding sustainable public
transportation systems will create direct jobs, but also open new
opportunities for labor force participation and higher wages and
productivity--connecting people to jobs that were literally out of
reach--reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality and
therefore health and education outcomes.

This Congress has taken significant steps in the right direction to
do this with ARPA, IIJA, and IRA, allocating new resources to these
long-neglected foundations of national economic prosperity. But it is
also important to note that the foundations of a dynamic and efficient
economy go deeper than hard physical infrastructure assets. The
pandemic ``she-cession'' has laid bare how essential caregiving
``soft'' infrastructure also is for the overall economy and that
inadequate and unequal access to quality care has caused preventable
harm to individuals, families, and on aggregate economic performance.
America's lack of paid caregiving infrastructure represents a glaring
obstacle to achieving the country's full economic potential that future
Congresses must address.
2. Benefits of ARPA, IIJA, and IRA Infrastructure Measures
ARPA delivered critical resources to American state, local, tribal,
and territorial governments in a time of acute crisis so that they
could maintain continuity in essential public and private
transportation and infrastructure services when revenue streams tanked;
\x\ expanded and accelerated local infrastructure projects to offset
demand losses in other sectors of the economy; and provided support for
struggling small businesses and families to keep the lights on. Moody's
analytics found that ARPA increased employment by more than 4 million
jobs and nearly doubled the rate of GDP growth in 2021, and delivered
sufficient aggregate demand to ensure that the Great Lockdown of 2020
did not repeat in a double-dip recession.\xi\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\x\ In addition to supporting public health, public security, and
education services, and providing aggregate demand support more
generally--through the business and household sectors--with indirect
economic benefits for transportation and infrastructure industries.
\xi\ Moody's Analytics. 2022. ``Global Fiscal Policy in the
Pandemic.'' Moody's Analytics. February 24. Accessed https://
www.moodysanalytics.com/-/media/article/2022/global-fiscal-policy-in-
the-pandemic.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act reauthorized funding for
existing infrastructure and provided nearly $550 billion in new
investments in surface transportation, public transit and rail, water,
and broadband internet infrastructure, along with new investments in
renewable energy and electric vehicles.\xii\ By my estimates, the
additional infrastructure spending in IIJA supports 772,400 jobs
annually.\xiii\ Table 2 details the number of jobs associated with each
program under the IIJA, with most jobs coming from road and surface
transportation projects, though all program areas provide significant
job creation effects.\xiv\ Table 3 looks at the kinds of jobs that IIJA
will create broadly across the economy. Of course, the construction
industry comprises the largest share of employment, with nearly 176,000
jobs annually. But the investments also stimulate 175,000 jobs annually
in the manufacturing sector, nearly 100,000 jobs in transportation
industries, and more broadly across other industries through induced
demand. Critically, Buy America and prevailing wage provisions in this
and other legislation help set a high standard for contractors to
ensure that America's investments create good jobs with fair wages and
contribute to the revitalization of our manufacturing base. Moody's
Analytics estimates that, at the peak of the expenditures, U.S. GDP
will be roughly 0.8 percentage points higher as a result of IIJA.\xv\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xii\ Adam S. Hersh. 2021. ```Build Back Better' agenda will ensure
strong, stable recovery in coming years.'' Economic Policy Institute.
September 16. https://www.epi.org/publication/iija-budget-
reconciliation-jobs/.
\xiii\ To be clear, these average annual number of jobs supported
cannot be summed together over 10 years. If, for example, all of the
spending ramped up in Year 1 and then persisted, then 772,400 jobs
would be supported in the first year and then this number would persist
but not grow. Over the 10-year window, one could cumulate these job
numbers and classify them as ``job-years''--a measure of total hours of
work supported by this spending over the next decade. For more on the
estimation methodology, see Adam S. Hersh. 2021. `` `Build Back Better'
agenda will ensure strong, stable recovery in coming years.'' Economic
Policy Institute. September 16. https://www.epi.org/publication/iija-
budget-reconciliation-jobs/.
\xiv\ These tables are reproduced from a report that also analyzed
the potential effects of President Biden's broader Build Back Better
agenda.
\xv\ Moody's Analytics. 2021. ``Macroeconomic Consequences of the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act & Build Back Better Framework.''
Moody's Analytics. November 4. https://www.moodysanalytics.com/-/media/
article/2021/macroeconomic-consequences-of-the-infrastructure-
investment-and-jobs-act-and-build-back-better-framework.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ink is still drying on the Inflation Reduction Act, but it is clear
this is the most ambitious action Congress has taken to confront the
impending climate change crisis with more than 100 programs that will
restore, expand, and modernize a broad range of infrastructure systems.
These investments will bring the costs of transportation, electricity
and other utilities, building heating and cooling for families and
businesses in America. The spending will do so while supporting
domestic manufacturing and development of new domestic industries where
U.S. businesses will lead innovation and critical components of energy
goods and systems will better insulated from disruption in global
supply chains. University of Massachusetts economists estimate that IRA
will generate 912,000 jobs per year, on average, for 10 years from the
public and private investments that the policies incentivize.\xvi\
Rhodium Group economists estimate that IRA will reduce energy costs for
the average household by $730 to $1135 annually.\xvii\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\xvi\ Robert Pollin, Chirag Lala, Shouvik Chakraborty. 2022. ``Job
Creation Estimates Through Proposed Inflation Reduction Act.''
Political Economy Research Institute. August 4. Accessed https://
peri.umass.edu/publication/item/1633-job-creation-estimates-through-
proposed-inflation-reduction-act.
\xvii\ John Larsen, Ben King, Hannah Kolus, Naveen Dasari, Galen
Hiltbrand, and Whitney Herndon. 2022. ``A Turning Point for US Climate
Progress: Assessing the Climate and Clean Energy Provisions in the
Inflation Reduction Act.'' Rhodium Group. August 12. Accessed https://
rhg.com/research/climate-clean-energy-inflation-reduction-act/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion
While this Congress has taken great strides to tackle pressing
crises while reinvesting in the infrastructure at the foundation of
America's long-term economic prosperity. Achieving our economic goals
will require not just significantly more resources, but embracing new
approaches to the public role in how we fund and incentivize
infrastructure and technological investments. Thank you.

Table 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State All Good Fair Poor Rank % Fair + Poor
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AK................................................ 1,626 739 761 126 18 55%
AL................................................ 16,162 6,416 9,171 575 26 60%
AR................................................ 12,955 6,136 6,145 674 16 53%
AZ................................................ 8,497 5,334 3,056 107 2 37%
CA................................................ 25,810 12,091 12,172 1,547 17 53%
CO................................................ 8,917 3,056 5,409 452 33 66%
CT................................................ 4,353 1,253 2,875 225 42 71%
DC................................................ 248 78 166 4 39 69%
DE................................................ 872 320 538 14 29 63%
FL................................................ 12,740 7,871 4,414 455 3 38%
GA................................................ 15,034 11,239 3,502 293 1 25%
HI................................................ 1,177 284 819 74 49 76%
IA................................................ 23,835 9,320 9,911 4,604 27 61%
ID................................................ 4,579 1,315 3,030 234 43 71%
IL................................................ 26,873 12,748 11,702 2,423 15 53%
IN................................................ 19,367 7,916 10,411 1,040 25 59%
KS................................................ 24,931 13,231 10,406 1,294 8 47%
KY................................................ 14,482 3,915 9,554 1,013 46 73%
LA................................................ 12,733 5,498 5,664 1,571 21 57%
MA................................................ 5,252 1,330 3,478 444 48 75%
MD................................................ 5,456 1,780 3,425 251 38 67%
ME................................................ 2,505 678 1,472 355 45 73%
MI................................................ 11,314 3,951 6,094 1,269 32 65%
MN................................................ 13,497 7,806 5,089 602 5 42%
MO................................................ 24,569 9,455 12,884 2,230 28 62%
MS................................................ 16,782 9,660 6,025 1,097 6 42%
MT................................................ 5,278 1,624 3,287 367 41 69%
NC................................................ 18,822 7,791 9,728 1,303 24 59%
ND................................................ 4,281 1,901 1,931 449 19 56%
NE................................................ 15,336 7,952 6,164 1,220 11 48%
NH................................................ 2,531 1,339 1,002 190 9 47%
NJ................................................ 6,805 1,791 4,559 455 47 74%
NM................................................ 4,033 1,441 2,393 199 31 64%
NV................................................ 2,071 1,184 858 29 7 43%
NY................................................ 17,557 6,350 9,596 1,611 30 64%
OH................................................ 27,003 16,437 9,343 1,223 4 39%
OK................................................ 23,197 9,824 11,166 2,207 22 58%
OR................................................ 8,255 2,802 5,057 396 34 66%
PA................................................ 23,202 7,798 12,292 3,112 35 66%
RI................................................ 784 168 486 130 51 79%
SC................................................ 9,427 4,095 4,855 477 20 57%
SD................................................ 5,897 1,950 2,951 996 37 67%
TN................................................ 20,377 8,621 10,875 881 23 58%
TX................................................ 55,701 28,040 26,887 774 14 50%
UT................................................ 3,080 858 2,158 64 44 72%
VA................................................ 14,042 4,668 8,873 501 36 67%
VT................................................ 2,846 1,493 1,282 71 10 48%
WA................................................ 8,388 4,291 3,674 423 13 49%
WI................................................ 14,336 7,356 6,058 922 12 49%
WV................................................ 7,317 1,711 4,145 1,461 50 77%
WY................................................ 3,121 967 1,949 205 40 69%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2
Jobs supported by Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and budget
reconciliation bill spending, average per year over 10 years
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category Jobs
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roads, bridges, major projects............................. 196,074
Safety..................................................... 19,607
Public transit............................................. 69,517
Rail....................................................... 72,933
Electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure....................... 16,686
Reconnecting communities................................... 1,782
Airports................................................... 26,394
Ports and waterways........................................ 23,138
Water infrastructure....................................... 79,964
Broadband infrastructure................................... 60,605
Environmental remediation.................................. 35,412
Power infrastructure, including grid authority............. 81,206
Resilience................................................. 89,125
------------
Subtotal................................................. 772,444
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Budget reconciliation bill
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Universal pre-K............................................ 197,659
Child care................................................. 341,711
Clean energy tax incentives................................ 153,664
Electric vehicle (EV) rebates.............................. 41,043
Agriculture/forestry....................................... 69,593
Clean energy accelerator/green bank/infrastructure bank.... 12,531
Civilian Conservation Corps................................ 6,951
Federal procurement of clean technology.................... 21,016
Weatherization............................................. 9,060
Place-based clean energy economic development and 8,072
environment...............................................
Education (postsecondary).................................. 321,989
Long-term care............................................. 545,598
ACA Premiums............................................... 102,768
Dental, vision, hearing.................................... 251,109
Public housing, preservation, supply, and affordability.... 115,261
Lawful permanent residences for immigrants................. 80,288
Community college infrastructure........................... 7,633
Critical Supply Chain Resilience Fund...................... 26,359
Manufacturing USA.......................................... 2,279
National Institute for Science and Technology Laboratories. 3,038
Extension Partnerships..................................... 5,317
Regional Innovation Hubs................................... 7,596
Community Revitalization Fund.............................. 6,717
Auto supply chain.......................................... 17,308
Manufacturing financing.................................... 12,800
Small Business Administration and minority business 18,433
development...............................................
Rural Partnership Fund..................................... 2,636
Pandemic preparedness: HHS, DOE, DOD....................... 12,508
Research and development................................... 149,450
Workforce.................................................. 82,177
Child nutrition............................................ 56,559
Paid leave................................................. 143,371
CTC/EITC/CDCTC............................................. 414,182
------------
Subtotal................................................. 3,246,677
------------
Total.................................................. 4,019,122
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes: Research and development includes research programs for
infrastructure, the National Science Foundation Technology
Directorate, climate research, Department of Energy demonstrating
funding, ARPA-Climate initiatives, historically Black colleges and
universities, and STEM centers of excellence and education programs.
Pandemic preparedness includes designated funding for the Departments
of Health and Human Services, Energy, and Defense. CTC/EITC/CDCTC
denotes Child Tax Credit/Earned Income Tax Credit/Child and Dependent
Care Tax Credit.
Source: EPI analysis of White House 2021b, 2021c, and 2021d.

Table 3
Jobs supported annually by the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act (IIJA) and budget reconciliation bill, by industry
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jobs
--------------------------------------
Industry Budget
IIJA reconciliation Total
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Agriculture, forestry, fishing 2,393 47,294 49,686
and hunting.....................
Oil and gas extraction........... 652 1,354 2,006
Mining (excl. oil and gas)....... 2,353 3,823 6,176
Utilities........................ 3,018 5,704 8,722
Construction..................... 175,501 136,708 312,210
Manufacturing.................... 174,628 381,628 556,256
Food........................... 383 14,526 14,909
Beverage and tobacco product... 73 2,288 2,361
Textile mills and textile 827 3,806 4,633
product mills.................
Apparel, leather and allied 304 7,586 7,890
products......................
Wood products.................. 5,119 23,262 28,381
Paper products................. 1,499 5,114 6,613
Printing and related support 1,296 5,876 7,172
activities....................
Petroleum and coal products.... 793 1,129 1,922
Chemical manufacturing......... 2,704 17,180 19,883
Plastics and rubber products... 8,416 11,852 20,268
Nonmetallic mineral product.... 7,741 7,550 15,292
Primary metal.................. 7,166 13,458 20,624
Architectural and structural 8,179 34,188 42,367
products; boiler, tank, and
shipping containers...........
Other fabricated metal products 14,861 31,393 46,254
Agricultural, construction, 1,356 9,481 10,837
commercial and service, and
metalworking machinery........
Engine, turbine, and power 439 9,525 9,964
transmission equipment........
HVAC and misc. industrial 6,134 57,971 64,105
machinery.....................
Computer and peripheral 127 6,418 6,545
equipment.....................
Communications and audio and 254 1,700 1,954
video equipment...............
Navigational, measuring, 1,031 2,722 3,753
electromedical, and control
instruments...................
Semiconductor and other 2,615 12,722 15,337
electronic components;
reproducing magnetic and
optical media.................
Household appliances........... 761 14,365 15,126
Other electrical equipment, 46,144 45,732 91,876
appliances, and components....
Motor vehicle and motor vehicle 24,927 21,924 46,851
parts.........................
Aerospace products and parts... 4,127 1,120 5,248
Railroad, ship, and other 11,060 792 11,852
transportation equipment......
Furniture and related products. 2,239 4,834 7,073
Miscellaneous manufacturing.... 14,053 13,112 27,165
Wholesale trade.................. 24,133 63,158 87,291
Retail trade..................... 17,862 158,596 176,458
Transit and ground passenger 99,474 8,644 108,119
transportation..................
Other transportation and 39,184 59,513 98,697
warehousing.....................
Information...................... 12,747 27,979 40,726
Finance and insurance............ 11,766 33,538 45,304
Real estate, rental and leasing.. 6,157 22,264 28,420
Professional, scientific, and 45,922 161,092 207,013
technical services..............
Management of companies and 10,392 50,774 61,166
enterprises.....................
Employment support services and 31,100 89,287 120,387
building services...............
Waste management and remediation 33,339 52,536 85,875
and other administrative and
support services................
Educational services............. 998 225,870 226,868
Health care and social assistance 674 1,069,517 1,070,191
Arts, entertainment, and 5,876 31,323 37,199
recreation......................
Accommodation and food services.. 9,502 110,030 119,532
Other private services........... 5,555 55,880 61,435
Public administration............ 59,221 450,164 509,384
--------------------------------------
Total.......................... 772,445 3,246,675 4,019,119
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: EPI analysis of White House 2021b, 2021c, and 2021d and BLS
2020.

Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, thank you. My thanks to all the
witnesses.
Before we get into questions, I just want to take the
opportunity to briefly discuss the Payroll Support Program,
which was supported on a bipartisan basis by this committee and
by the United States Congress.
People say, well, it didn't work. Look at the interruptions
to schedules this summer. Well, as Ms. Nelson mentioned, just
look at Europe and what a mess they are. We would have had a
fraction of the flights in the air this summer that we did
have. Demand came back, roaring back. And yes, the airlines
weren't quite ready for that, but they would have been totally
unprepared without the PSP program.
As Ms. Nelson pointed out, unlike 2001 and 2008, when
airlines got money after the attack on the World Trade Center
and after the economic collapse in 2008, many declared
bankruptcy. We saw consolidation, and employees lost their
pensions, and we said it is not going to be that way this time.
You are going to pass the money through to your employees, you
keep them qualified, and you will be ready when the pandemic
abates.
We, at that point, couldn't anticipate when we first passed
that it was going to go on as long as it did with several
surges. But I think it was extraordinarily successful.
And so, I want to enter into the record a letter signed by
70 of my colleagues that is directed to Airlines for America,
National Air Carrier Association, and the Regional Airlines
Association, urging that, with the expiration of the stock
buyback on October 1st, that airlines refrain from stock
buybacks.
Stock buybacks used to be illegal until the Reagan
administration. It is the ultimate in self-dealing. It doesn't
benefit customers. It only benefits those whose salaries are
tied to stock price and, of course, stockholders. And a large
majority of Americans do not own any significant amount of
stock in the airlines or the oil companies or others that have
been profiting coming out of the problems with COVID.
So, today we are sending this letter to ask them to refrain
until such a time as they can meet current demands with proper
staffing and customer service. And I am hopeful that they will
receive this and will act accordingly.
So, with that, I ask unanimous consent to enter this in
record.
Without objection, so ordered.
[The information follows:]

Letter of September 29, 2022, to Airlines for America, Regional
Airlines Association, and National Air Carrier Association, from 70
Members of Congress, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
Congress of the United States,
Washington, DC 20515,
September 29, 2022.
Mr. Nicholas Calio,
President and CEO,
Airlines for America, 1275 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, Suite 1300,
Washington, DC 20004.
Ms. Faye Malarkey Black,
President and CEO,
Regional Airlines Association, 1201 15th St. NW, Suite 430, Washington,
DC 20005.
Mr. George Novak,
President,
National Air Carrier Association, 1735 N. Lynn, Suite 105, Arlington,
VA 22209.
Dear Mr. Calio, Ms. Black, and Mr. Novak:
When the pandemic struck in 2020, Congress came together in a
bipartisan manner and quickly passed the Payroll Support Program (PSP),
an aid program that unequivocally prevented the unmitigated disaster
and potential collapse of our nation's aviation system. Unfortunately,
other countries that were either too slow or too limited in their
response are still struggling to recover and, in some cases, parts of
their aviation system ceased operations altogether. The PSP, which
provided approximately $50 billion in aid to the U.S. aviation sector,
safeguarded the livelihoods of the 750,000 plus workers employed by
U.S. airlines as well as those in manufacturing and maintenance. In
doing so, it not only protected those jobs, but it ensured the
airlines' ability to return to service by precluding a crippling
attrition of talent during this temporary crisis.
The PSP also included clear limitations on the use of funds.
Specifically, it mandated a prohibition on involuntary furloughs,
forbid cuts to hourly rates of pay, required continued service to all
communities, banned stock buybacks and dividends through September 30,
2022, and capped executive compensation through April 1, 2023. This was
purposely done so federal funding would be directed to frontline
workers for their pay and benefits and to prevent airline shareholders
and investors from profiting off an economic crisis and taxpayer money.
As a result, PSP saved thousands of aviation industry jobs and accrued
tremendous benefits for workers, airlines, and consumers alike. Given
the restrictions outlined above, those who characterize the PSP as a
bailout for the airlines are entirely off the mark; it was solely a
program to protect the integrity of the aviation system and its
workers.
Fortunately, the U.S. aviation system survived the pandemic.
Unfortunately, it is now having trouble meeting the increasing and
pleasantly unexpected public demand for air travel. In just the first
half of 2022, U.S. airlines have canceled more flights than in all of
2019, disrupting travel for millions of passengers. Meanwhile, despite
PSP, flight attendants, pilots, and other aviation workers have had to
endure increasingly stressful working conditions due to inadequate
staffing and an unprecedented number of unruly passengers, which has
led to a growing number of workers leaving the industry for better
opportunities. This, combined with (1) changing travel patterns as the
market adjusts to more leisure-oriented destinations, (2)
infrastructure and system limitations, and (3) retraining and
onboarding delays, has created a critically challenging post-crisis
climate the aviation industry must navigate.
Some carriers have done just that by adjusting and adapting their
schedules to compensate for this new normal. Others, meanwhile, have
been much slower to respond, resulting in a deluge of cancellations,
delays, complaints, and headlines. Even the Department of
Transportation has taken notice, launching a dashboard for travelers to
compare airline cancellation policies. Simultaneously, communities with
small airports have been increasingly frustrated that routes are either
being reduced or cut altogether. Suffice to say, the industry has some
more work to do before we say we've returned to normal operations.
We stand united with the entire U.S. airline industry and applaud
them for weathering the pandemic. And to be clear, not all of the
operational challenges we're seeing around the country are the fault of
the airlines. The FAA is also trying to tackle these issues, working to
replenish their ranks and balance staffing to better serve the
drastically different new post-COVID travel patterns. That said, given
the cracks in the system which the pandemic exposed and the number of
displaced passengers due to chaotic operations, we urge your member
carriers to refrain from initiating stock buybacks when the prohibition
ends on September 30, 2022, at least until air carriers are able to
publish and fulfill schedules that meet demand; staff flights and key
personnel positions appropriately; and return service to every
community--big or small.
We look forward to your response.
Sincerely,
Peter A. DeFazio,
Member of Congress.
Rick Larsen,
Member of Congress.
Adam Smith,
Member of Congress.
Adriano Espaillat,
Member of Congress.
Alan Lowenthal,
Member of Congress.
Albio Sires,
Member of Congress.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
Member of Congress.
Alma S. Adams, Ph.D.,
Member of Congress.
Andre Carson,
Member of Congress.
Andy Levin,
Member of Congress.
Ayanna Pressley,
Member of Congress.
Barbara Lee,
Member of Congress.
Bonnie Watson Coleman,
Member of Congress.
Carolyn B. Maloney,
Member of Congress.
Carolyn Bourdeaux,
Member of Congress.
Colin Allred,
Member of Congress.
Conor Lamb,
Member of Congress.
Cori Bush,
Member of Congress.
Danny K. Davis,
Member of Congress.
David N. Cicilline,
Member of Congress.
Dean Phillips,
Member of Congress.
Debbie Dingell,
Member of Congress.
Donald M. Payne, Jr.,
Member of Congress.
Donald Norcross,
Member of Congress.
Donald S. Beyer, Jr.,
Member of Congress.
Dwight Evans,
Member of Congress.
Eleanor Holmes Norton,
Member of Congress.
Emanuel Cleaver, II,
Member of Congress.
Eric Swalwell,
Member of Congress.
Frederica S. Wilson,
Member of Congress.

Gerald E. Connolly,
Member of Congress.
Grace F. Napolitano,
Member of Congress.
Grace Meng,
Member of Congress.
Haley Stevens,
Member of Congress.
Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr.,
Member of Congress.
Jahana Hayes,
Member of Congress.
Jamaal Bowman, Ed.D.,
Member of Congress.
Jamie Raskin,
Member of Congress.
Jan Schakowsky,
Member of Congress.
Jared Huffman,
Member of Congress.
Jerrold Nadler,
Member of Congress.
Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia,
Member of Congress.
Joe Courtney,
Member of Congress.
John Garamendi,
Member of Congress.
Judy Chu,
Member of Congress.
Katie Porter,
Member of Congress.
Lloyd Doggett,
Member of Congress.
Lucille Roybal-Allard,
Member of Congress.
Marcy Kaptur,
Member of Congress.
Marie Newman,
Member of Congress.
Mark DeSaulnier,
Member of Congress.
Mark Pocan,
Member of Congress.
Mark Takano,
Member of Congress.
Nanette Diaz Barragan,
Member of Congress.
Nikema Williams,
Member of Congress.
Nydia M. Velazquez,
Member of Congress.
Pramila Jayapal,
Member of Congress.
Rashida Tlaib,
Member of Congress.
Raul M. Grijalva,
Member of Congress.
Ro Khanna,
Member of Congress.

Rosa L. DeLauro,
Member of Congress.
Salud Carbajal,
Member of Congress.
Sean Patrick Maloney,
Member of Congress.
Seth Moulton,
Member of Congress.
Sharice L. Davids,
Member of Congress.
Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick,
Member of Congress.
Stephen F. Lynch,
Member of Congress.
Steve Cohen,
Member of Congress.
Tom Malinowski,
Member of Congress.
Troy A. Carter, Sr.,
Member of Congress.

Mr. DeFazio. All right, we will now go to formal questions,
and I will first start with Ms. Nelson.
Would you briefly--very briefly, because I want to ask
questions to a number of people--summarize the difference
between what happened in 2001, 2008, and with PSP?
Ms. Nelson. Certainly. In 2001, the airlines were given $5
billion to recover their time that the airplanes were actually
on the ground. They were also given a grant program that many
did not even get approval for, even though airline employees
agreed to concessions.
The result was bankruptcies across the industry. We lost
our pensions. We took a 30- to 40-percent cut in pay. We
increased productivity, so that airlines were working
essentially with one worker for every two that they had pre-9/
11. That was a bad move going into the pandemic, actually, and
part of what we saw as a result of staffing problems this
summer.
The bailout was really put on the backs of employees, while
airline executives and bankruptcy lawyers enriched themselves.
It grew inequality, and it was 20 years of austerity where we
did not work on any infrastructure issues. We did not move
forward on diversity and inclusion initiatives. We did not
improve union contracts. We did not attract people to the
airline industry.
And that is also why we do not have people in the funnel
right now for many of the jobs, like pilot jobs, mechanic jobs,
flight attendant jobs, and otherwise.
Mr. DeFazio. OK, thanks. And so, we could assume that, had
we not engaged in this program, as you pointed out with Europe,
that things would have been--despite the problems this summer,
it would have been way, way worse.
Ms. Nelson. First of all, this was a bigger crisis than 9/
11 by 100-fold. This was the biggest crisis in 100 years in the
airline industry. And this committee saved the airline industry
and made it possible for us to move forward now, and not have
another 20 years of austerity and hurt for everyone, and
probably just one airline serving all of America.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you. Now to Mr. Regan.
Would you comment on what would have happened with transit,
had you not received the funds to keep people on the job?
Mr. Regan. Yes. I think basically every public transit
system in the country would have gone bankrupt. I don't think
we would have had service in most of the cities, whether it be
large or small communities across the country.
And frankly, the way that the aid was structured--again,
driven towards workers--allowed them to not only keep the
service going, which allowed people who needed that service
during the pandemic--which included medical officials, people
in food service, other critical workers that were keeping our
country moving during the pandemic--could continue to use the
service.
But then we had the workforce in place. So, as we started
to see demand rise again--and I have seen numbers of upwards of
75 percent of where we were pre-pandemic--that we had the
workforce and the infrastructure in place to actually be able
to meet those demands.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you.
Mr. Desue, I mean, some have said, well, we gave the
transit agencies too much money, way more than they normally
receive. We allowed them to use it for operating, which we
usually don't. Is TriMet rolling in money there?
What did you do with all that money?
Mr. Desue. Actually, we used the money to save lives,
actually to put services out on the street, to get people to
destinations, to get people, frontline workers, to work to be
able to assist us. And we used all of our money that was given
to us to make sure that we connected people to opportunities,
and we also connected people to essential services.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you.
And Mr. Gardner, similar for Amtrak.
You talked quite a bit about the future and what is coming
out of IIJA, but going through the pandemic?
Mr. Gardner. Mr. Chairman. Yes. Without the funding we
received, Amtrak would not have survived. There is no question.
We were facing dramatic losses of revenue and ridership,
and strong interest in maintaining the network required
additional investments. And because of the investments we
received, we were able to recall workers and operate our
services. And those have been incredibly important to
preserving the network, and now give us a platform from which
to improve.
Mr. DeFazio. OK, thank you.
Mr. Ditch, if I understood your testimony, it is kind of
the same thing we saw during the Trump administration with the
advisor on transportation, which is we should devolve the duty
to all of the 50 States and the Territories to provide for the
Nation's transportation network.
Now, it didn't work in the 1950s. I didn't bring it today
because I didn't expect anybody to go back to the stupid
argument of the poster that I have, which was the cover of Life
magazine, which was this brandnew, beautiful ribbon of
concrete, the Kansas Turnpike. Oops, suddenly it ends in a
farmer's field, and it ended in that farmer's field because
Oklahoma didn't have the money. They said, ``Well, we will
build it, but we don't have the money.'' And they didn't build
it until the Eisenhower program.
So, we are going to say to, like, say, L.A.-Long Beach,
hey, it is up to you to get all of that freight out of
California. And when it reaches the Arizona border, it is up to
Arizona to move it, and it is up to the next State to move it?
We are not going to have a coordinated Federal program, because
you are talking about basically a 60-percent reduction from
what is in the IIJA.
Now, you really think that is going to rebuild those 42,000
bridges, that is going to deal with a $100 billion backlog in
transit, or we just shouldn't bother?
Mr. Ditch. I believe----
Mr. DeFazio [interrupting]. Briefly.
Mr. Ditch [continuing]. That there has been quite a lot of
bloviation about the concept of crumbling roads and bridges,
even though, historically, if you look decade by decade, the
quality of our infrastructure in America has, in fact, been
improving. There are fewer structurally deficient bridges,
there are fewer roads in poor condition.
Mr. DeFazio. Right. Because we have a lack of investment.
Mr. Ditch. I believe that States have the capacity in
2022----
Mr. DeFazio [interrupting]. Well, OK, thank you.
Thirty-six States, including red States, have raised gas
taxes, registration fees, and every other damn thing, and they
need a partner. And if the Federal--we haven't adjusted the
Federal gas tax--I was here when we did it, 1993. It was the
last time. There has been a little bit of inflation since 1993.
And you want to go back to, oh, we will live off the gas tax
and proceeds that weren't adequate back then, now?
So, I thank you very much for your misplaced testimony.
With that I recognize the ranking member.
Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a letter here
addressed to you and to the ranking member from The
Transportation Alliance. I would ask unanimous consent to
submit that for the record.
Mr. DeFazio. Without objection.
[The information follows:]

Letter of September 29, 2022, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair, and Hon.
Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, from Judith Potter, President, The Transportation
Alliance, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Eric A. ``Rick'' Crawford
September 29, 2022.
The Honorable Peter DeFazio,
Chairman,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of
Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
The Honorable Sam Graves,
Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, U.S. House of
Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
Dear Chairman DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves:
Thank you for holding today's hearing on Investing in our Nation's
Transportation Infrastructure and Workers: Why It Matters. We hope the
Committee will continue to hold hearings like this where more of the
transportation sector can be included and their stories heard. Today's
hearing focuses only on a small part of the overall transportation
infrastructure and workers in this country. We would urge you to invite
more of us to be witnesses at hearings like this.
My name is Judith Potter and I serve as the President of The
Transportation Alliance (TTA), which represents the interests of
members in 250 cities, including airport shuttle, executive sedan,
limousine, non-emergency medical transportation, paratransit, and
taxicab fleets. The Transportation Alliance is the largest trade
organization in the industry, with members operating over 100,000
vehicles and serving 900 million passengers per year. In short, we are
critical to the overall transportation infrastructure across the
country. We are made up of small businesses, whose workforce is very
diverse. Today, our industry employs a workforce that is over 80%
persons of color in most urban areas. What other industry can make that
claim?
In addition to my role with the TTA, I am the CEO of Black & White
Transportation Company located in Toledo, Ohio. When I first joined
Black & White it was as their bookkeeper and we had a small fleet of 40
taxicabs. Since I bought the company in 1997, we have increased our
fleet to over 150 taxi vehicles and another 25 paratransit vans.
I'm submitting this letter for the record so that the Committee
will get a better picture of the real impacts COVID-19 has had on our
industry. We appreciate the immediate action Congress took in March of
2020 when the country shutdown. We appreciate the efforts to provide
relief to small businesses through the Paycheck Protection Program
(PPP), Economic Impact Disaster Loans (EIDL), and other relief
programs, but those programs were short term and were not enough to
help industries like ours, where most of our members lost 80 to 100% of
their businesses. We are making a comeback, but it hasn't been easy,
and we are not yet back at full strength. I am here asking Congress to
do more to help industries like ours, that are so vital to every
community, the elderly, persons with disabilities, and people who have
no other timely transportation options available to them.
As Congress has and continues to pass vital legislation focusing on
critical infrastructure, we ask that it go beyond the big ``boys'' in
this sector. We ask that Congress put the same focus on our industry
(and others) that it has on the airlines, who received its own stimulus
funds. Amtrak, which also received its own stimulus funds. The
motorcoach industry which also received its own special funding. And
public transit, which also received significant extra funding. The taxi
(local for-hire transportation) industry plays as big of a role in our
Nation's transportation infrastructure as the airlines, Amtrak, and the
motorcoach industry, but we have not received special funding.
Unlike most other transportation providers, much of our industry is
open 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. We are available when there are
no other transportation options open to the public. When other
transportation services are available, we provide feeder services to or
from them. When they are not open or not timely, we provide the full
trip. We are specialists at providing demand response service for first
mile, last mile or the full trip.
This country needs our services. This country needs our workers.
I'm submitting this letter in the hope Congress will bring us to the
table and work with us to ensure that we continue to make it back so we
can serve our communities who today are under served and who don't have
access to various transportation options.
To help us do that, we ask that Congress consider the following
actions if it is serious about investing in our Nation's infrastructure
and its workers:
1) Worker shortages: Like so many other industries, we face a
shortage of workers to serve the communities who need us the most. To
help us attract drivers, we are asking Congress to consider grants to
companies like mine so that I can recruit the drivers I need to serve
the citizens of Toledo. These grants aren't just to help attract
drivers, but to help us train and keep mechanics, call center
personnel, and the full workforce needed to serve the public. It's one
thing to put a fleet of cars on the road, but if you can't keep them
operational, then our citizens suffer, and our business will fail.
Wages continue to rise beyond what we can offer today. We
need access to grants to help us supplement the wages we offer our
workers. I have heard over and over how people are working for non-
livable wages. We can fix that if we have a partner like the Federal
government. We aren't asking for handouts, but a partnership. When we
can recruit, train, and keep our workforce, it means we are healthier
as a company. This means our community is healthier because they get
the services they need and depend on. Local, state, and Federal
governments are healthier because more tax revenue is being collected.
This is a cycle and one that needs the support of Congress.
2) Small Business Centric Policy: When Congress turns to the issue
of tax breaks, the attention immediately turns to big corporations. We
want to ask that Congress instead turn its attention to small
businesses. According to the Small Business Administration (SBA) there
are 32.5 million small businesses in the United States that account for
64% of all new jobs created in this country. Small businesses create
1.5 million jobs annually. According to the SBA, COVID-19 has rendered
31% of all small businesses in the United States non-operational. This
is a big loss to every community. Our industry has suffered its share
of losses due to the pandemic. We need Congress to focus on tax policy
that helps and supports small businesses. We need the same types of
treatment our large corporate counterparts get. Cut our taxes and let
us reinvest in our companies. Cut our tax rates and cost of doing
business and watch us grow to big businesses, which ultimately means
more tax revenue back to the Federal government.
3) Electric Vehicles: We have seen the push over the past couple
years towards electric vehicles, yet little has been done to help
really move businesses like ours in that direction. It's one thing to
say we need to move away from gas powered vehicles and towards electric
vehicles, but it's hard to fulfill that promise when the vehicles don't
exist to get us there. In our industry for example, there are no good
options for us when it comes to electric vehicles. The vehicles
available do not have the battery life to justify the change. We cannot
have our fleets charging half the day. We cannot keep our businesses
operating or servicing the community when our vehicles are hooked up to
charging stations every couple of hours versus on the road transporting
passengers. Congress needs to work with our industry on addressing this
issue before we can mandate changes.
The second problem with pushing the electrification of
vehicles is the lack of battery capacity. This country currently cannot
make enough batteries to meet its push to move the country to electric
vehicles. It's hard to meet the Buy America Act requirements when the
most critical part of your vehicle isn't produced in the United States.
The third issue is recent proposed legislation by Congress
that would limit who can and can't receive the tax credit for buying
electric vehicles. Under the proposal I've read, the tax credit would
only apply to vehicles made with union labor. That will again limit
industries like ours, who could and should be the pilot case for how
and why the country can go electric.
Due to the electric vehicle limitations noted above, our
industry is not currently able to present the public with a favorable
picture of how great electric vehicles can be. The other big obstacle
standing in our way is the cost of these vehicles. A company like mine
with 150 vehicles could not afford to buy new or used electric vehicles
to meet this goal. Not only do we not have the financial resources to
do so, we could not stay in business due to the cost outweighing any
profits we could generate.
If Congress and the Administration are serious about moving
to electric vehicles, then work with us. Help us. Create a pilot
program that offers our industry grants to purchase these vehicles,
charging stations, and batteries. Supporting the taxi industry's
efforts to green their fleets could set the tone for the country. The
more people ride in our electric vehicles, the more we can educate the
public on the need and savings to passengers, their communities, and
the planet. Work with us. We are the solution.

These solutions will go a long way toward meeting the goals of the
hearing today. Invest in us and we can provide the green return on
investment you're looking for. Invest in us and our communities become
stronger, our workforce becomes stronger, and our Nation's
infrastructure becomes stronger.
Don't forget the little guy in these discussions and policy
debates. We need your help. If we go away, what then? We have solutions
that help you meet your goals. We just need a seat at the table and for
Congress to work with us.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit these comments for the
record and for your attention to these issues. We hope Congress will
hear us and invite us to the policymaking table.
Respectfully,
Judith Potter,
President, The Transportation Alliance.

Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Gardner, I wanted to visit with you a little bit about
Amtrak. As you know, in March of this year I introduced the
RATES Act because of my concern with significant amounts of
taxpayer dollars invested in Amtrak. When is the last time
Amtrak was profitable?
Mr. Gardner. Well, Congressman, thank you for the question.
The company was never set out to be profitable. We----
Mr. Crawford [interrupting]. OK, so, basically, the answer
to that question is never.
Mr. Gardner. That is right.
Mr. Crawford. Correct. OK. So, are we at a point with
Amtrak that we are not measuring profit and loss as a
performance metric? Are we just looking at the service that is
provided, or are we just looking at whether or not people are
happy with their experience on Amtrak? What does success look
like for Amtrak?
Mr. Gardner. Well, I think the Congress actually just
helped to reformulate that in the passage of the IIJA and the
reauthorization. And really, the focus is to operate the
company as a business in pursuit of a public mission, to take
the funds that we receive from the public and try and drive as
much value and operate as efficiently as possible.
Mr. Crawford. So, no profitability required there?
Mr. Gardner. Right.
Mr. Crawford. In fact, 2019 was probably the closest year
you came to profitability. And according to my records, last
year you approached 90 percent of August 2019 levels, and that
was the closest you had ever come in the history of Amtrak to
actually making a profit.
So, where does Amtrak expect to end this year in terms of
profit and loss?
Mr. Gardner. Our anticipated year-end results, which we are
still tabulating, but our roughly $910 million operating loss,
that reflects very significant increases in cost structure
since 2019. Still lagging revenue, of course, compared to 2019,
and lagging ridership, but the overall trends of the year have
been very positive, and increasing ridership and revenue.
Mr. Crawford. OK, let me pause there and interject this.
This is a $910 million operating loss. This is after $3.7
billion in extra money, in COVID money over the last 17 months,
and you still have a $910 million operating loss?
Mr. Gardner. The dollars that were provided by Congress
helped to stabilize the employees and the operation of the
network. They provided the dollars that normally come from
revenue. But after losing 97 percent of our business in 1
month, we did not have that revenue source. So, those dollars--
--
Mr. Crawford [interrupting]. And what do you attribute that
97 percent loss of business to?
Mr. Gardner. Pardon me?
Mr. Crawford. What do you attribute that 97 percent loss
to?
Mr. Gardner. Well, that occurred between March and April of
2020. So, we had a massive shutdown of travel across the entire
network. We suspended a huge amount of service, and we did
provide those important necessary trips, but very few travelers
in that period of time. And since we have been rebuilding
ridership month over month, riding with the waves of COVID, of
course, and seeing reductions as we have seen flare-ups. But we
are----
Mr. Crawford [interrupting]. So, we have actually observed
a trend, where more people are working from home. That would
mean that probably you are experiencing less ridership. So,
what is your plan to address that?
Because more and more people, even in post-COVID--in fact,
President Biden came out not long ago--I think it was last
week--and said the pandemic is over. So, that is great news.
So, that means the workforce has made some adjustments, that,
kind of, the new normal is a lot of people are working from
home now. And so, do you anticipate continuing to see ridership
decline?
Mr. Gardner. No, Congressman. In fact, Amtrak's business is
not really subject to the daily commute. In fact, for instance,
on the Northeast Corridor, most of our trips are people who
travel once a year.
So, we see, in fact, some parts of our network with growing
ridership of people have reshifted their locations around the
region and need to travel into those central business districts
once or twice a week. So, we are growing ridership over time.
We have about 80 percent of our pre-COVID ridership in August.
Mr. Crawford. So, the one area where you come the closest
to actually turning a profit in the commuter space is the area
that you are not focusing.
You are saying that your ridership is increasing with the
one time a year that people are taking long hauls. Is that what
I am hearing from you?
Mr. Gardner. No. In fact, in the Northeast Corridor we have
folks who travel once a year. We have folks who travel once a
month. The Northeast Corridor continues to be the real driver
of growth in parts of the country. But our short-distance
corridors, which make up half of our ridership, are also and
have been historically our biggest source of ridership growth
in the past decade or so.
So, we see value in many of these services. We see a much
greater return for our business than some of our transit
colleagues, because people are finding ways to find rail useful
in this new arrangement.
Certainly, it is changing over time. We see this, as well,
in our own workforce. But we think rail is well positioned in
those short-distance corridors, both here in the Northeast
Corridor and around the country, to provide value, particularly
as folks have moved to different locations and need access to
the central business district. And congestion, as we all see,
still is back, is raging back in many cities, and people see
trains--we see a huge portion of new riders coming to Amtrak
because they are attracted by the offer of passenger rail.
Mr. Crawford. So, yes or no, profitability in the future at
any point?
Mr. Gardner. We are working really hard to return the
economics back to the train operating business here by driving
revenue across our system.
We also are returning more seats into the marketplace. We
are still below what we had, but we will, in response to
demand. And we will be looking to again, in the train operation
portion of our business, get our recovery back up to the kind
of levels we had in 2019. It is going to take several years to
do so.
The biggest issue for us is the loss of revenue associated
with business travel, particularly here in the Northeast
Corridor, where business travel has not yet returned. We have
been able to find folks to fill those seats, but it is going to
take a while to be able to regain the revenue that was
associated with business travel. And I think that is something
that folks are looking at in systems all over the country. But
we are working hard to do that.
Mr. Crawford. I yield back.
Mr. DeFazio. I now recognize Representative Larsen.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Gardner, just following on on a few questions slightly
unrelated to the previous questions. We just started the Amtrak
Cascades on Monday, and one run a day north and one south.
There was a thought we could start in March. That didn't
happen. So, we started in September, second run later this
winter.
One of the challenges has been the availability of staff to
operate. And this is going to be for a few of the panelists on
this theme about the challenge to implement the IIJA and the
availability of people to do it.
And can you, from Amtrak's perspective, help me understand
what you are doing to find the people to actually implement the
IIJA as it applies to Amtrak?
Mr. Gardner. Thank you very much, Congressman Larsen. We
are working across every available strategy to build our
workforce. As I mentioned, we have achieved 3,200 hires here, a
little bit more in this fiscal year. We are aiming for 4,000
next year.
And as you rightfully mentioned, in various pockets of the
country, we face different challenges for our workforce. In the
Pacific Northwest, we have a challenge both with mechanical
workforce and with our conductors. And some of our employees,
they are highly skilled, trained employees, and to develop them
into skilled professionals in their Territory can take 6
months, 1 year, or 2 years for certain types of crafts. So, as
we look to rebuild the workforce, there is a long lead time to
do that.
We were able to fully recall our furloughed employees, and
most returned. The vast majority came back. But we still have
to now make up for the hiring we didn't undertake to deal with
the attrition across retirements. And so, that is underway.
We are focused on bringing back all of the service and
frequencies we can. We are investing in referral programs for
our employees. We have an entirely new training capacity. We
are building out partnerships with a whole host of technical
colleges, community college trade schools, starting working in
high school to build a pipeline of new employees into the
business.
So, it is really a new day at Amtrak, in terms of hiring
and building up an entirely new skill set. And we are
partnering with our labor colleagues. We have just received a
grant from the Federal Railroad Administration, CRISI, to be
able to start a new and expanded apprenticeship program based
off an initial program that is going to train 600 new
apprentices.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Thanks.
Mr. Regan, could you talk a little bit about challenges of
the workforce availability, and what labor is doing to fill
those gaps? We have got a lot of dollars of spending in roads,
bridges, and highways, and a variety of other areas. But again,
the workforce availability over time could be a challenge to
successfully implementing the IIJA.
Mr. Regan. Well, I think, if you look at the way we are
going to see workforce growth because of the IIJA, it is going
to come in a couple of phases.
The first phase for a lot of this is going to be in
construction. And I would have to point out that the
apprenticeship programs run by the North America's Building
Trades Unions is the second highest job training program in the
country after the U.S. military. So, they are prepared, and
they are ramping up to be able to meet the demand of
construction.
When it comes to the operations side, especially if you
look at things like transit, a lot of these new programs are
putting job training requirements at the front end. So, the
low- and no-emission bus program, for example, required
applicants to put 5 percent of their money towards workforce
training. That includes making sure people are trained to
operate electric buses and maintain electric buses, which is
very different than diesel bus.
Building in the workforce training on the front end means
that, by the time you have built out the physical
infrastructure or you have received the new equipment, that you
have the workforce ready to go to meet the service demands that
are going to be there when they are delivered.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes.
President Nelson, could you talk about how this question
might apply to flight attendants?
Ms. Nelson. The issue here is that staffing was cut down to
minimum levels prior to the pandemic. There is no give in the
operation.
The issues of combative passengers, and the fact that
contract negotiations were essentially put on hold during the
pandemic is making it difficult to maintain and attract people
to the jobs. And so, contract negotiations have to be
concluded. And I think that, as we move forward and look at the
FAA reauthorization bill, we need to look at priorities around
staffing.
Mr. Larsen of Washington. Yes, thank you.
Mr. Chair, I have got just a few moments. I just do think
the challenges of workforce availability is a concern. We need
to address it, and really be on top of it as we move forward
over the next several years to implement the IIJA. Thank you, I
yield back.
Mr. DeFazio. I now turn to Representative Babin.
Dr. Babin. Yes, sir. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
As you all know, and some of you brought up in your
testimonies--thank you for being here, all you witnesses--
Government investment is vital to transportation and
infrastructure industry.
However, we all know that simply just throwing money at
this problem doesn't work. Throwing billions of taxpayer
dollars at this industry without solving the supply chain
crisis, pandemic recovery issues like fraud and abuse, major
workforce shortages, burdensome bureaucratic redtape, and other
underlying issues will not actually allow us to see long-term
sustainable improvement and investment in our Nation's
infrastructure.
And additionally, carving out political handouts for niche
green transportation and infrastructure projects and companies
is not good for our industry. In fact, it causes delays,
increases costs, and is anticompetitive.
My question is for Mr. Ditch.
Mr. Ditch, as noted in your testimony, a historic level of
funding was injected into the transportation and infrastructure
sector with the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act, much with budget gimmicks and inflationary deficit
spending. I am deeply concerned about the left's rampant
spending and its effect on our economy.
If there was one thing that you would like people listening
in on this hearing to take home on the impact of this type of
spending, what would it be? Very briefly, please.
Mr. Ditch. My gosh, it is difficult to know where to start.
But I believe that, unfortunately, as bad as things are
right now with interest rates going up, with inflation at the
highest levels we have seen since I was an infant,
unfortunately, things could still get worse because we are
facing a nearly $31 trillion national debt. That works out to
about $238,000 in debt for every single household in the
country.
And as the interest rate on debt payments climbs, just
keeping up with those payments is going to be very difficult.
It is going to eat into our Federal and economic resources
tremendously.
Dr. Babin. Absolutely. Thank you so much. One more
question, please.
Another thing I am very deeply concerned about are
President Biden's project labor agreements, or PLA mandates,
threats from the left to ensure that infrastructure funds only
pay for union labor. These comments are very concerning,
especially for the 87.4 percent of nonunion workers in
construction.
I have received correspondence from more than 1,000
construction companies, and another letter from nearly 20
business groups that all oppose Biden's PLA mandate. They say
that PLAs discriminated against firms and workers based on
whether or not their workers are union.
Mr. Ditch, would you please explain how Government-mandated
PLAs hurt the transportation and infrastructure industry?
Mr. Ditch. At a time where construction companies are
desperate for workers, are struggling to find people to do the
work, which is much more highly skilled than it was 100 years
ago, it is, frankly, absurd that Congress and the Biden
administration feels the need to impose more ``worker
protections'' like project labor agreements, which are the
equivalent of union work rules.
It makes it nearly impossible, between that and the Davis-
Bacon Act, for nonunionized construction contractors to bid for
these Federal projects, which means that not only are you
freezing out a lot of people who could do good work at a more
affordable rate, it also means that State and local governments
are going to be bidding against each other for the relatively
small number of unionized contractors for the next several
years, while all this money is going out the door. And that is
going to incentivize those smaller number of contractors to
increase their prices, which means that we are going to get
fewer roads, fewer bridges, fewer miles of tunnels built for
this incredible $1.2 trillion in spending.
Dr. Babin. At a higher cost, as well, I might add.
OK, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Thank you very much, Mr. Ditch.
Mr. DeFazio. OK, I thank the gentleman.
Representative Napolitano?
Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Regan, I thank you for working with me on provisions of
the infrastructure law requiring transit agencies to salvage
risk reduction programs and improve safety by installing
equipment and implementing actions to reduce accidents,
injuries, and assaults on transit workers. Is this important
safety requirement being implemented effectively by FTA and
transit agencies?
What can we do to improve the implementation of the safety
projects?
Mr. Regan. Thank you for the question. We have been in
constant communication with the Federal Transit Administration
about implementing the safety protections in there. Obviously,
they made some important steps recently in terms of changing
the definition of ``assault,'' and will improve the accuracy of
the data that we collect to make sure that we have an accurate
description of how broad the scope of the problem is.
I do think that what we need to do--I view the actions that
were taken by this committee and by Congress to improve safety
for operators, I view them as a first step. It is going to be a
diagnostic tool to show how broad the problem is, and also
making sure that we have workers as part of the safety planning
committees to make sure that they can help identify where the
biggest risks are in their workplace.
So, I want to see, you know, another year, make sure we
have the right data come in, make sure we have people part of
the committees. And I think that what the Congress can do is to
hold their own agencies accountable, make sure that they are
following through with their promises to engage workers on the
safety side and accurately reflect the data in terms of how bad
the assault problem is in this country, which we know is just
far too bad at this point.
Mrs. Napolitano. Yes, but we need your input as to what
needs to be done.
And also, you mentioned in your testimony the Executive
orders passed that empower the workers' right to organize,
bargain, and feel safe. What practices have been implemented to
protect the workers' rights since these orders?
Mr. Regan. Well, the President started off on the strongest
note, with the Worker Organizing and Empowerment Task Force,
where they went through every agency in the Federal Government
to identify ways that they can better empower workers and
better make it easier for people to collectively bargain and
join unions.
I think the last discussion was about the project labor
agreements and Davis-Bacon. And I would take the complete
opposite view about the effects of those laws, and the fact
that we are incorporating strong labor standards into all of
these projects that are going out is a good thing. It means
people are going to get paid more, put more money into their
communities, make sure they have the benefits that they need in
case they get ill or get injured on the job.
So, I think the idea that somehow the union participation
in these programs is a bad thing, I just find completely absurd
on the face of it.
Mrs. Napolitano. Well, I agree with you, because you also
have to look at the safety standards in some buildings that
have collapsed because they didn't go with organized labor to
build them. I just wonder whether any more implementation of
the safety programs is needed, and if you would send
information to this committee on what your findings are so we
can follow up on that.
Mr. Regan. Yes, we will absolutely do that. We are going to
work hand in hand with the Federal Transit Administration to
make sure that this is done right.
And what I would do to my colleagues that are running these
transit agencies, I would encourage you to welcome in the
unions with open arms, to make sure that we are addressing the
safety problem. Our members are the ones that are on the
ground. They know where they are vulnerable. They are the ones
who can help craft policies that will protect them in the
workplace.
Mrs. Napolitano. Well, I know our workers are revered all
through the other nations, and we should also thank them for
the work they have done.
I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank gentlelady. We would now move to
Representative Gonzalez-Colon. I believe she is virtual. Are
you there?
[No response.]
OK. We will move on to then Representative Balderson.
[Pause.]
Representative Balderson?
[No response.]
Nope? OK, Representative Johnson.
[No response.]
All right, let's try one more. Mr. Guest?
[No response.]
Is the video working, or did everybody just go away?
OK. Representative Van Duyne, I believe, is actually here,
so, I recognize her.
Ms. Van Duyne. I am right here. I am right here, Chairman.
Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Mr. Ditch, I would like to actually have you have a moment
to respond to the chairman's question, and give an answer--
without being cut off or belittled--about the State funds, and
whether or not they actually are adequate, and why you believe
that is true.
Mr. Ditch. Thank you very much. I genuinely believe that
State governments now have the capacity to maintain their own
highways, especially if the Federal Government gives them more
tools to work with.
For example, the 1956 Highway Act prevented the tolling of
roads that were built from that date forward, which essentially
means most highways west of the Mississippi. The existing
highways at the time are grandfathered in, which means that you
see tolls all over the Northeast and parts of the Southeast.
If States had full ability to raise funds on their own,
whether it is gas tax, whether it is tolls, whether it is
mileage fees, what have you, they could easily do the work that
is necessary to maintain the highways. And especially when you
get rid of all the redtape that is mandated by the Federal
Government that increases costs.
Ms. Van Duyne. Well, I appreciate you bringing up the
redtape, because that was going to be my second question to
you. When we talk about State funds, a lot of State funds have
to have all of these different Federal regulatory costs on top
of them. For example, the Biden administration wants to
obligate every NEVI grant applicant, regardless of local or
State regulations, to use Davis-Bacon wage requirements.
The problems associated with the implementation of the
Davis-Bacon Act are well documented. I worked at HUD. People
who worked in the Davis-Bacon department hated it and wanted it
to go away. We have seen it directly and indirectly. The
compliance requirements are burdensome and costly.
Can you talk about some of the Federal regulations that
actually make the State budgets a lot less efficient because
they are having to be wasted on unnecessary regulations? Can
you go a little bit further into that?
Mr. Ditch. Yes. The Davis-Bacon Act increases wages, or I
should say it increases costs by billions of dollars every
single year across the country.
More to the point, though, the real value of the added cost
is greater in right-to-work States. So, for example, if there
is no Davis-Bacon Act, I suspect that Oregon would still be
paying union wage rates--New York, Illinois, California.
But for States like Texas, Florida, Tennessee, the Dakotas,
it reduces their flexibility to make choices. You need to pay
workers enough to show up to do the work. And with a lot of
blue collar work, especially with construction work, right now
that means employers already have incentives to pay very
healthy wages, growing wages. There is no need for the
additional burden of the Federal Government saying the market
rate isn't enough, you need to pay a premium.
Ms. Van Duyne. In your testimony you also stated that these
so-called infrastructure bills did more to push Green New Deal
policies than for traditional infrastructure that we have
already identified as not getting enough resources. Can you
explain how these bills masked Green New Deal ideas under the
pretext of infrastructure, and what the likely impact will be
on actual infrastructure?
Mr. Ditch. One of the things I find striking is how much of
the discussion of these green energy policies acts as though it
is a free lunch, that we will be better off, that it will
create all these wonderful green jobs. The fact of the matter
is, if the green economy was this amazing investment
opportunity, the private sector would be pouring in money hand
over fist.
The green sector only works through subsidies. So, that
means you are getting these high-paying new unionized jobs in
the green sector at the expense of an untold number of jobs
elsewhere in the private sector. We see these green jobs and
these construction projects. We fail to see all the jobs that
could be created and will in many cases be destroyed through
higher taxes if the Federal Government got out of the way.
Ms. Van Duyne. Do you think that there would be more actual
infrastructure, more building of roads, more building of
bridges if we prioritized that, as opposed to things like bike
lanes?
Mr. Ditch. Again, absolutely. The amount of value we could
get for the economy, for the average Americans who use roads
and bridges every single day, and who might never ride transit
in their entire life, we could derive far more economic benefit
if we concentrated on the things that people actually use from
coast to coast and border to border.
Ms. Van Duyne. Do you have any examples of where you have
seen highway spending not spent on highways since the rollout
of these pieces of legislation?
Mr. Ditch. I am sorry, could you repeat that?
Ms. Van Duyne. Yes, do you have any examples of where
highway spending was spent on things other than highways?
Mr. Ditch. Oh, my gosh, yes. Each year about 30 percent of
funds that go through the Highway Trust Fund are diverted into
things like bike lanes, and walk paths, and even ferry boats.
Its intent is to shoehorn every single conceivable aspect of
surface transportation into the highway bill, and it muddies
the waters. And people paying the gas tax end up paying for
things they don't actually use.
Ms. Van Duyne. Thank you very much.
I yield back.
Mr. DeFazio. OK, we would now turn to Representative Payne,
who is virtual.
Mr. Payne. Thank you, Chairman.
Mr. Gardner, thank you for joining us today. The
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provided over $22
billion to Amtrak, with an additional $36 billion to modernize
and develop intercity passenger rail. I am proud to work with
Chairman DeFazio in making that critical funding available.
I am a frequent rider of the Northeast Corridor. Can you
please share when you think the NEC service will return to pre-
pandemic levels?
Mr. Gardner. Thank you, Chairman Payne, and thank you for
your strong support.
We are working hard to return the NEC service by the end of
fiscal year 2023. We will have much of the service back. In
fact, on the regional side we will be, on some days, at higher
levels. The Acela service will take a little bit longer to
return in the section between Washington and New York to its
full levels. But as we see the arrival of our new train sets
next year, we will be able to increase service. So, we are
working hard there.
The long lead is on the equipment maintenance side, the
mechanical crafts, which we are building and growing now, but
are under intense competition across the Northeast Corridor for
machinists, welders, et cetera.
And, as I mentioned, we have seen a good return of demand
and, in fact, we have higher demand for relatively less service
today. So, we are very optimistic that the growth will
continue, and we are working hard to return all of our
capacity.
Mr. Payne. Yes. I recently had an opportunity to see the
new Acela equipment that is scheduled to enter service next
year. I look forward to the improved ride quality.
How would consistent funding help Amtrak get on a regular
cycle of fleet replacement for all its services?
Does consistent funding provide Amtrak's suppliers the
confidence they need to invest in their U.S. manufacturing
facilities and workers?
Mr. Gardner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The IIJA funds to
Amtrak really change the entire game for Amtrak's capital
program. As you know, we have always gone year to year on
annual appropriations for capital investment, and that has
significantly restrained our ability to make those longer term
investments that help drive down operating costs and improve
quality over time, because we were never aware if the funds
next year would be there to pay the bills to invest in those
bigger programs. So, the 5 years of advance appropriations is
essential for us to be able to re-fleet the entire network.
As you know, we have started with the Acela, and the IIJA
funds provide the funding necessary to re-fleet the regional
equipment, both in the Northeast and around State-supported
corridors, and, really excitingly give us the funds now to
start tackling the long-distance network. This equipment is the
same age as I am. It has earned its retirement. I haven't yet,
but it certainly is ready to be replaced with modern, reliable
equipment to meet the demands of a new generation of riders
and, in the process, creating enormous opportunity for the
manufacturing sector.
The new Acela trains are being manufactured in New York,
creating 450 or so direct jobs in Hornell, another 1,700 jobs
across 29 States at the various suppliers supporting the
development of that new fleet, which is 95 percent made in the
United States. So, really, a great opportunity as we invest in
new equipment for the network to also stimulate the economy and
job growth.
Mr. Payne. Yes, I am really glad that the Federal
Government has finally met its commitment to Amtrak over its
life, finally.
Thank you for your work on advancing the Gateway Program
with New Jersey Transit. What help do you need from our
committee going forward to keep this project moving?
Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you. We are making good progress
on the Gateway Program. It is an incredible partnership between
the State of New York, New Jersey, Amtrak, and the Federal
Government.
The key things here will be our partnership with the
Department of Transportation as it starts to award the grant
funds, both in the FTA programs and FRA programs, to provide
that funding necessary to deliver the program, and to also work
to harmonize the different requirements associated with the
relative grant programs, because there are different rules in
each, and we are really in a new era of combining funding
together.
So, I think the committee's focus on ensuring that those
funds can come together from different programs successfully so
that program parties and sponsors can deliver these programs
efficiently and at the lowest dollar cost with the best benefit
is going to be really important.
The other thing I would just say generally is Amtrak's
operations, the daily operations, really rely on that annual
appropriation amount. The Senate has $2.6 billion in their
proposal for 2023, and that is really important so that we can
keep operating the railroad while we are making these big
investments on the capital side.
Mr. DeFazio. OK, thank you.
Mr. Payne. Thank you, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. DeFazio. We would now turn to Representative Balderson.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you all for being here this morning. My first
question is for Mr. Ditch.
Mr. Ditch, last year the White House and the Federal
Reserve referred to inflation as transitory, and even suggested
it was a high-class problem. Currently, the Consumer Price
Index is 8.3 over the past year, a 40-year high.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, the so-called
Inflation Reduction Act, which was signed into law last month,
will actually increase inflation in 2023. Your colleague at The
Heritage Foundation, Daren Bakst, recently said about the IRA,
``The bill's push for electric vehicles is just one example of
this extremism.''
Despite decades of subsidies, electric vehicles make up
just about 1 percent of registered vehicles. Mr. Ditch, do you
believe the new tax credits for electric vehicles included in
the IRA is a good use of taxpayer dollars?
And do you believe they will reduce the record-high
inflation in the short term?
Mr. Ditch. I do not believe it is a good use of taxpayer
dollars. And I think it is very clear at this point that the
so-called Inflation Reduction Act has practically nothing to do
with reducing inflation. You don't have to take The Heritage
Foundation's word for it; you can look at the Penn Wharton
model, you can look at the Congressional Budget Office, and you
can also look at the math.
The spending is front-loaded, and the ``deficit reduction''
is spread out, which means that you are actually increasing the
deficit in the first 5 years when, for inflation reduction, we
need deficit reduction today. We need the spending, if
anything, to be back-loaded and the pay-fors to be front-
loaded. Not to mention the fact that, by reducing the
incentives for business investment, you will be reducing
overall productivity, and productivity, again, is what we need
right now. We need more goods to lower prices.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you. A followup to that, do you
believe the environmental provisions from the IRA or the new
tax on natural gas will reduce inflation?
Mr. Ditch. I genuinely do not. The IRA is not going to
lower energy costs. It is investing in types of electricity--in
electricity generation, electric vehicles, what have you--that
are not practical for broad swaths of the country.
Now, I am originally from western New York. Solar power is
not going to do a lot of work in western New York or States
like West Virginia, but I see the Federal Government investing
in projects in those locations. Those projects might feel good
for Members who are very passionate about that issue, but they
are not actually going to produce a sufficient amount of
energy. They are not going to actually help the consumers who
really need the price of gas and the price of home heating to
come down.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you for that response. And I know that
Secretary Buttigieg on Twitter--that those EV tax credits will
reduce inflation in the short term by helping Americans save
money on gas. Unfortunately, I don't think this administration
understands the vast majority of our constituents, my
constituents, are focused on affording groceries and paying
their bills, not saving for a new electric vehicle. So, thank
you.
My final question to you, Mr. Ditch. In your testimony you
note that, to fund the infrastructure bill's spending
increases, Congress used a combination of budget gimmicks and
inflationary deficit spending. Can you expand on these budget
gimmicks? And how do you think Congress should have structured
the funding to ensure the bill wasn't inflationary?
Mr. Ditch. There is a lot of what we might call turning
over the couch cushions looking for money.
Perhaps the largest gimmick involved supposedly derailing a
rule put forward by the Trump administration that Congress
clearly has no intention of allowing to take place, but it just
happens to receive a favorable CBO score.
The fact that this thing isn't going to happen, even though
it has also never happened, doesn't actually offset the amount
of spending that is going out the door. What matters is how
much money is going out the door compared to how much money is
being brought in. And the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs
Act makes more money go out the door to the tune of hundreds of
billions of dollars, and the deficits, once again, are very
high in the early years, which is exactly the wrong time to
have it. We need deficit reduction today, not 6 or 7 years from
now.
Mr. Balderson. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentleman. I would make just one
comment that there is a difference between investment and
spending for consumption. And investment in infrastructure has
an incredible economic multiplier effect, according to many
private sources. Perhaps not The Heritage Foundation.
Mr. Cohen is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Firstly, I would like to say that Mr. Gardner did a good
job of praising our chairman, but it could have been better,
because he is the Roger Federer of transportation. He is
leaving everything on the court. He can leave knowing he has
accomplished his job and served his mission well. And I thank
the chairman for his work and Mr. Gardner for his kind remarks.
I appreciate it.
Mr. Gardner, let me ask you about Amtrak. Memphis proudly
has a service to and from Chicago and New Orleans. I would like
to have service to Nashville. Any opportunity for that to occur
in the future?
Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you, Congressman. So, there is
opportunity for that through the FRA Corridor Development
Program.
So, just to be clear, the way that the IIJA structures--so,
the dollars available on the opportunities--is really the
growth, the network, and expansion opportunities will proceed
through the Federal Railroad Administration's programs. And
Amtrak has really focused on rebuilding and modernizing our
current assets. So, the FRA has established this program, it is
an opportunity for States, localities, and other partners and
stakeholders to identify corridors for development, and then
proceed through a pipeline of planning and investment so that
new services can be developed.
So, we are going to be working with the FRA, and we already
are working with States all across----
Mr. Cohen [interrupting]. I hope you will try to see that
that happens. There are more songs written in Nashville about
people leaving Nashville and going to Memphis than anything
else.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Cohen. And it gets facilitated with a train.
Let me ask you also, is Mr. Steven Anderson still at Amtrak
in any way whatsoever?
Mr. Gardner. Richard Anderson? No.
Mr. Cohen. Richard Anderson. Good. Richard Anderson, at one
of these committee meetings, when they were talking about the
merger of Northwest and Delta, promised me that they would not
close the hub in Memphis. He said, ``I love Arnold Perl. I love
Phil Trenary. I love the Rendezvous. Memphis will not close.''
He lied. I am happy he is gone.
Management makes a lot of money. They make a ton of money,
and they come to us and they lie. Just like the Boeing aircraft
president came to us and said, ``I am responsible.''
And I asked him, ``If you are responsible, you should take
a cut in pay or resign.'' He did neither. He was fired about 3
weeks later.
Ms. Nelson, do labor union employees who don't come before
our committee and lie, who don't make tremendous salaries like
the Boeing CEO and Mr. Anderson, do they contribute greatly to
these opportunities for America to improve its transportation?
Ms. Nelson. Absolutely. Aviation workers and other workers
on the front lines are committed to their jobs.
And when you go to a family party or a gathering, what do
you ask people? You ask, ``What do you do?'' People take pride
in what they do.
We are typically here for the long run when CEOs come and
go. I have seen eight CEOs in my time at United Airlines, for
example, and it is the aviation workers who know on the front
lines where we need to improve on safety, how we need to
respond to consumers' needs, and why we need to keep things
safe so that people can take that for granted, but then also
have a safe, efficient flight, or a safe, efficient transport
experience.
And so, it is through our work on ensuring safety for the
public and for ourselves--and the fact that we put our lives on
the line when we go to work, so, it better be safe--so, you can
count on us, and you can trust us to ensure that.
And we want to make sure that we maintain that connectivity
for the American public. It also matters to us for getting to
work ourselves. We have to have transportation into those
smaller communities because oftentimes we can't afford to live
in the bases that are high-priced and very hard to get housing
in.
Mr. Cohen. Thank you for your work in representing the
flight attendants. And the union is important there. I know
that.
Ms. Nelson. Thank you.
Mr. Cohen. I want to thank Secretary Buttigieg, who is not
here, for his work. He came before our committee. He came to
Memphis, when the bridge over the Mississippi River, the
Hernando de Soto Bridge, closed because of a failure of it to
be monitored correctly, to see defects in the infrastructure,
and also for the opportunity that he gave us to have Ms.
Fernandez, the FTA Administrator, to come to Memphis when she
announced grants to our transit system of close to $76 million,
which was very important for our bus system. And we appreciate
it.
And we know bridges will be coming, lead pipes will be
replaced, that internet will become more available to more
people and cheaper, and that roads will be constructed. Memphis
is a city that lives on transportation, and this infrastructure
bill was good, could have been much greater if they had
accepted the House bill.
And I do want to mention the following names real quickly:
Richard Burr, Bill Cassidy, Susan Collins, Lindsey Graham, Lisa
Murkowski, Rob Portman, Jerry Moran, Todd Young, Thom Tillis,
Mike Rounds, and Mitt Romney--Republicans who voted for this
bill in the Senate. It is a good bill. It could have been
greater.
I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentleman. Representative Johnson,
I believe, is now with us, virtually.
You are recognized.
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My
questions will be for Mr. Ditch.
Obviously, the laws that Congress passes are important.
But, Mr. Ditch, it seems to me that the laws of supply and
demand are also pretty powerful, certainly more powerful than
anything we do in DC.
So, a recent survey by the Associated General Contractors,
I think, found that 73 percent of respondents indicated that
they wouldn't bid on a Federal project that had a project labor
agreement as a requirement. So, I want you to tell me if I am
thinking about this in the wrong way.
I mean, I look at a workforce crisis out in this country.
We have a lot of big things we want to get done. We don't have
enough talented and hard-working people to get done what we
want to get done. You have got a number of outstanding firms
across our country, where the workers have chosen not to
unionize. They have made that decision, and they are at risk.
And a number of these Federal projects are being frozen out of
helping to advance this infrastructure investment that our
country needs to continue to make.
Now, this is of particular importance in my State, South
Dakota, where 4 percent of the workers are unionized. There are
simply not enough unionized shops to be able to respond to the
edict that the administration has put out, saying that some
workers will be frozen out of this kind of work.
Mr. Ditch, the laws of supply and demand. It seems to me
that if we are shrinking the number of firms and workers
available to bid on these projects, it will, by necessity,
increase the price of those projects at a time when inflation
is already destroying the purchasing power of these Federal
dollars.
Mr. Ditch, what am I getting wrong with my economic
assumptions?
Mr. Ditch. I don't believe you are getting any of that
wrong.
There are times where I am a bit confused as to what
reality these moves are attempting to supposedly respond to.
Again, if you go back a century, construction work was very low
skill. You can go around and, potentially, employers would have
more leverage than the employees, and they would underpay. And
so, maybe in some scenarios it would have made sense to have
protections like project labor agreements and the Davis-Bacon
Act.
But in 2022, construction work is not low skill. You need
to know what you are doing. The productivity per worker is
exponentially greater than it was a century ago. These workers
are valuable, they know they are valuable, and employers know
they are valuable. They are compensated fairly. That
compensation keeps going up over time, both in absolute terms
and, frankly, I believe, relative to the median wage.
All that these rules do is layer on an additional amount of
requirements, an additional amount of bureaucracy, and it makes
it harder for State governments who are mostly doing the work
to find the workers, to find the contractors that they need to
get the work done.
And what, supposedly, is the harm that is being addressed
by these rules? I don't see it. It just seems like
featherbedding.
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Well, and I want to make clear
I certainly wish no ill will to the hard-working men and women
who have chosen to unionize. That is their right under Federal
law.
But for those who have made a different decision, and for
those firms that are expert firms that are able to deliver
great value for the American people, including on a number of
projects that are expected to be built in South Dakota, the
idea that we are going to freeze South Dakota firms out of that
part of the economy, to me, is a terrible waste of talent.
I do, with the minute I have left, I want to turn to Mr.
Hersh. There is bipartisan agreement, sir. It seems to me that
the siting process in this country takes too long. The same
kind of project that would take 2 years to permit in France or
Germany, it takes 7\1/2\ years in this country. Secretary
Buttigieg and I had a great conversation about this the last
two times he was before this committee.
So, sir, if you were going to give a recommendation to this
committee on the most important thing we could do to
appropriately streamline these approval processes, what would
your answer be?
Mr. Hersh. Thank you for your question, Representative
Johnson. I don't think I am the best person on this panel to
actually answer this for you. I would suggest forwarding to Mr.
Regan.
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. Sure, right. It is an all-
play. Who wants to take the bait?
[Pause.]
Mr. DeFazio. He is asking someone to answer his question. I
forgot what the question was already, sorry.
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota. It was about--sir, and I am
out of time.
I would just note that I think we need, with the little
time I don't have available, it is good and well to talk about
this investment in infrastructure. But if we are going to take
7\1/2\ years to permit these projects, we are going to have a
tremendous amount of money wasted----
Mr. DeFazio [interrupting]. OK, all right.
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota [continuing]. I think we need
to be talking [inaudible] about what we can do to streamline
that process.
Thank you, sir, I yield back.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentleman. The gentleman might
remember that Representative Davis, who I guess is not here,
virtually or not, his One Federal Decision was adopted to
streamline the process to a maximum of 2 years.
And I would further observe, if the gentleman would--that
93 percent of Federal transportation projects go forward under
categorical exemption; 4 percent go forward with an
environmental analysis, which is a relatively short process, it
does involve a little bit of public involvement; and 3 percent,
the largest projects, many of which impact millions and
millions of people and cost billions of dollars, potentially,
go through a full NEPA process, so the public can participate,
the options are looked at, and we determine what the overall
impact is of that particular project.
For instance, we know we have to rebuild the tunnels under
the Hudson River, but they were held up by the Environmental
Impact Statement, sitting on Secretary Chao's desk for 3\1/2\
years collecting dust. And we couldn't get her to blow off the
dust and put those forward, even though the work had been done.
So, it is a very small number of projects that take
anywhere near the amount of time the gentleman is talking
about.
With that, we are moving----
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota [interrupting]. The NEPA
process [inaudible]----
Mr. DeFazio [continuing]. We are now moving on to----
Mr. Johnson of South Dakota [interrupting]. Even the Biden
administration agrees.
Mr. DeFazio. We are moving on to Representative Lynch. The
gentleman is out of order.
Mr. Stauber. Mr. Chair, Mr. Chair, I will yield----
Mr. DeFazio. Representative Lynch.
Mr. Stauber. Mr. Chair, Mr. Stauber. I will yield some time
to my good friend, Mr. Johnson.
Mr. DeFazio. Well, you are not recognized, so, you can't
yield. When you are recognized you can yield.
Mr. Lynch. Reclaiming my time.
Mr. DeFazio. Representative Lynch is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Lynch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Look, I know this is
probably one of our last meetings, there is not much time left
in this session. I just want to say thank you to you, Mr.
Chairman, for your 36 years that you have served Oregon's
Fourth Congressional District. I want to thank you.
I know that, in the process here, the legislative process,
the sausage-making process, sometimes we don't get everything
we want. But I think everyone would agree that you have
elevated the cause and the priority of infrastructure,
transportation and otherwise, across this country during your
36 years. We all owe you a debt of gratitude for making--look,
I am from Massachusetts, and we have some of the oldest
infrastructure in the country. And so, I am doubly grateful for
your leadership.
I am also a former president of the Iron Workers Union, and
former legal counsel for the Carpenters Union, the Teamsters
Union, and the Stagehands Union. And I just want to thank you
for your willingness to champion the cause of workers, and
especially those that go through an apprenticeship program and
might get paid a little bit more as a union tradesperson under
either Davis-Bacon or local prevailing wage laws. So, thank you
for that.
Mr. Regan, Quincy, Massachusetts, where I represent, is the
city of Presidents. John Adams, Abigail Adams, and John Quincy
Adams all grew up there, lived there.
We have a brandnew electric bus facility. And it is really
transformational, I think, not only for the skill set of the
workers.
But also, I wanted to talk to you about the Build America,
Buy American provision of the Infrastructure Act. So, how will
that--I mean, I know why, but I want you to explain to the
public why that provision will help put more Americans to work,
especially in an emerging industry that we really haven't
captured well in the United States as of yet.
Mr. Regan. Absolutely, and thank you for the question.
First, if I may, I want to correct a couple of comments
about Davis-Bacon and Buy America----
Mr. Lynch [interposing]. Go right ahead, feel free.
Mr. Regan [continuing]. Mentioned earlier.
First of all, Davis-Bacon, what it does is it sets a wage
floor, and it ensures that the workers are actually paid their
wages in an industry where wage theft, unfortunately, is a very
significant problem. What it does is ensure that people who are
bidding to do the work are qualified to actually deliver, they
are qualified to do the training, they are qualified to deliver
the wages that are needed, and to deliver a quality work
product. And it prevents people from actually just undercutting
the marketplace and abusing their workforce.
Second of all, PLAs ensure that projects are delivered on
time and with the highest quality work available. I have spoken
to Republican Members of Congress who support PLAs, and they
were in the contracting industry. They said they paid a little
bit more upfront, but they knew it was going to be the best
quality work, and was going to be delivered on time.
So, there is a reason why PLAs are adopted all throughout
the country and why Davis-Bacon is the gold standard when it
comes to construction.
Mr. Lynch. So, Mr. Regan, what you might be saying is
that--so, when the gentleman from South Dakota is concerned
about people in South Dakota, Davis-Bacon actually requires
that people and prevailing wage laws in South Dakota make sure
that the workers in South Dakota can afford to live in South
Dakota, is that right?
Mr. Regan. That is 100 percent right.
Mr. Lynch. OK.
Mr. Regan. So, on Build America, Buy America, we look at--
unfortunately, for too long in our country, we have ceded our
previous manufacturing areas to foreign companies. We have to
import so many things. We saw that with the supply chain crisis
of 1\1/2\ years ago, when one of the major problems and
contributors to the failure to move goods was the lack of
chassis. And we didn't make chassis here, so, we had no way to
actually solve that problem on our own. We were relying on
chassis made in China or in other countries.
And if we look at an emerging industry like electric buses,
this is an opportunity to gain back some of that market share,
and become leaders in the manufacturing field once again, in an
area where, frankly, we just can't sit here and rely, from our
own economic competitiveness and our national security, on
foreign nations to provide our critical goods that keep our
economy and our people moving throughout this country.
Mr. Lynch. Thank you. And you just raised another issue.
So, we have a competition over EV batteries, so, electric
vehicle batteries. There is one U.S. company that is competing.
It is from my district, but we are manufacturing them in the
suburbs of Austin, Texas. But that would bring those jobs into
the United States. Even though I am putting workers from Texas
to work, that is a good thing, as opposed to losing those jobs
to countries overseas.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Again, I thank you for your
service to your constituents and to the country. Thank you.
Ms. Nelson. Mr. Chairman, if I may just add briefly, it is
really important to correct the misstatement that 87 percent of
the construction workers have rejected a union. That is not
true. There is no vote for that. They only have access to these
jobs when we make the commitment to make them project labor
agreement jobs. So, it is on all of us, as policymakers, to
make sure that that is possible for the American worker.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you for the clarification. We would now
turn to Representative Massie.
Mr. Massie. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Ditch, it looks like we have given over $50 billion of
bailouts to the airline companies. And meanwhile, they are
giving bonuses to management and their executives.
If Congress hadn't given the billions and billions of
dollars to the airline industries, would the airplanes have
disappeared? Would the equipment on the tarmac that we see
carrying the fuel and the luggage to the airplanes, would that
have just vaporized? Would the computer systems that they own
and use, would those have gone into the waste bin? What would
have happened in a free market if we hadn't given the bailout
to the airlines?
Mr. Ditch. For one thing, it is a very complicated
situation because what was going on during the pandemic was not
a pure free market.
Airlines, in many cases, were discouraged or actively, in
some cases, prevented from normal operations because of the
public health rules. So, to that extent, their reduction in
business was not their fault. At the same time, there was a--
essentially, it was a jobs program. The $50 billion, you are
right, it didn't go into airplanes and terminals, it went into
ensuring that absolutely nobody got laid off. This was a
special kind of protection.
While we did have the Paycheck Protection Program, there
were some sectors of the economy where that wasn't enough, and
some people lost jobs. And then, when the economy rebounded,
those jobs returned. We could have seen some layoffs----
Mr. Massie [interrupting]. At least--it looks like about
half of that money went to that. But isn't it really a bailout,
not for the airplanes and the airlines and these routes, but a
bailout for the investors in those companies, and a bailout for
the creditors?
Like, the airplanes wouldn't have disappeared. After
capital rearrangement, I would assume they would go out and get
more capital from new investors, and the old investors would
get diluted. Didn't we really just protect--ultimately, after
you do the paycheck protection, we were protecting the people
on Wall Street that hold the stock in those companies.
Mr. Ditch. Yes, there is--absolutely. And again, that is
very true. And it is also the case for the Paycheck Protection
Program that a tremendous amount of the money that was
notionally being put forward to preserve jobs was instead
captured by investors and owners, and they ended up in some
cases not only not losing money, but getting a little bit back.
Mr. Massie. Let me move on to my next question for Mr.
Gardner.
Mr. Gardner, can you describe to me the state of Amtrak's
vaccine mandate program?
Mr. Gardner. So, we have a general mandate for vaccine for
new workers.
Mr. Massie. And so, are you aware that the efficacy of the
vaccine wears off after 6 months quite a bit?
Mr. Gardner. So, I think, depending on which vaccine, and
what time, and what period, certainly the vaccines have limited
efficacy, but we require new employees, as they come to the----
Mr. Massie [interrupting]. Let me ask you a question. If
somebody got the first initial doses of the vaccine 20 months
ago, would that comply with your vaccine mandate?
Mr. Gardner. Yes, if they were vaccinated.
Mr. Massie. Do you believe two doses 20 months ago has any
effect on the currently circulating variants of the virus?
Mr. Gardner. From what I understand from the public health,
I do believe vaccines have a beneficial effect on public health
and the individual----
Mr. Massie [interrupting]. Do you believe a COVID vaccine
that was taken 20 months ago that targeted a variant that is no
longer circulating has an effect on preventing the spread of
COVID now?
Mr. Gardner. Well----
Mr. Massie [interrupting]. Can you give me some scientific
basis for that? Because I think it is based in mysticism,
disproven myths, and superstition.
And, in fact, I am glad you mentioned public health and
what we know about public health. The CDC this summer said
that, after 8 months, the effectiveness of three doses is
somewhere between 20 and zero percent against the currently
circulating variants. That is after 8 months.
Your vaccine mandate is so ridiculous. You are saying if
you got the jab 20 months ago, then you are good to go. And in
the meantime, you do have an exemption, according to your
website. Somebody can be tested every week, every week. Why
would you test somebody who has not had the vaccine, but you
wouldn't test somebody who had a vaccine that is no longer
effective, according to the CDC? Do you have any scientific
basis for doing that?
Mr. Gardner. Yes. Again, we are following the guidance from
the CDC. We are following the best public health guidance we
can get.
Our goal here is simple, which is to try and ensure the
health of our employees and the health of the traveling public.
We have done a good job throughout the pandemic to do that. Our
ask here is simple, is that we are looking for employees, when
they come new to the company, that they be vaccinated and
boosted for COVID-19 so we can help to play our part in
supporting----
Mr. Massie [interrupting]. But you don't care--my time has
expired. But you don't care if it works or not.
And I would like to submit to the record--I know my time
has expired, Mr. Chairman, and I will yield that back, but I
would ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a CDC
``Updates on COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness During Omicron,''
published June 28, 2022, that shows just what I said.
And also, for the record, an article in National Review
titled ``The Third Airline Bailout Is No Better Than the First
Two Bailouts.'' The author is Veronique de Rugy.
Mr. DeFazio. Without objection.
[The information follows:]

``Updates on COVID-19 Vaccine Effectiveness During Omicron,''
PowerPoint presentation, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,
June 28, 2022, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Thomas Massie
The 24-slide presentation is retained in committee files and is
available online at https://www.fda.gov/media/159499/download.

``The Third Airline Bailout Is No Better Than the First Two Bailouts,''
by Veronique de Rugy, National Review, March 12, 2021, Submitted for
the Record by Hon. Thomas Massie
The Third Airline Bailout Is No Better Than the First Two Bailouts
by Veronique de Rugy

National Review, March 12, 2021, 1:21 p.m.

No one seems to care anymore but airlines will receive their third
bailout in a year thanks to the new COVID-19 relief bill. That will
make a total of $79 billion in airline bailout: $50 billion in the
CARES Act ($25 billion in payroll support and $25 billion in subsidized
loans), $15 billion in December 2020, and finally $14 billion for
commercial airlines as part of the American Rescue Plan.
I have written many times about why most of the money goes to
bailing out shareholders and creditors rather than workers. In part, it
is because the amount of each bailout covers more than the payroll
costs of those workers who would have gotten furloughed. Oh, and by the
way, airlines are receiving subsidies even when they have committed not
to furlough anyone in 2021 even without a bailout, like Southwest has.
Gary Leff of View from the Wing also notes that while the airlines
are picking our pockets, ``Delta is even paying out large management
bonuses'' and that ``American even figured out how to keep workers they
let go from collecting on payroll support.''
Leff also points out this morning that American was threatening to
furlough employees while demanding more government subsidies and paying
large bonuses to management:

At the beginning of February American Airlines sent out
13,000 WARN Act notices letting employees know they might be
furloughed at the beginning of April. At the same time American
was preparing to provide widespread across-the-board raises to
management.
View From The Wing has learned that American provided Level 5
(manager) employees and above with raises starting in February.
This week President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan
which included $14 billion for a third airline payroll bailout.
The deal requires American to keep workers on payroll through
September 30, in exchange for approximately $3 billion.
(Employing the workers that would have been furloughed will
cost them less than $100 million per month for six months,
according to an explanation during its last earnings call.)
But the airline was handing out raises at the same time their
hands were out to Congress.

The first bailout was wrong, so was the second one, and this third
one is no different. The fact that no one seems to be outraged anymore
is simply adding insult to injury.

Mr. Massie. Thank you.
Mr. DeFazio. We will now turn to Representative Carbajal,
virtually.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Ms. Nelson, thank you for your and your members' work
during the COVID-19 pandemic.
When you came before this committee about 1\1/2\ years
ago--February of last year, to be exact--we discussed the
challenges transportation workers faced during this pandemic.
And in response, Congress acted and passed the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law and the American Rescue Plan, which included
$15 billion to extend the Payroll Support Program, PSP, which
helped airline workers from losing their jobs during this
unprecedented time.
Right now, our Nation continues to confront another threat,
the ongoing climate crisis. In your testimony you mentioned the
impacts to the aviation industry and its workers. Can you
elaborate more on this?
Ms. Nelson. Yes. Thank you very much for that question.
So, the climate crisis is continuing to disrupt our jobs.
There are increased incidents of severe turbulence that has
thrown aviation workers--flight attendants--around the cabin.
We are the ones that are unbuckled, pushing 300-pound carts.
And when these happen, it is typically flight attendants that
are severely injured, hospitalized. And there are two incidents
that I referenced in my written testimony specifically about
this at American Airlines and Southwest Airlines over the past
year. This frequency of events are becoming more and more
serious, and a serious occupational risk.
The other issue is that we have a disaster relief fund. We
have more applicants for our disaster relief fund in the past 5
years, by far, than we have had in the entire time since its
inception at 9/11. Flight attendants' homes are destroyed.
Their ability to get to work is destroyed. Airport
infrastructure is destroyed. Airport tarmacs become too hot to
land on or, with the polar vortex, it was too cold to take off.
The climate crisis is creating a serious threat to our
jobs, our income, and focusing on better prediction of these
weather events so that we can work to avoid them and work to
avoid the catastrophic effects of them, as well as stopping
carbon emissions, slowing carbon emissions, and tackling the
climate crisis is critically important for the continued jobs
that flight attendants and other aviation workers do.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Congress just passed the Inflation
Reduction Act, which I am sure you are aware of, to not only
reduce energy and healthcare costs, but also to fight climate
change to address these challenges.
Ms. Nelson. We thank you.
Mr. Carbajal. Yes.
Mr. Regan, it is nice to see you, and thank you also for
your work during this COVID-19 pandemic. This committee, under
the leadership of Chairman DeFazio, has been busy, as you are
aware. We helped write the American Rescue Plan and the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Now, as we begin to see the $1.2
trillion being used to bring our infrastructure into the 21st
century through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, can you
discuss the impacts of this historic investment for workers?
Has it helped make sure we have good-paying jobs?
Mr. Regan. Yes, and thank you for the question.
I think we are going to see the worker impact of the
infrastructure law go throughout the entire length of the law.
As I have mentioned earlier, it will come in stages, I think,
especially early on. We are going to see, really, an increase
in construction worker jobs. And with some of those important
protections like Davis-Bacon and PLAs, we are going to ensure
that those are good-paying jobs, where people are paid a good
wage, and the projects are going to be done the right way and
on time.
Beyond that, as we start seeing expansion of services,
whether it be in transit systems, or at Amtrak, or in other
parts of our economy, we are going to see more and more need
for operating crafts, maintenance crafts, people who can be
trained up to deliver these jobs, and actually, manage what are
becoming very high-tech systems in some of our public transit
systems.
So, the job training aspect that is going to be done now
will help lead us into the future, where we have a workforce
ready and able to go, and to operate what will hopefully
become--and which I believe will become--a modern, efficient,
and effective transportation system, one that will be the envy
of the world.
Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much. I was glad to support
the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and our workers. This
legislation was a jobs bill, and I am glad that it also had
specific language promoting good Davis-Bacon union jobs. Thank
you very much for your testimony.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Auchincloss [presiding]. The Chair now recognizes Mr.
Gibbs for 5 minutes.
Mr. Gibbs. Thank you.
Just to clarify a little bit, Representative Johnson from
South Dakota was talking about the delays and stuff. And,
unfortunately, the infrastructure bill included no reforms to
the outdated NEPA process, and we still have a 6-year-plus
delay, even though we tried to do it in 2 years. But Secretary
Buttigieg is still sitting on administrative inaction. So, I
just wanted to make that clear.
A lot of the testimony today is talking about all the great
things all this taxpayer money spending has done. One thing I
want to clear for the record is, prior to March of last year,
when the American Rescue Plan was passed on a 100-percent
partisan basis, we passed five COVID relief measures, a
bipartisan legislation which I fully supported, because I think
when the Government locks down the economy, tells people they
can't come to work, tells people who is essential and who is
not essential, that is kind of like eminent domain. And all of
society should help pay for that cost, and we did. And I think
that it protects us, and protects our economy and our standard
of living.
But unfortunately, when they passed the bill, nearly $2
trillion last March, a year ago last March, it accelerated
inflation. We had inflation under 2 percent prior to that, and
then it jumped up to 4.2 percent, now at 8.3 percent, and maybe
heading higher. Who knows? Only time will tell. It has added to
costs now.
Mr. Ditch, we talk about all this inflation, and everybody
on the panel is talking about the infrastructure bill and all
the spending, how it is going to pay for all this. How does
inflation devalue all these additional trillions of dollars
that Congress is spending for all these projects?
Would we have been better off to not spend all these
trillions of dollars, and maybe pass an infrastructure bill
that actually went to infrastructure like roads and bridges?
Because in the infrastructure bill, a lot of it didn't go for
roads and bridges, it went for pet projects. Is that the way
you see it?
Mr. Ditch. And I profoundly disagree with Chairman
DeFazio's statements a few minutes ago that, essentially, if it
is an investment, then magically it can't be inflationary.
Spending is spending. Economic activity is economic activity.
Whether someone is buying a hamburger or whether someone is
buying a concrete mixer, monetary policy doesn't distinguish
between how the money is being used.
So, yes, the added spending in the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act is inflationary, because it isn't paid
for, because it is adding to deficits.
And in terms of the economic value, while some of the
projects could potentially provide a return on investment, just
because we are spending on infrastructure, that doesn't mean
there is a great multiplier effect. When you are spending on
expanding transit in Amtrak that only a small percentage of the
public actually uses, when you are spending on things like
Complete Streets and Road Diets that might make a roadway look
nicer, but isn't going to actually increase the economic
productivity of that asset, that isn't going to be meaning we
get economic gains to balance out the spending and balance out
the inflation.
I do believe we would be better off----
Mr. Gibbs [interrupting]. Mr. Ditch, the Inflation
Reduction Act has some tax increases in there targeting the
supply side of the economy. And I would argue the reason we are
in this fix is because we spent trillions of dollars, the Feds
have put a bunch of money out, and now they are raising the
interest rates and trying to bring their balance sheet back in
order, but we have limited the supply, but increased demand
because we put all these dollars out here in the economy, and
we have cut supply, especially in the energy sector.
I mean, I think most people see that. Is that correct? We
have just increased this inflation, these two bills just put
gas on the fire for inflation and limited supply. What could we
do on the regulatory side to help this?
Mr. Ditch. Yes, the One Federal Decision rule in the IIJA
was a step in the right direction. It is only one of many steps
that we need.
We really need to overhaul NEPA, perhaps even scrapping it
altogether and starting over. Many of the provisions in NEPA
are outdated. They are cumbersome, they are really
bureaucratic. Some of my colleagues at The Heritage Foundation
have written extensively about this over the course of years.
There is a lot we can do. And the extent to which this
permitting process gets in the way of things, it gets in the
way of projects that both sides like. It gets in the way of
highways; it also gets in the way of solar plants and
windmills.
Mr. Gibbs. Yes. Just one last question, I have a little
time here.
The Heritage Foundation, do you have any recommendations on
how we could shore up the Highway Trust Fund?
Mr. Ditch. I am sorry, what?
Mr. Gibbs. How can we shore up the Highway Trust Fund?
Mr. Ditch. Yes, that is very important.
Mr. Auchincloss. The Chair recommends that perhaps you do
that in a written response.
Mr. Gibbs. OK, yes.
Mr. Auchincloss. The Chair recognizes Mr. Malinowski for 5
minutes.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thanks to our
witnesses. I just want to begin by saying--and I see the
chairman came back--what an extraordinary privilege it has been
for me, serving with him on this committee these last 4 years.
I came to this committee for the subject matter. I stayed
for the chairman. This is one committee where I would always
try to come on time, not just to gavel in so that I could ask
my questions, but because I always wanted to hear Pete
DeFazio's opening statement, because I knew I would learn
something from it.
And Pete, I have to admit that, if not for you, I would not
know nearly as much as I do about budgetary treatment expansion
and adjustment of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund under
section 9505 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
Did I get that right?
Mr. DeFazio. Yes.
Mr. Malinowski. Close enough, yes.
[Laughter.]
Mr. Malinowski. I came here with ambitious goals, of
course. And I think we met a lot of those goals: the biggest
investment in American infrastructure in our country's history;
helping my State of New Jersey with the Gateway Project, doing
it at a time when most of my constituents thought Washington
was broken and incapable of doing big things. We proved them
wrong. Doing it in a way that enables our country--America, and
not China--to lead the world to clean energy. I can't
understand why anyone would be against that.
Now, we did spend a lot of money. I acknowledge that. I
wish the infrastructure bill had been better paid for. The
political reality is we would have done it in the House. There
was no way to get a bill through the filibuster in the Senate
that is fully paid for. That is the political reality.
But I also think that we have to be a little bit honest
when we are talking about the deficit. And I want to ask you,
Mr. Ditch, you said at one point today, quite correctly, that,
when it comes to the deficit, the only question is how much
money is going out, how much money is coming in. So, I want to
ask you whether you or The Heritage Foundation, for example,
opposed the 2017 tax bill, which resulted--just yes or no--in
about $2 trillion more going out than coming back in.
Mr. Ditch. I was a congressional staffer at the time.
Heritage was broadly supportive.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you. And can you think of any bill
that was enacted by the U.S. Congress during that 2-year period
when the Republican Party had control of the House and Senate
and the White House, enacted and signed by the President, that
substantially reduced the deficit, can you name one?
Mr. Ditch. No.
Mr. Malinowski. Thank you. And you would acknowledge that
the IRA--although your critique of it, I understand it, is that
it doesn't get to the deficit reduction fast enough; fair
enough--that it does reduce the deficit by around $300 billion
over the next few years.
Mr. Ditch. It remains to be seen whether that will actually
be the case.
Mr. Malinowski. OK. That is the estimate of the nonpartisan
analyst that looked at it.
And as you acknowledge, Republicans had 2 years to do
something about the deficit, and you acknowledge they did
nothing. We just cut it by $300 billion.
As to the airline bailout, you actually believe that, if we
had done nothing at a time when not only the Government was
telling businesses to shut down, but people were not flying
because they didn't want to die, you actually believe that if
we had done nothing to help the airlines, that 2 years later
they just would have picked up where they started, all those
workers would have just magically come back to their airline
jobs, all the planes would have been ready to go, the airports
would have been fine, and the airline industry would have been
in good shape this summer to fly all those people around?
Mr. Ditch. I didn't say that. I don't believe it. There
absolutely would have been layoffs, and there could very well
still be jobs that would not exist.
Mr. Malinowski. Correct.
Mr. Ditch. The question, to me, is----
Mr. Malinowski [interrupting]. Probably massive disruptions
far greater than anything that consumers faced this summer.
What would the unemployment rate in America be, if not for
the PPP program and the money that we spent, the deficit-
causing--I acknowledge that--money that we spent during the
pandemic, what would our unemployment rate be in America today?
Mr. Ditch. There is really no way of knowing.
Mr. Malinowski. Would it be 3.5 percent or higher?
Mr. Ditch. We very well could have higher unemployment
today. The question is whether it was worth the incredible
expense.
Mr. Malinowski. OK. Well, I think most of the folks in my
district who I represent, who have jobs today and would not
have--I think we kind of agree some of them would not have jobs
today--believe and would probably argue that it was worth it,
because I don't think there is anything more important,
especially at a time where we all acknowledge inflation is a
problem, that people actually have jobs and incomes to begin to
afford the day-to-day expenses of life in this country.
Thank you, and I yield back.
Mr. Auchincloss. The Chair recognizes Miss Gonzalez-Colon
for 5 minutes.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Gardner, I just tried to book a trip----
[Audio malfunction.]
Miss Gonzalez-Colon [continuing]. Using my Puerto Rican
address on the website, on the Amtrak website----
Mr. Auchincloss [interrupting]. Is the gentlelady's
microphone on?
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Yes, it is. Can you hear me now?
Mr. Auchincloss. Perhaps speak closer to it.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. I will try.
Mr. Gardner, I tried to book a trip using my Puerto Rican
address on the Amtrak website. And when I went to purchase a
ticket, I discovered that Amtrak does not recognize Puerto Rico
as part of the United States. I just hope that you can commit
to me to rectify this issue.
Mr. Gardner. Absolutely. We don't serve all of the United
States, only 46 States. But----
Miss Gonzalez-Colon [interrupting]. I know. But I was using
the Amtrak here, in the States.
Mr. Gardner. Yes.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. But I am using my address in Puerto
Rico just to purchase the ticket.
Mr. Gardner. I will look into that, for sure, absolutely.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you.
Mr. Gardner. Yes.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Mr. Ditch, in your testimony there is
an issue regarding the way the funds are being used. And one of
those is specifically saying--and I will want to quote it
here--that only 4 percent of the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act funding will go towards actual infrastructure
projects, would produce actual benefits for State, local, and
the whole country's economic well-being.
Does The Heritage Foundation agree with the CBO dynamic
scoring analysis, that the actual Federal infrastructure on the
Federal budget can be positive, if funding is not borrowed but
sustained in real investment?
Mr. Ditch. Yes, it--I am sorry, could you repeat the
question?
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. OK. My simple question is if you agree
with the CBO, the Congressional Budget Office, dynamic scoring
analysis, that the actual effect of infrastructure on the
Federal budget can be positive if the funding is not borrowed,
but sustained in real investment.
Mr. Ditch. The funding of--the way that the--I am sorry I
am having such a hard time understanding anybody today, Miss
Gonzalez-Colon. Please, just one more time. I am very sorry.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. That is OK. I am prepared to use my
time on another question.
You said that you are aware of the issues of the Highway
Trust Fund. Are you?
Mr. Ditch. Yes. The Highway Trust Fund is in a very
perilous state. Unfortunately, for many years Congress decided
to draw down a large existing balance by offloading money into
places like transit and local government slush funds----
Miss Gonzalez-Colon [interrupting]. What recommendations do
you have to shore up the Highway Trust Fund?
Mr. Ditch. I believe the number-one thing we need to do,
rather than trying to increase taxes on hard-working Americans,
Congress needs to live within its means, and that means getting
rid of the diversions that are coming out of people who pay gas
tax, and are going towards people who do not pay the gas tax,
who ride on buses and trains, and who take ferry boats. None of
those things have to do with the Interstate Highway System.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Mr. Ditch.
Dr. Hersh, as someone who voted for the House
infrastructure bill that passed out of this committee--and I
did so in support of critical and needed infrastructure
development for Puerto Rico. However, due to the current
inflation rates, projects are at risk of not being done because
of cost overruns and skyrocketing prices.
According to USAspending.gov, there is still $220 billion
in COVID-19 funding that hasn't even been earmarked to be spent
on specific projects. Just the Department of Transportation
alone is sitting on $11.77 billion in unspent and unobligated
money that could be used to help build infrastructure projects
across the country.
Would it make economic sense to utilize this unspent
funding to address cost overruns for infrastructure projects?
Mr. Hersh. Thank you for that question. Yes, it would make
sense, and it is going to be a challenge to manage these----
[Audio malfunction.]
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. What is needed to use that unspent
money?
[Pause.]
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. You are muted. You are muted, sir.
Mr. Auchincloss. The gentleman is muted. Mr. Hersh?
[Pause.]
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Mr. Hersh, you are muted.
Mr. Auchincloss. The gentlelady's time has expired. Perhaps
the gentlelady can request a written response to that question.
[Pause.]
Voice. I think you need to put your headphones back in.
That thing goes to your mic.
Ms. Nelson. Also, this is a moment to recognize aviation
worker job security.
[Pause.]
Mr. Auchincloss. The Chair recognizes himself for 5
minutes, and my question is for Mr. Regan, and it is really
about why our younger American men are dropping out of the
workforce, and how unions affiliated with TTD can work to
engage them.
According to The New York Times, men in their prime working
years, 25 to 54, have retreated from the workforce. The trend
was occurring before the pandemic, really since the 1960s, but
it has been exacerbated by COVID-19. Under the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law, we had an unprecedented investment in the
workforce that has a strong union foundation at a time when
public approval for unions has never been higher. It is a great
opportunity for us.
And yet some of our domestic male-dominated blue collar
industries have been growing rapidly, adding millions of new
jobs, and we can't find workers. Men with no bachelor's degree
have seen an almost 10 percentage point decline in their labor
force participation over the last 30 years in the 25 to 34 age
cohort. Some of this decline can be attributed to economic and
structural change, and I know some of my Republican colleagues
will place some of the blame on COVID-19 unemployment benefits,
although there is no evidence for that.
What we do know for sure is that men are not returning to
work. And in 2021, almost twice as many women joined the
workforce as men did. In 2022, 91 percent of prime age
immigrant men re-entered the labor force, compared to only 84
percent of U.S.-born men. So, again, I would push back on any
claims from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that
this has to do with immigrants taking jobs. That is not what is
happening. What is happening here is that we have an issue with
native-born American men 18 to 35 who are not entering the
workforce at the level that we need them to.
The not-in-the-labor-force men outnumber the formerly
unemployed by more than four to one. So, we have this huge pool
of untapped potential working-age labor force that we need to
help build our roads and bridges, fix our water supplies, and
yet they are on the sidelines of the United States economy.
And my question to you is, how can Congress and unions work
together to get this cohort of prime working-age men back into
the workforce with skills that give them confidence, dignity in
this economy, and contributing to overall economic growth?
Mr. Regan. Thank you for the question. I think, at its
core, when people talk about a labor shortage in a lot of these
areas, it tends to rub me the wrong way because in a lot of
situations--you actually saw during the Great Recession, for
example, more people were hired than actually resigned during
that period--it is that people didn't want to do bad jobs.
So, in many of these cases, especially as you advance
greater union density and more union participation, it actually
raises wages across the board, even for nonunion employees. So,
if we are providing better incentives for people to go to those
jobs, which really--wages, benefits, working conditions, you
hit all those three, you are going to be able to recruit more
people into your workforce.
And as we also put in more training at the front end for
these jobs, and giving people the skills they need to advance
not only in the job they are hired to do, but hopefully advance
their careers down the line as well, you are giving people the
tools to succeed in a specific trade, whether it be in the
transit workforce, in the freight rail workforce, or in the
aviation workforce. In every scenario, if we provide people
with the wages, the benefits, the working conditions, and the
training, then they are going to succeed, and they are going to
tell their friends about, ``Hey, I got this great job right
now. I didn't always think I would be a transit worker, but
right now I was blown away. The pay is good, the benefits are
good.''
Mr. Auchincloss. And what are you doing for outreach on
that? I mean, I hear your point: wages, benefit, working
conditions. There has never been a time, at least in my
lifetime, when the conditions have been better for that type of
outreach, where we have got work that we want to do, we have
got funding to do it, we have got a lot of people able to work.
And the appeal of joining organized labor is higher than ever,
and yet we still have one American looking for every two open
jobs right now.
There is this cohort of younger American men who need a
different type of outreach.
Mr. Regan. Well, part of it--and I want to commend Stephen
for what they have done at Amtrak, in terms of partnering with
unions to go to these job fairs, to advertise their jobs in
high schools and in community colleges, to make sure that
people understand what the realities of these jobs are.
Mr. Auchincloss. Yes, these men are not going to job fairs,
though, to be clear.
Mr. Regan. That is fair.
Mr. Auchincloss. We have done studies. They are not at
job--they are not seeking employment.
Mr. Regan. Well, I think it is going to require a lot more
work. I mean, from a union perspective, certainly we can do
more to advertise what our jobs bring, and the quality of life
you can get with a job in any of the industries that I
represent. So, I think there can be more done, from a union
perspective.
I also think that employers themselves, if they are
embracing some of the principles that I support, and are
talking about what people can earn and achieve in these
workforces, and put them out, whether it be on online
advertisements or even whatever is getting the greatest number
of eyes on it, I think that should be an effective way to go.
Mr. Auchincloss. Well, I am certainly eager to work with
unions on this, because we need these young men building things
and getting off the sidelines.
Mr. Regan. Yes.
Mr. Auchincloss. Thank you.
I yield back. I recognize Mr. LaMalfa for 5 minutes.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As we have seen with
inflation and supply chain shortages and such, an estimated 43-
percent increase in the cost of highway and street construction
just from May of 2020 until August of this year, according to
the American Road and Transportation Builders Association. We
have $7.5 trillion in additional U.S. debt since the beginning
of March 2020, due mostly to the response to the COVID
situation.
The proposal in the IIJA had a total spending of $1.2
trillion, but had nothing in there to really fix the underlying
shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund issue, gas taxes, et
cetera. So, I would like to toss a question to Mr. Ditch on
that, which would be: What recommendations do you have to shore
up the Highway Trust Fund?
There are ideas of raising the gas tax. There are other
measures. There is also one of a per-mile fee increase, or
creating a per-mile tax, which I am very opposed to personally,
for my rural district. But what would you say we do to shore up
that Highway Trust Fund?
Mr. Ditch. I believe the number-one solution to making the
Highway Trust Fund sustainable is reducing Federal spending.
That would involve eliminating transit subsidies to involve
eliminating some of the slush funds, like the Climate
Mitigation Program and the Transportation Alternatives Program.
If you remove all of the diversions away from roads and
bridges, that would reduce trust fund--and you--in the--at
least in the pre-IIJA baseline, that would reduce spending
about 30 percent get it close to balance.
I also believe the Federal Government should reduce the
amount that it spends on highways. I believe that State
governments have the capability to do the work themselves
faster and more affordably, and the need for the Federal
Government to subsidize highways is, frankly, zero at this
point in time.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK. So, we have seen the price of all the
materials that have gone up so much. How much do you think the
role of inflation has played in these price spikes versus some
other factors, say, a road project costs $10 million, it took 5
years to permit and build. What do you think it would look like
now, like, say, 20,000,008 years?
And then I want to come to you on the permitting process
after this question.
Mr. Ditch. Yes, it is really unfortunate that Congress has
decided to massively increase infrastructure spending at the
exact time when infrastructure spending is going to cost so
much more to actually do. These projects are going to be much
more expensive. Some of that increase is due to energy prices.
And while some of that, in turn, is potentially caused by the
unfortunate war in Ukraine, some of it could also be addressed
if our Federal energy policy was more interested in increasing
domestic production of the things that we need, the things that
we can rely on, rather than all these Green New Deal policies.
It is unclear what is going to happen in terms of
economywide inflation or sector-specific inflation, but it
seems that right now is a very, very bad time to try to throw
more money to turn the fire hose up even higher.
Mr. LaMalfa. Indeed, it seems, I think, a widely held view
that energy costs have driven everything up, and yet we have
the capability in this country to overwhelm the market with the
amount of energy we would need, whether it is natural gas or
petroleum or our electricity generation, like we face in
California.
Miraculously, they decided to extend the life of a nuclear
powerplant, which is 9 percent of our power in California,
another 5 years. It should have been 25 years. But indeed, we
are not shutting that down, amongst other things.
So, let me shift gears to lastly mentioning the frustration
with getting projects permitted. And so, in the last
administration, there was a Federal decision that streamlined--
the NEPA process would set a 2-year limit for completing a NEPA
review for permitting on major infrastructure projects, and
required it to go through a single Federal agency. That was
reversed by the Biden administration on day one. I am not sure
how that helped its productivity, but it was tossed out.
So, my home State of California, it has a very rigorous
CEQA process, kind of equivalent to NEPA, only even more
rigorous, more stringent. How productive do you think it would
be to have a substitution policy authority that--if a State
such as California and several others have already their own
level of NEPA process that is equivalent to or even more
aggressive than the Federal one, would that not be a productive
way to have one-stop shopping for permitting and getting things
done in parallel, instead of stacking permit processes?
We actually had such a thing in the 2015 FAST Act, but it
never got put into place. Please comment on how you think that
could be, cost savings-wise and time saving-wise.
Mr. Ditch. Frankly, you mentioned your home State of
California. I think that, if you look at the trends for
California, they are not very positive. And a lot of that has
to do with the amount of bureaucracy, the attempt to control
everything centrally.
And then we can turn to what happened with the California
high-speed rail debacle, some of which, unfortunately, received
a few billion dollars of Federal funding. That project is
estimated to cost several times what it initially did. It is
years and years and years behind schedule.
We don't want to follow the California model in the
country, and we really don't want to impose that sort of one-
size-fits-all bureaucratic, centrally planned approach to
infrastructure. And unfortunately, with each successive round
of infrastructure spending, the Federal Government takes over
more areas that used to be controlled by State and local
governments. And we are going to take the country in the
direction of California. And I think people are voting with
their feet in terms of whether that is what they want.
Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, indeed, had California been required to
do the high-speed rail--I call it high-cost rail--project on
its own without Federal help--it is going to look for more
Federal help, too, because the original idea that was sold to
the voters on the ballot was $33 billion. It quickly increased
to $42 billion in a year. Two years later it was $98.5 billion,
and now it is about $120 billion, and they only have a little
bit going between an almond orchard on one end, and I think
Merced on the other. So, it is a boondoggle. And we can't have
the Federal investing in things that don't work.
So, I appreciate it, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Auchincloss. The Chair recognizes Mr. Garcia for 5
minutes.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And to all
of our witnesses, thank you for being here today.
I also want to echo the accolades of our chairman and, of
course, his great legacy. And of course, next year, when we
walk into that room, I vow to solemnly bow at his picture in
the room. So, thank you, Chairman, for a great run leading our
committee.
I am going to ask our witnesses to be as concise as
possible in their answers. I am trying to get four questions
in. So, thank you so much for your indulgence.
First, for Ms. Sara Nelson, in 2020 I led a letter to
leadership expressing concern with airlines spending over 96
percent of free cashflow on stock buybacks from unused funds
under the CARES Act--the Payroll Support Program, rather. I
even questioned former Boeing CEO Dennis Muilenburg for reaping
millions in stock buybacks.
Are you concerned with the expiration of the stock buyback
and how that will be tied to pay? One.
And two, would you agree that these funds can be used to
prioritize payroll payments, staff levels, benefit, and minimum
wage assurances?
Ms. Nelson. Yes, thank you for the question.
So, first of all, I just want to make clear the Payroll
Support Program put a cap on executive compensation that
extends through March of 2023, and banned stock buybacks and
dividends through September 30th, just tomorrow. And the result
of that was that this was the only industry where inequality
did not grow.
And we are not done with the recovery yet, so, we are very
concerned that the $39 billion that went out the door from 2014
to 2019 in stock buybacks--and during a time when the airlines
were making profits, they were still cutting back on staffing
and the number of people that we had at work to handle the
demand--we are suffering from the results of that now. People
are not able to work at the rate that they were before.
It has been too hard to work two and three jobs just to get
by, with the 20 years of austerity that we have been working
under. And this is no time for cash to be going out the door in
stock buybacks, essentially a greed tool, to send money to Wall
Street when we need to invest in the operation, invest in the
American workforce, and put us in a position where we can say
to the next generation, ``These are good jobs to come to. They
are good union jobs with good pay benefits and a secure
retirement.''
And so, that is what we need to do, rather than investing
in stock buybacks.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. And that is why I look forward to
working with you on the Reward Work Act, my bill, and I thank
the chair for serving as co-lead in its introduction.
A question for Mr. Regan. Midway Airport in Chicago is near
my current district, and will be in my new district next
Congress.
I am also the sponsor of the Good Jobs for Good Airports
Act in the House, which would establish a minimum wage and
benefit standard for airport workers across the country. I am
pleased that several aviation unions have endorsed the Good
Jobs for Good Airports Act.
In light of the current picketing happening at O'Hare and
Midway Airports in Chicago, how can we ensure that this money
is used to improve wages and benefits that aviation workers
receive, especially low-income workers who don't receive a
living wage and good benefits like healthcare?
And how will the $25 billion in the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law for airports help rebuild our airports and
aviation infrastructure?
Again, as concise as you can be.
Mr. Regan. Yes, thank you for that question. And obviously,
we are in complete agreement when it comes to making sure that
these workers are supported. In many cases, the contractors
work for subcontractors. They are the lowest paid people in the
entire aviation industry, and they deserve better support from
the Federal Government as we start utilizing all this money.
I think one thing that the Federal Government can do is
really incentivize the increase in better jobs or wage raises,
benefits, things like that at the front end, when airports are
applying for greater funds. They are going to be looking to
expand airports all across the country. And it is going to be a
big amount of money that is going out. And if we are putting it
at the beginning that we need to have labor peace agreements,
if we have to have certain wage requirements as a condition of
making sure this money is going out the door, I think that will
go a long way towards ensuring that people actually start
treating these workers with the dignity and respect that they
deserve.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. Thank you so much. I am running out
of time here. I want to ask one more question to Mr. Regan on
rail safety.
Chicago is the center of this country, of our rail network.
The IIJA takes a number of important steps towards improving
highway and trucking safety, with the goal of reducing tragic
accidents and fatalities on our highways. And it is evident
that these efforts are more needed now than ever, as NHTSA
reported that traffic deaths reached a 16-year high in 2021.
To be [inaudible]----
Mr. Auchincloss [interrupting]. The gentleman's time----
Mr. Garcia of Illinois [continuing]. And why are Amazon's
operations so unsafe, and what threat do they pose to the
promises of the IIJA?
I think the chairman is telling me my time is up.
Mr. Auchincloss. The gentleman's time has expired.
Mr. Garcia of Illinois. [Inaudible] in writing, I would
appreciate it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Auchincloss. The gentleman yields. Written responses
would be appreciated.
And the Chair recognizes Mr. Nehls for 5 minutes.
Mr. Nehls. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank
all the witnesses for being here today. My questions are really
geared towards Mr. Gardner.
And I am from Texas, Mr. Gardner, I represent the 22nd
Congressional District in Houston, and I am getting a lot of
questions. Like most individuals in the great State of Texas,
we are seeing the crisis at our southern border, and many of my
constituents are asking me what Congress is doing to secure our
border. They ask me about these midnight flights, where illegal
aliens are flown all over the country.
And so, my question is, are illegal aliens being
transported on Amtrak trains?
Mr. Gardner. Thank you, Congressman. We, of course, offer
trips through Texas on the Sunset Limited through your district
there, and those tickets are available for purchase. We don't
have any special programs or engagement regarding any immigrant
groups, per se. It is really just a matter of people purchasing
reservations. So, the tickets are available for sale, and folks
board our trains, but we don't, as part of ticketing, of
course, check immigration status.
Mr. Nehls. OK. And so, that is a followup question I have,
as it relates to purchasing tickets. And I brought this up in a
previous hearing, about people that want to ride on an Amtrak
train. Up here, in this corridor here, I have had staff and
others that have told me that they can purchase a ticket on a
train, right, and they are never asked for an ID. They can
carry two bags, whatever they want, on the train. The bags are
not scanned.
I mean, there is no metal detectors. There is no--like, you
get on an airplane today, you have to give them everything but
a blood sample. I mean, you have got to take off your belt,
your shoes, all of it. You have got to have your bag match
your--all of it. But on a train, it appears that you can buy
that ticket, and there is no real security apparatus in place
to make sure you know who is on your train.
So, how does Amtrak--what are your safety procedures to
make sure that your passengers are safe on a train, if someone
can buy a ticket like an illegal alien, possibly, or someone
else, and give that ticket to somebody else because there is no
ID required? How does Amtrak justify this?
Mr. Gardner. Well, Congressman, the Amtrak system and
transit systems around the country are open systems designed to
make travel easy and facilitate mobility. And certainly, we
have a dedicated Amtrak police force, one that we have been
growing, a lot of efforts, in partnership with DHS and TSA, to
provide security.
We do random ID checks. You need to have an identification
on board. And we do spot screening, and we have a large K-9
force associated with our police team to screen passengers.
Having said that, we would encourage and support further
investment in rail security efforts. That is something Amtrak
has long advocated for since the tragedy of 9/11 and so forth.
So, there are opportunities to invest, and we are growing our
police force, and we work very closely with police forces
across the country to provide security both at our stations and
on board our trains.
But----
Mr. Nehls [interrupting]. Would Amtrak support legislation
to have your passengers travel through a metal detector like I
have to do to get on the House floor to vote here?
Mr. Gardner. That is a, I think, very impractical approach,
given that the majority of our 500 stations are--many of them
are unstaffed. Many of them are just platforms located in the--
--
Mr. Nehls [interrupting]. All right, I have about a minute
left. And you say it is impractical, but I will say this to
you. Is that--when you look at the security apparatus that you
have in place--and yes, I am an old sheriff, I did it for 30
years, I understand about having dogs running around, maybe
sniffing a bag here or there, and doing some random checks.
But I will guarantee you--the first time, sir, that you
have a mass casualty event on your train because somebody
brings guns onto those trains, and these assault weapons, and
all of a sudden--you think you are struggling now? You wait
until you have a mass casualty event on the train, and then the
American taxpayers are going to be on the hook because you are
going to want more money. You are going to want more money
because your ridership is going to say, ``We can't ride this
train because we can't feel safe.''
All I am trying to say to you is be a little bit more
proactive. And the idea to say is, well, it is an open system
doesn't sit well with me, because that is not--you got to be
more proactive, and do everything that you can to provide a
safe and secure environment for your passengers. And my
understanding is that right now you have received billions of
dollars from us, and you just haven't really improved the
security apparatus. And it is something that I am going to be
focusing on here in the next legislative year.
Thank you for your time.
Mr. Auchincloss. The gentleman yields. The Chair recognizes
Mr. Lamb for 5 minutes.
[Pause.]
Mr. Lamb. I guess the button that says ``talk'' is the one
you are supposed to press. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank
you to all of our guests.
Mr. Regan, to start--Regan or Reagan? I missed the intro.
Mr. Regan. It is Regan.
Mr. Lamb. Yes. In Pittsburgh, that would be Regan, so, I
just wanted to make sure.
I want to talk about the issue of Buy American steel
provisions, particularly in the IIJA. The goal in that statute
was to make these the most comprehensive and enforceable that
we have ever had. I know that opinion in the steel industry is
pretty positive about it, but there is always a risk of there
being more loopholes or, sort of, specific steel products that
are difficult to obtain in America.
And then there is, kind of, a whole separate set of issues
related to the tendency of steel companies to start moving away
from union areas like western Pennsylvania to nonunion
operations in the South.
So, I was wondering if you could just comment, from the
AFL-CIO's perspective, on how we are doing on Buy America, and
what else might remain on that to-do list.
Mr. Regan. Thank you for the question. I think that the
policies that were adopted as part of the IIJA were among the
most aggressive pro-Buy America policies that I have seen in my
career.
When you have those types of really aggressive, forward-
looking policies, it is going to take a little bit of time for
the industries to catch up. I am trusting that the DOT, working
together with the unions who care about these issues, that
every decision they are making when it comes to implementing
Buy America is geared towards that goal of getting to 100
percent. That is, ultimately, what needs to be the goal, that
we don't just set ourselves a ceiling or a floor at 70 percent,
and then just try to scrap that together. It should be towards
rebuilding our overall manufacturing capacity to actually meet
our country's needs.
And as I mentioned earlier, our supply chain crisis that
happened earlier really laid bare where our lack of
preparedness is when it comes to economic redundancy and making
sure that we have the ability to provide the equipment and the
raw materials that are needed in this country.
So, as we start to implement this bill more, as we start
identifying where there are gaps in our manufacturing capacity,
the next step needs to be making sure that companies are aware
of those opportunities, and that we can start growing that
manufacturing base again in this country.
Mr. Lamb. Yes. No, I couldn't agree more. It is obviously a
complicated issue that involves energy prices and things that I
think both sides have had input on here today. So, I appreciate
that.
Ms. Nelson, I missed the earlier parts of your testimony,
but I know from your written submission one of the key
observations is the way that, even before the pandemic, the
situation was unstable for your workforce and the people you
represent. And so, if there is anything you haven't gotten to
say yet, or anything you would like to emphasize as it relates
to basically helping your members thrive a little bit better in
the years ahead, changes that we can make. Every time I am on a
flight I am struck by how difficult that job is, and I know
during the pandemic it got a whole lot harder. So, if you
could, just point us to some concrete ways you think we can
address whatever workforce issues are going on.
Ms. Nelson. I appreciate that very much.
And first, I would just like to say that it was historic
that unions and the industry got together to work on this
relief program that really put us in a place where we are not
going backwards now. We essentially froze an imperfect system,
that is true. There were issues prior to the pandemic, and
thank you for recognizing that.
But I really do want to recognize that the industry agreed
to ban stock buybacks. We hope that they continue on that. We
are asking them to do that now, so that they can invest in the
workforce and the infrastructure. But they also agreed to a cap
in executive compensation. They did not take bonuses during
this time. That was said earlier in the hearing. So, I want to
make that very clear. And when we do our best work is when we
are working together.
So, what we want to do is make sure that the system in
place right now that promotes things like stock buybacks, where
cash is being sent out to Wall Street, not reinvested in the
business, not reinvested in good jobs, not reinvested in the
infrastructure that is needed--I will give you an example. When
the airlines started making money after all the bankruptcies,
after the consolidation of the industry, the mergers, what we
saw was staffing taken down to FAA minimum levels.
Typically, at the mainline carriers, it was staffed 25 to
50 percent over the minimum levels, depending upon the load
factors on our planes. Today, every single flight is full, and
every single flight is staffed at FAA minimum levels. There is
no give in the system. That also then makes it much harder for
the flight attendants on the front lines, who are dealing with
aggressive passengers, conflicts.
And I want to be very clear. We have been working very
closely with TSA Administrator Pekoske, recognizing that the
assaults against airline employees have not gone down. There
was a lot of narrative around that was just about the mask
policy. That is not true. There are other issues going on in
the country that we need to deal with: serious depression
issues, serious mental health issues. And we are usually on the
tip of the sphere of anything happening socially or politically
in the country. We see that on the front lines.
In terms of what can help as we are coming up, we need to
address the issue of staffing. We need to readdress what those
staffing minimums are in relation to--it can't just be about
evacuation standards anymore. There are a whole series of
things that flight attendants are responsible for today:
radiation exposure----
Mr. Auchincloss [interrupting]. The gentleman's time has
expired.
Ms. Nelson [continuing]. [Inaudible] standards, a seat for
every passenger on board----
Mr. Auchincloss [interrupting]. The gentleman's time has
expired.
Ms. Nelson. Thank you so much for your----
Mr. Lamb [interrupting]. Thank you for that. I do have to
yield back.
Mr. Auchincloss. The Chair recognizes Mr. Stauber for 5
minutes.
Mr. Stauber. Thank you, Mr. Chair, what a great discussion.
Ms. Nelson, I just want to--first off, thanks for your
comments. I want to just share a couple of things with you, and
I will share with others, as well. Thanks for what you and your
union workers do to keep us safe, a tremendous amount of
responsibility during COVID.
I will just add that when you are talking about your
profession, make sure it is under the wings, too, the mechanics
and the people that push the bags, as far as union workers,
both above and beyond the wings. I just want to make sure
that--that is a whole group of people that allows us to fly
across this Nation and enjoy the great things that your
profession does to allow us to have good ridership and safe
ridership. I just want to make sure that it is above and below
the wings that we recognize it.
Ms. Nelson. Absolutely.
Mr. Stauber. Thank you.
A couple of things, Mr. Chair. Chairman DeFazio--I wanted
to talk more about the NEPA process, and I am not going to
speak for the chair, but I think that, if he were here, he
would probably say that this committee should have had some say
in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.
Do you all know that not one of us had a hearing or input
on it?
Ms. Nelson. Yes.
Mr. Stauber. And that is unacceptable. That is not good
governance, and we know that.
We talked about NEPA. My good friend from South Dakota
talked about NEPA. That does need to change. We need to change
it. I just want to give you an example.
In the Iron Range in Minnesota there is the biggest copper
nickel find in North America. It is called the Duluth Complex.
It has 95 percent of our Nation's nickel reserves, 88 percent
of the cobalt reserves, over one-third of our copper reserves,
and other platinum group metals. This administration pulled the
Federal leases on it, and it had a project labor agreement in
it, and I supported it. Thousands and thousands of workers lost
the right to mine, lost the right to go through the process.
And there is a project labor agreement. I stood there with my
union brothers and sisters.
Help me help you on this. We talk about electric vehicles.
Does anyone here ever want to purchase any critical minerals,
including cobalt, with child foreign slave labor? If there is
anybody here, raise your hand on the panel. Anybody?
OK. I want you all to know on this committee I had an
amendment that said the United States will not purchase one
ounce of critical minerals using child slave labor from foreign
nations. And it went down on a party-line vote.
My workers in northeastern Minnesota are ready, able, and
willing to help with the supply chain. The EV charging stations
that Secretary Buttigieg just brought forward to the country
yesterday, no requirement for American critical minerals. The
workers in my district? Zero requirement.
I just want to move on to Ms. Nelson.
Do you require a 4-year degree?
Ms. Nelson. To be a flight attendant?
Mr. Stauber. Yes.
Ms. Nelson. No.
Mr. Stauber. Mr. Regan, do you require a 4-year degree?
Mr. Regan. Not for most of the professions that I
represent.
Mr. Stauber. Mr. Gardner, Amtrak, do you require a 4-year
degree?
Mr. Gardner. For most crafts, no.
Mr. Stauber. OK. One of the things that we must understand
is there are many people that have gone through school,
college, paid for it themselves, worked while going through
school, and there are many others that haven't. You are an
industry that doesn't require the 4-year degree in your jobs.
And so, we just had a piece of legislation that allows your
blue collar workers to have to pay for others that committed to
pay their own loans.
The last thing I want to talk about is, Ms. Nelson--I just
want to share this with you all. My background is a police
officer. For 23 years I wore the uniform in a local police
department. I organized my union, I became my union's
president.
Ms. Nelson, you brought up something that is very near and
dear to me. The depression and the suicide in our cops across
this Nation because of the defund the police movement is
atrocious. The training, retention, morale, and recruitment is
down lower than ever. As you go across and talk to people,
would you please make sure that you talk about our men and
women in blue and brown that keep our community safe every
single day? You have the voice to do that, and I am just
imploring you to do that.
And I yield back.
Mr. Lamb [presiding]. The Chair recognizes Mr. Allred for 5
minutes.
Mr. Allred. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will just say that
the House spent months and had hundreds of amendments on a
House infrastructure bill. The Senate, of course, incorporated
some of that in the IIJA. I think it is a little bit
disingenuous to say we had no input into it. I think that our
bill was better than theirs, but I do think it was a huge
advancement for us. In fact, the largest investment in
infrastructure since the Eisenhower era. And as Chairman
DeFazio likes to point out, even larger than the investments
from the Eisenhower era.
Mr. Regan, in your testimony you mentioned the February
2022 MOU, memorandum of understanding, signed by Secretary
Buttigieg, Secretary Walsh, and will support millions of good-
paying jobs. And I was wondering if you could speak to the
significance of the MOU and the impact that it is going to have
on job growth in the country, and certainly in your area.
Mr. Regan. Thank you for the question. I think one of the
things that I found most significant about this MOU is that
there are areas of expertise within the Department of
Transportation that the DOL does not have. And there are areas
of expertise in the Department of Labor that the DOT does not
have.
And I think one of the key parts there deals with
apprenticeship programs and job training requirements that DOL
has dealt with extensively, and that DOT wants to adopt and
bring in to make a key part of how they are rolling out this
infrastructure spending money that comes in their jurisdiction.
I think it is actually a really important step, and far
more meaningful than I think it is given credit for that they
have partnering, and brought the shared experience and shared
expertise between those two agencies together to actually
deliver on projects that are going to create the best quality
jobs and the best pathways to success for individual workers
across the country.
Mr. Allred. That is great. I am glad to hear that. I am a
big believer that unions strengthen our middle class. I myself
am a former member of the NFL Players Association, which is an
affiliate of the AFL-CIO, and I know how important my union was
to me, as a player and now, even as my playing career is over.
And so, Ms. Nelson, you and I have talked about this
before, and you were starting to talk about it with my
colleague, Mr. Lamb, about how we can better support your
folks, the flight attendants who faced, as you said, some of
the most challenging conditions of any field during the
pandemic, and even post-pandemic.
On my last flight coming here, the flight attendants were
talking about the assault that occurred on--I forget which
flight it was, where a flight attendant was hit in the back of
the head. I am just wondering----
Ms. Nelson [interrupting]. [Inaudible] to Los Angeles on
American Airlines, yes.
Mr. Allred. Yes, that is right. Obviously, on that flight
there was, again, an issue around jurisdiction, that you and I
have talked about before and when the plane landed, who was
responsible for what?
Can you just talk about how we can better support safer
working conditions for flight attendants?
Ms. Nelson. Thank you very much. What we would like to see
is a banned passengers list and, as you noted, the better
jurisdiction and clarification about who is going to take on
these issues that happen on the plane, on the jetway, and in
the gates themselves, because we have assaults against gate
agents and assaults against concession workers and TSA workers,
as well. We need to look at that banned passengers list.
We also need to look at a major contributor to these
events, and that is alcohol. And so, the signage in the
airports and the policies and the training for people serving
alcohol in the airports, and also making it more clear and
giving better staffing and better eyes on the entire operation
throughout the airport about where the problems are arising,
and where people are inebriated, so that they are not getting
on the plane--and we are not able to see that because we have
little staffing and a lot of people to load on board--so that
we can keep them off the planes before we start.
I want to thank you so much for your support on that and
the more that we can do to be coordinating. I appreciate very
much the TSA and FAA working together on moving people out of
the PreCheck program when they are being fined by the FAA for
outbursts on the plane--they are no longer a trusted traveler
and they shouldn't be there--and the coordination between FAA
and DOJ to speed up prosecutions, and make sure that people are
very clear that, when you are acting out on the plane, when you
are violent on the plane, you are going to be ending up in
jail. This is a Federal crime, and the more that we can enforce
that, the better off we can be.
Finally, I would just say that we really need leadership
from all over to call on people to be helpers and to lift
people up. Because our experience, as flight attendants, is
that the vast majority of people come to our planes with
kindness in their heart and a desire to have a safe, uneventful
flight. We need to help people understand that flight
attendants are there for your safety, that when they board the
plane they are making that connection with people, and that
they are sitting up, and we are calling out good behavior, as
well. And we need that coming from all leadership ranks across
the Government and across our airlines, as well.
Mr. Allred. That is great. Thank you so much for your
testimony.
And Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Lamb. The Chair recognizes Ms. Mace.
[No response.]
Mr. Lamb. The Chair recognizes Mr. DeSaulnier.
Mr. DeSaulnier. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is nice to see
you up there.
Well, I want to thank all of you for being here. This is
really very exciting and important.
I represent a district in northern California in the bay
area that is transitioning. We have got five oil refineries.
Chevron is headquartered there. We have 4 of the 10
megacommutes in the United States, so, infrastructure is
important.
But also, Mr. Regan, I want to direct this question at you.
You represent a diverse workforce. So, transitioning, it is
this hard infrastructure over the next few generations of
workers, but it is also transitioning the fuel. A major part of
the bill that I was able to get in was a bill that I had on
clean corridors. This is really extraordinary, not just the
multiplier of this investment for multiple generations on
improving our infrastructure and what that does to communities.
The multiplier--correct me if I am wrong, but my memory is
that, for every 1 construction job in a high-cost area, it is
about 12 other jobs out in the larger economy.
Maybe, if you could just talk a little bit about--and there
has been some challenges. I know the steel workers who
represent the workforce in those refineries in my district,
they are good-paying jobs by State statute--I was an author of
the bill--they are required to be graduates of the State
apprenticeship program. It has led to much fewer workforce
disruptions and air quality off-sites. But on the other hand,
those are good-paying jobs. But we are going to transition
those. We have got plenty of jobs in the new economy on solar,
IBEW, and other alternative fuels.
As exciting as this is, I think it is even more exciting,
because we are looking at multiple generations, if we do it
right, not just to improve those long commutes and quality of
work, quality of life in two-income households in expensive
places like DC and the bay area, but lead the world in
transitioning to a cleaner, more efficient, and economically
more robust energy source.
For your memberships, there are challenges to that. People
have to be retrained and respected. Maybe you could talk to
that a little bit, about what you see, from a multigenerational
standpoint, of the benefit of this investment.
Mr. Regan. Well, I think the investment is critical to our
country.
I also think that it would be--it is too often dismissed
that many of the new, green-energy jobs do not have the same
pay or benefits or job training requirements that exist in some
of the more traditional--whether it be in pipeline work, or
whether it be even in mining or in fuel refining.
I think we do need to have a real focus on making sure that
it is--the word ``transition'' gets thrown around a lot, but I
actually think it needs to be that we have a true, genuine
transition where you are not asking people to take a step
backwards. Because I don't know very many people in this
country who would say, ``yes, you know what? I will gladly take
a 75-percent cut and go do that,'' because that is just not
realistic, especially for most people in this country,
especially working-class people who are relying on this.
I think there needs to be a focus on making sure that there
are the same level of wages and benefits, but also to ensure
that there is training up there at the front end, so that
people are not just sort of cast out to sea and expected to
figure it out.
Mr. DeSaulnier. And I think that is sort of what I was
getting at. Some of it is--in my perspective, and I have a very
progressive San Francisco district. I have, I think, a 98
percent League of Conservation lifetime score, but I have a 99
percent AFL-CIO score. And I am a former Teamster. But I don't
see these as mutually exclusive.
But you don't tell somebody--a boilermaker or a welder--
that it is too bad we are going to make you coders. They are
jobs that can take their current craft and apprenticeship, and
we can move them to. We are doing a lot of work identifying
with NOAA--I mean, as we look at what is happening in Florida
right now, we know there is lots of work here. But it is
connecting that work to actually make this country remarkably
like--and the kind of growth we had in the fifties and sixties,
where the middle class really regains its position.
I wonder if either you or, Ms. Nelson, if you have
something to say. I see you shaking your head.
I think we have got such an opportunity with this to
rebuild the middle class in so many ways for multiple
generations.
Mr. Regan. I think you are absolutely right. And I think
there are examples of where this is being done well.
I think a lot of the offshore wind energy, we are making
sure that all that construction is being done under project
labor agreements so that the job quality is up there with
traditional energy jobs, but that also needs to extend to other
parts of that supply chain, if you will, from energy.
And in one example for--we do need to make sure that the
mariner jobs, our Jones Act jobs, make sure that those----
Mr. DeFazio [presiding] [interrupting]. OK, the gentleman's
time has expired, but I will take 5 minutes, and you can
continue. And then Ms. Nelson.
Voice. No, Ms. Norton first.
Mr. DeFazio. Oh, Norton, Norton. Oh, sorry. Where?
Oh, oh, there you go.
Eleanor, sorry, sorry, I didn't know you were on the
screen. OK.
Eleanor Holmes Norton is recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question for Mr.
Desue, the general manager of TriMet.
One of my goals, as chair of the Highways and Transit
Subcommittee, has been increasing the ability of Disadvantaged
Business Enterprises--DBEs--to participate in the building of
our infrastructure.
Mr. Desue, I understand that your agency recently completed
a new bus rapid transit project that had DBE participation at a
rate of 84 percent. Now, that is a record for TriMet on a major
capital project. Can you tell me what benefits TriMet saw from
inclusion of minority- and women-owned businesses, and what
advice you have for other agencies looking to increase their
DBE participation?
Mr. Desue. Thank you, Congresswoman. We are very excited at
TriMet with the 84-percent rate that we had.
I would start off by saying partnerships are very key to
the community, making sure that we engage Disadvantaged
Business Enterprises to be part of the projects that we have.
We start with really connecting and building those
relationships with the partners in the community also on this
project here, with the 84 percent, which is the largest in the
State of Oregon, from a project standpoint, and we are really
proud of that.
Ms. Norton. Thank you.
Mr. Gardner, in 2012 Amtrak announced a master plan for the
development of Union Station here in the District of Columbia.
The $10.7 billion Washington Union Station expansion project
will renovate facilities and over 25 acres of tracks,
[inaudible] compliance, address decades of maintenance
backlogs, eliminate [inaudible] bottlenecks, and create an
estimated 67,000 construction jobs.
Mr. Gardner, when does Amtrak expect to start receiving
funding under the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law or other
sources for the Union Station expansion project?
Mr. Gardner. Well, thank you, Congresswoman, and thank you
for your interest and leadership on this project. I know it has
been very important to you.
As you know, we are still in the environmental process,
which is led by the FRA, to finalize that Environmental Impact
Statement for that future vision that we laid out quite some
time ago. And we have been in great conversations with our
partners at USRC in the District, and with the Federal
Government, and FRA, in particular, about advancing this
program.
Our expectation is that that environmental work will be
done towards the end of next year. We are very anxious for that
to be complete, and that will then permit us to go into the
design process and start advancing some of the core elements of
that program. I am happy to say that work is underway in a
variety of other important aspects that will support that work.
We are nearing in on completion of the track 22
rehabilitation, which puts back in a track that had been out of
service in the new accessible platform. That is going to be
completed in the summer of 2023.
We, of course, are looking for further work on the sub-
basement elements here. This addresses both the historic
basement of the headhouse and the track structure above it in
the lower level platforms, and are working on the hangar to the
south, as well, and modernizing the concourse.
A lot of work is underway on the infrastructure and the
elements of the terminal. But the big program is in the
environmental process, and we are anxious to have that work
completed by the department, and be able to move forward in
partnership with the District, our other commuter rail
partners, WMATA, and the Federal Government.
Ms. Norton. Well, how soon after the release of the Federal
Railroad Administration's final Environmental Impact Statement
Review can we expect a groundbreaking?
Mr. Gardner. Well, I think we are working right now,
actually, with the District, who is making an investment and
working with us and also the Federal City Council to develop a
governance and funding and financing strategy. We have got to
pull together all these different parties, who have different
elements of this program.
We will also partner, of course, with the developer, who
has the air rights, to build a path to implementing this
program. As soon as we get the environmental work done, we will
really be able to commence the remainder of the design, and
look for those early wins. We are hopeful we will be able to
move forward quickly once we get the EIS complete.
Ms. Norton. OK, thank you.
Mr. DeFazio. I thank the gentlelady. We are waiting for Mr.
Van Drew. He says he is on his way here. OK.
He is not?
Well, that is OK. I will take 5 minutes, and then, if he
shows up, he can--OK.
So, Ms. Nelson, I was a little concerned about some of what
we have heard today about the PSP program. Would you just
expand a little bit on that issue, especially from the--well,
anyway, let's just say what we have heard. Go ahead.
Ms. Nelson. I would be happy to. The Payroll Support
Program was historic. We have never conducted a relief program
in this way ever before in this country. And----
Mr. DeFazio [interrupting]. You are talking a little soft
now, Sara.
Ms. Nelson. We have never--thank you. I have never had
anybody say that to me.
But we have never conducted a relief program in this
country the way that we did with the Payroll Support Program.
It covered, essentially, 50 percent of the payroll at the major
airlines to keep everyone in their jobs, make sure there was no
reduction in the rate of pay, and continue service to all of
our communities. And it had executive controls, as well, and
controls on ensuring there would not be growing inequality
during this pandemic. And that was the ban on stock buybacks
and dividends that expires tomorrow and the cap on executive
compensation. And so, all of these things kept people in their
jobs, paying taxes, continuing to contribute to the country.
And it was a total investment in the workers.
It was the first time also in the country that we told a
corporation exactly what they could do with the money. We have
not done that before. We have given it to them and said, ``You
make the best decisions,'' and that ends in job cuts. That
usually ends in concessions, sometimes that ends in
bankruptcies, and it always ends in executive bonuses. And that
did not happen with the Payroll Support Program.
Anyone who calls it a bailout does not understand what this
was. It was a total success. And everywhere I go around the
world, talking with other aviation unions and other
corporations, frankly, around the world, they absolutely herald
the success of payroll support, wish they had done it, and look
to the U.S. as a leader on what we did to preserve aviation and
our ability to maintain our aviation system.
The only other thing that I would say is that we are on
the--we had demand come slamming back. This is not like another
crisis, where demand slowly came back, either. And some of the
problems that we see are an irregular set of demands for where
people want to fly, and also the short staffing and the
problems of 20 years of austerity prior to the pandemic.
But the Payroll Support Program itself was a complete
success, and I thank you for your absolute relentless efforts
to get it done. If we had not had you in the chairperson
position, I do not believe that we would have been able to
achieve this. And I have to applaud unions and the industry
working together to make this work.
Mr. DeFazio. Well, thanks. And I just would note that the
FAA also took a hit. I mean, because a lot of people retired,
they couldn't run the academy, they couldn't bring in new
controllers. And then we had, as you point out, displaced
demand. Like, suddenly a lot of demand for Florida, not so much
in other places.
Ms. Nelson. Yes.
Mr. DeFazio. And the FAA was a little slow to adjust to
that, and it caused some disruptions. And now they are trying
to staff up.
Ms. Nelson. However, TSA and our air traffic controllers
being in a federalized system, that is the other thing that I
hear around the world. The privatized systems that you worked
so hard in your career to fight against were a complete and
total failure in other countries during this pandemic.
Mr. DeFazio. Yes, I have talked to people who have been in
line for 6 hours in Amsterdam because the private entities laid
off all the security workers, and they didn't come back.
And obviously, the same thing here. We maintained TSA, even
though they weren't real busy. And we were ready when people
came back. So, you are absolutely right. There would have been
unbelievable disruptions, hadn't we done those things.
And Mr. Regan, you were just finishing up on something, and
I interrupted you. You will have 1 minute.
Mr. Regan. Yes. Look, I was just going to add that there
are success stories out there when it comes to green energy and
doing it the right way.
I know that there was some discussion in Congress about
whether to make sure that the ships that are carrying goods to
and from the construction sites for offshore wind are U.S.
mariners with U.S. certifications, and that is something where
I think we need to look at the totality of a project, to make
sure that is being done the right way across the board.
Mr. DeFazio. Yes. Actually, I have been engaged in working
on trying to have the insertion vessels be Jones Act vessels,
too. And the crews of the insertion vessels in the interim,
which are foreign, operating in U.S. waters, should be U.S.
workers, or at least paid adequately, which they aren't.
Mr. Regan. Yes.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you.
I guess Mr. Van Drew didn't get here, so, I think at this
point we are going to conclude. That would conclude our
hearing.
I would like to thank all the witnesses for your testimony.
Comments have been informative and helpful.
I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing
remain open for such time as our witnesses have provided
answers to any questions that may be submitted to them in
writing.
I ask unanimous consent, without objection, that the record
remain open for 15 days for any additional comments and
information sent by today's Members or witnesses to be included
in the record of today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
The committee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:19 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]

Submissions for the Record

----------

Prepared Statement of Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Texas
Thank you, Chairman DeFazio, and Ranking Member Graves, for holding
today's hearing on our nation's transportation workers. I would also
like to thank our witnesses for testifying today.
I want to take a minute to say how much I've enjoyed working with
Chairman DeFazio over the years. Your strong leadership and keen
knowledge of every mode of transportation made for a more productive
committee. The programs we're discussing today are a testament to your
success as a chairman and your dedication to workers everywhere.
Democrats in Congress and especially on this committee have worked
extremely hard to provide new jobs and economic development as we
address the problems created by the COVID pandemic. We've provided
stabilizing funds that have allowed companies and agencies to keep
their employees working and keep the economy moving.
Democrats, with very little help from our Republican colleagues,
passed the largest transportation and infrastructure bill in history,
building better roads, rail lines, and transit systems creating
millions of good paying jobs and new manufacturing opportunities.
After years of chronically underfunding our transportation
infrastructure needs, the $600 billion Democrats provided in the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is creating jobs in every mode
of transportation and improving infrastructure in every state in
America.
I look forward to learning from our witnesses how the
infrastructure and worker provisions provided through the American
Rescue Plan, Inflation Reduction Act, and the Infrastructure Investment
and Jobs Act are being utilized to keep our economy growing and keep
people working.

Letter of October 12, 2022, to Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, Chair, and Hon.
Sam Graves, Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, from Catherine Chase, President, Advocates for Highway
and Auto Safety, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
October 12, 2022.
The Honorable Peter A. DeFazio, Chair,
The Honorable Sam Graves, Ranking Member,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
United States House of Representatives, Washington, DC 20515.
Dear Chair DeFazio and Ranking Member Graves:
Thank you for holding the September 29 hearing, ``Investing in our
Nation's Transportation Infrastructure and Workers: Why it Matters.''
We respectfully request this letter be included in the hearing record.
With 20,175 people killed on our nation's roads during the first
half of this year, according to recently released data from the
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Congress and
the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) can and must take swift
action to end this tragic toll. Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety
(Advocates) commends the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
for advancing the Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and
Surface Transportation (INVEST) in America Act which included numerous
lifesaving provisions directly targeted at preventing crashes, saving
lives, reducing injuries, and containing costs. We thank the Committee
leadership and members who championed safety improvements as part of
that bill. The INVEST in America Act set a strong foundation for the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA, Pub. L. 117-58) which,
while not optimal, took key steps forward for safety.
It is now incumbent upon the U.S. DOT to implement the lifesaving
measures enacted in the IIJA taking the directives as a ``floor,'' not
a ``ceiling,'' for what must be achieved, as they have the authority to
do. We applaud this Committee for exercising your oversight role by
holding the July 19 hearing ``Implementing the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act.'' We look forward to continuing to work with
you to ensure the U.S. DOT delivers the needed advances on time and in
a manner that maximizes safety outcomes and equity for all road users.
Lastly, on behalf of the Board of Directors and staff of Advocates,
we thank and commend Chair DeFazio for your nearly four decades of
service to the U.S. House of Representatives, your remarkable
leadership of the Committee and your steadfast commitment to safety.
Because of your vital work, countless lives have and will continue to
be saved.
Sincerely,
Catherine Chase,
President, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety.

cc: Members of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure

Statement of the American Society of Civil Engineers, Submitted for the
Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
Introduction
The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) appreciates the
opportunity to submit a statement to the House Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure ahead of the hearing on Investing in
our Nation's Transportation Infrastructure and Workers: Why it Matters.
ASCE has long advocated for investing in our transportation system
and the workers who help it function. While infrastructure is often
taken for granted, it forms the foundation of our national economy,
global competitiveness, and quality of life. Infrastructure investment
and economic strength are closely linked, as projects that aid the
nation's highways, ports, waterways, railroads, and airports put people
to work and help goods reach their destinations. The Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), enacted in November 2021, will be
instrumental in generating economic growth and narrowing the
infrastructure investment gap.
The IIJA represents a historic bipartisan achievement and the
largest investment in our nation's critical infrastructure systems in a
generation. With this $1.2 trillion investment, the federal government
can restore its critical partnership with cities and states to
modernize our nation's roads, bridges, transit systems, drinking water
systems, sewer collection pipes, school facilities, broadband, ports,
airports, and more. To optimize the investment of over 100 new programs
and many more existing programs across these sectors, the American
Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) understands the vital role
transportation workers play in ensuring infrastructure serves
communities safely and efficiently. Congress should build on recent
legislative actions by continuing to encourage government agencies to
include skilled workers in their long-term plans.
ASCE thanks the committee for holding this important and timely
hearing and looks forward to helping lawmakers as the IIJA is
implemented.
ASCE's 2021 Report Card for America's Infrastructure
Every four years, ASCE publishes its Report Card for America's
Infrastructure, which grades the nation's major infrastructure
categories using an A to F school report card format. The most recent
report card \1\, released in March 2021, evaluated 17 categories of
infrastructure and reflected an overall C- grade. This grade marks an
increase from the D+ recorded in 2017, indicating the country has made
some progress in recent years, however 11 categories remained in the
``D'' and those categories reflect some of the infrastructure that
families and businesses interact with most closely on a daily basis
like the roads and transit systems, or critical systems like our dams
and levees. Often, it is these categories where we have failed to make
investments needed to maintain the assets that were build 50 years ago
or more. Fortunately, the IIJA makes progress to reverse decades of
underinvestment in many of these lowest categories and make a
significant down payment on the $2.5 trillion infrastructure investment
gap that was identified in the 2021 Report Card.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://infrastructurereportcard.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Therefore, efficient implementation of the IIJA will play a major
role to not only raise the grades for these infrastructure categories,
but to make our nation's infrastructure fit for the future.
Dedicating Resources to Growing the Pipeline of Skilled Workers
To realize the potential of the five-year IIJA, it is critical that
we have the civil engineering workforce in place to design, build, and
maintain the nation's infrastructure. The American Council of
Engineering Companies found that the industry will need to add 82,000
full- and part-time engineers to implement the IIJA. Infrastructure
owners, including state and local departments of transportation, as
well as consulting engineers, cannot effectively utilize the influx of
funding if they do not have the workforce in place.
While Congress continues to recognize workforce needs with recent
provisions dedicated to advancing science, technology, engineering, and
mathematics (STEM) education in the CHIPS and Science Act of 2022,
Congress should continue to encourage state and local governments to
include skilled workers in their long-term workforce development plans.
Furthermore, the Department of Labor and the National Science
Foundation should partner with the engineering community to develop
programs that can assist state STEM education and workforce plans to
solve this ongoing challenge in the industry.
While some limited funds in the bill support workforce development
activities and address gaps, as a nation we must continue to grow a
diverse pipeline of skilled workers. Specifically, we must bring
students into the industry and keep engineers in the U.S. Even more
importantly, funds can and should be directed to include targeted
outreach to disadvantaged and minority communities to address the
ongoing gender, racial, and ethnic diversity gap that persists in the
engineering field.
ASCE has identified some steps that communities can take in order
to grow the pipeline of future engineers. This includes:
Provide all students, regardless of background or career
intentions, with basic STEM literacy.
Provide equitable access to STEM education for all
student populations, particularly those populations that have been
traditionally underrepresented in STEM fields.
Encourage students to pursue careers in engineering--and
especially in civil engineering.
Establish and maintain rigorous K-12 STEM education
standards that are validated by the relevant professional communities.
Introduce K-12 students to civil engineering through
counseling, instruction, and engineering experiences, and in class
practice to stimulate interest.
Prepare K-12 students to study engineering at the college
level through rigorous coursework in mathematics and the sciences.
Support the development and implementation of Career and
Technical Education in the STEM disciplines for students who are not
college bound.

Many of these steps will also address the fact that the engineering
profession continues to lag behind in diverse representation, which is
critical to serve communities across the country effectively. The lack
of diversity, equity, and inclusion in the civil engineering profession
limits capacity to effectively meet societal needs. Over the last
several decades progress has been made to varying degrees through
awareness, education, and action. However, more efforts are needed to
fully realize inclusive and equitable practices in our profession, to
assure representation of the rich diversity of our global communities,
and to produce just societal outcomes from our work.
Finally, the lack of professional grade status and associated
compensation for qualified engineers employed in many government
agencies has been a disincentive for attracting and retaining
engineering professionals in the public sector. Many of these positions
are now being filled by professional administrators and
paraprofessionals having little or no formal engineering training.
Ultimately, the quality of the public infrastructure and the successful
prosecution of infrastructure projects which these agencies oversee
could be adversely affected. This could undermine the public trust and
respect for the affected government agencies. A government career path
for engineers to reach professional grade will encourage engineers to
enter government service and enhance retention of the valuable
technical expertise and experience that is required to effectively
implement the IIJA.
Conclusion
ASCE remains a staunch supporter of investing in infrastructure and
the workforce that maintains and operates transportation systems. A
robust workforce is necessary for a safe and dependable network of
roads, bridges, transit systems, rail lines, ports, waterways, and
aviation facilities. The nation is on the precipice of a long-awaited
infrastructure decade. However, if we fail to make smart investments or
fail to fill the nation's workforce gaps, we will not realize the full
impact of the historic investments made by the bipartisan
infrastructure law.
ASCE thanks the House Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure for holding this hearing and stands ready to assist
lawmakers with their work on this important subject.

Statement of Cole Scandaglia, Senior Legislative Representative and
Policy Advisor, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Submitted for
the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
On behalf of the 1.2 million members of the International
Brotherhood of Teamsters, I write today regarding the Committee's
hearing entitled ``Investing in our Nation's Transportation
Infrastructure and Workers: Why it Matters.'' The Teamsters are proud
to represent members across the transportation industry who operate,
maintain, and build our nation's transportation networks, and we
appreciate the opportunity to provide our perspective on today's
hearing.
Over the last 18 months, Congress and this Committee have worked to
pass the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Taken
together, these bills represent one of, if not the most, critical and
transformational legislative periods for transportation workers and the
nation's infrastructure. We vigorously applaud the Committee's efforts
and the members who supported these bills, and in particular thank
Chairman DeFazio for his steadfast leadership and vision in securing
these victories. From the depths of the COVID-19 pandemic to seizing
the opportunity to make generational investments in the transportation
industry, these bills have dramatically changed the trajectory of
Teamster members' lives and livelihoods.
American Rescue Plan
The sudden onset of COVID-19 and its sustained destruction as it
reached pandemic status presented an existential threat to hundreds of
thousands of Teamster members. Aviation boardings dropped 96%, Amtrak
ridership dropped 97%, transit ridership cratered, and construction
projects came to halt. At the beginning of 2021, it was evident that
our economy was still in need of a lifeline. The Rescue Plan delivered
that--providing essential support for Amtrak, the airline and transit
industry, and other sectors as well extended unemployment benefits and
secured pension benefits for millions. Without the passage of this
legislation, the industries we represent were staring down the barrel
of bankruptcies, closures, and dramatic service reductions. Instead,
Congress wisely acted to pass the Rescue Plan, and both our members and
the American economy continue to reap the benefits of that decision.
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act
Today's witnesses will assuredly discuss in detail both the
historic investments the IIJA made in infrastructure and the
transportation workforce, along with key policy victories on safety,
working conditions, and labor protections. Simply put, the IIJA
delivered on years of failed promises to ``do infrastructure''. We have
already begun to see the impacts of the IIJA for our members and know
that over the course of the bill it will create thousands of good
Teamster jobs.
We also know that the IIJA lacked a number of the bold, forward-
thinking policy objectives that the Teamsters fought for when
infrastructure legislation was originally passed out of this committee.
We remain committed to these principles and look forward to working
with the Committee to pursue them in other avenues.
Inflation Reduction Act
While many of the Inflation Reduction Act's greatest
accomplishments are unrelated to transportation, we should not ignore
the inclusion of important provisions that provide tax credits and
incentives to support decarbonization of the economy and promote the
manufacture and deployment of clean commercial vehicles. As the federal
government and state regulators continue to pursue green initiatives
and stricter emissions standards, it will be essential that compliant
vehicles are available and accessible for the country's freight needs.
Driven by necessity and emergency, this Congress has passed some of
the most impactful and pro-worker legislation of our lifetimes. The
Teamsters look forward to seeing these efforts continue to bear fruit,
and we express our deep gratitude for those who have stood by us in
these challenging times. We appreciate the Committee's consideration of
our perspective on this hearing.

``Invest in Transit Equity, Invest in Transit Workers,'' Report,
National Campaign for Transit Justice, February 2022, Submitted for the
Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
The 14-page report is retained in committee files and is available
online at https://transitjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/
Transit-Workers_Report_v7.pdf.

Statement of Adell Louise Amos, J.D., Clayton R. Hess Professor of Law,
Executive Director, Environment Initiative, Office of the Provost,
University of Oregon, Submitted for the Record by Hon. Peter A. DeFazio
On behalf of the University of Oregon's Environment Initiative, I
submit this written testimony for the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee's Hearing on the transformative impact of the legislation
passed by the 117th Congress as it relates to the need to address
climate change through the transportation sector. I submit these
comments as the director of the University of Oregon Environment
Initiative. Oregon's Environment Initiative is a campus-wide,
transdisciplinary effort to focus our faculties' considerable expertise
and energies on addressing the challenges of climate change. This
effort reflects a critically important point that I've seen in my own
career as the Deputy Solicitor for Land and Water Resources at the U.S.
Department of the Interior (Obama Administration) and as a professor of
law and researcher on pressing water issues related to climate, every
single discipline can contribute. The UO is well-positioned to bring a
broad range of expertise to this moment--from the humanities and social
sciences to the natural sciences, law, journalism, business, design,
and education.
As Chair DeFazio recognized in his opening remarks, the work of the
Congress in the last two years to focus on the role of the
transportation sector in addressing the climate crisis has been
historic. The American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), and the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022
represent an unprecedented and transformational investment in our
shared vision for a just and livable future. Combined with passage of
the CHIPS and Science Act, universities through our faculty, students
and graduates are well-positioned to team-up with our own communities
and the federal government to lead technological and civic change. We
want to commend Chair DeFazio and the Committee for their leadership in
putting climate change, transportation equity, and neighborhood access
at the forefront of congressional action. This work promises
transformational change that will benefit American families in the
years to come.
As the work of this Committee recognizes, we find ourselves, as a
nation, amidst unprecedented and transformative environmental impacts
brought about by global climate change, the impacts of structural
racism, increased economic insecurity, and the public health outfall of
a global pandemic. As a result, we face societal paradigm shifts in
systems that govern our economy, our natural world, the built
environment, democracy, and the fundamental relationships among people
and our relationship to the ecological system around us. These shifts
highlight social justice dynamics and environmental inequities that
shape our world and they require action from all spheres of society.
The University of Oregon is a comprehensive public research
university with an integrated mission to explore new knowledge,
generate innovative teaching approaches, and serve our community. We
are known for our deep expertise in a wide range of disciplines related
to the environment. This legacy of leadership results from decades of
deep and substantive engagement with environmental issues. We have
demonstrated our ability to deploy this expertise in ways that provide
lasting policy-relevant work, including transportation research and its
impact on communities.
In the transportation area, the UO has had the pleasure of working
with Chairman DeFazio for the last fifteen years since the
establishment of a University Transportation Center that included
University of Oregon faculty. We appreciate his longstanding focus on
climate and resiliency in this sector. Reflecting the ``Oregon Way''--
the idea that solutions should benefit the common good--the Chairman
has championed improving infrastructure and transportation for
communities, understanding impacts, and the integration of
transportation, livability and our built environment. At the University
of Oregon, we also take an integrated approach in developing our
expertise in understanding transportation impacts.
University of Oregon faculty have demonstrated our ability to
deploy this expertise in ways that serve our communities. For example,
our street re-design guidebooks, Rethinking Streets, have been used by
local officials and communities in every state to help build
infrastructure that makes it easier, safer, and more comfortable to
walk, bike, or take transit more often. Our award-winning university-
community partnership model, the Sustainable City Year Program, expands
the transportation workforce while directly helping communities address
climate change and equity through improved transportation, housing, and
land-use systems. It has been adopted and adapted by other institutions
of higher learning in all regions of the United States. Our innovative
work focusing on the next generation of surface transportation modes,
including autonomous vehicles, ridehailing, and micromobility, is
helping proactively guide municipal decision making across the country
so that regions can maximize the positive potential benefits of these
modes and limit the negative externalities.
Much of this forward-looking, practice-relevant, and transportation
workforce expanding effort was catalyzed through the leadership of
Congressman DeFazio fifteen years ago. We have enjoyed and appreciated
our continuous engagement with him as the work continues to make our
transportation systems and communities more climate-friendly,
equitable, and livable. We are very encouraged that the Infrastructure
Investment and Jobs Act included a Center of Excellence that will focus
on the impacts of autonomous vehicles and new mobility on our systems
and communities.
Just as Congress has taken decisive and unprecedented action to
address climate, here at the University of Oregon, as an institution of
higher education with a public facing mission, we are committed to
doing our part to contribute to climate solutions in even more
meaningful and direct ways using the tools of education, research and
community engagement. To accomplish this purpose, the University of
Oregon launched the Environment Initiative, a campus-wide coordinated
structure through which we can create and disseminate knowledge,
integrate curriculum and reorient the work of the University using a
transdisciplinary, problem-centered approach that responds to the needs
of the community.
Facing our collective future requires us to create infrastructures
in higher education that envision our work differently. Just as so much
of our public life will be transformed as we face the impacts of a
changed climate, so must our education system be prepared to respond.
Organizing our research, teaching, and external engagement around an
issue allows us to design proactive problem-solving pathways, to engage
with multiple constituencies and social groups, to participate in
diverse ideas and forms of knowledge, and to exert the full measure of
our creative energy. This problem-centered approach begins with a
particular challenge--such as clean water, energy efficiency,
decarbonization, or wildfire--and asks what each discipline can bring
to bear upon the problem.
Given our integrated mission to explore, teach, and serve, our
engagement is critical to our authentic participation in the state, the
ecoregion, the nation, and the world. We are marshaling our expertise
to build upon and leverage our existing institutional strengths to
structure higher education in a way that is responsive to the
challenges and focused on climate solutions that reflect justice and
equity. The work that this Committee has done to address the need to
decarbonize the transportation sector through the historic passage of
the American Rescue Plan, the IIJA and IRA reinforces and sets the
course for the work we hope to partner in as a public research
University as we build a resilient, decarbonized, and just future--in
the transportation sector and beyond.
By leveraging the support provided through the University of
Oregon's recently launched Environment Initiative, we are eager to see
the provisions Congress has put in place be fully funded and
implemented including efforts such as TRACE Centers and ARPA-I. The
University of Oregon's Environment Initiative intends to step up and
participate in these new opportunities. Congress has provided historic
resources in pursuit of historic goals. We believe the Environment
Initiative can contribute in achieving these goals and look forward to
the work ahead.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit this written testimony. In
particular, as a citizen of Oregon and member of this community, I want
to recognize and thank Chair DeFazio for his longstanding and steadfast
commitment to these issues and our state. The 117th Congress has acted
in remarkable ways to create a policy framework that transitions the
U.S. to a more sustainable and equitable future. We look forward to
engaging in this work.

Appendix

----------

Question from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Sara Nelson, International
President, Association of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO

Question 1. Ms. Nelson, we've seen a disturbing trend in passengers
attacking flight crew members. Is there more the airlines and DOT could
be doing to help prevent this violence against airline employees?
Answer. Congresswoman Johnson, thank you for asking and checking in
on this issue affecting our workplace. AFA appreciated the letter you
sent to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) last year to encourage the
agency to prioritize prosecution of unruly and disruptive passengers
onboard aircraft, particularly toward crewmembers. We agree that
expeditiously referring the most violent, physical assaults against
crewmembers and passengers to the DOJ for public prosecution is
critical to deter bad actors. While there must be swift and clear
consequences for violent acts, there also must be leadership from
airline management, federal agencies and Congress that asks, ``What is
the right thing to do and demonstrate?'' Your willingness to stand up
for us matters greatly and we value your leadership. It makes us safer.
We encourage all your colleagues to join you.
Still, more needs to be done. AFA has called for more airport
signage, airport public service announcements (PSAs), and notifications
from the airline--starting when passengers purchase the tickets all the
way up until boarding--should all be enhanced communication measures to
reinforce the `zero-tolerance' policy, the fines/jail time
consequences, and the rules associated with alcohol consumption.
Most of the passenger noncompliance with safety rules coincide with
passenger alcohol consumption. We need more education throughout the
airports on rules related to alcohol--advising passengers that federal
regulations prohibit passengers serving themselves alcohol and from
boarding aircraft when inebriated. Vendors selling alcohol should be
required to provide staff with ``traffic light'' alcohol training and
recognition of the server's important role in contributing to aviation
security and safety of all travelers. We also continue to call on
airports to ban the practice and promotion of ``to go'' alcohol.
AFA has a list of recommendations for airlines and airports (and we
encourage DOT/FAA guidance on these items):
1. Limit onboard alcohol sales.
2. Ban cocktails to-go and in-airport alcohol delivery.
3. Limit customers to purchasing one alcoholic beverage at a time.
4. The FAA must remind airports and vendors of their obligation
not to serve inebriated passengers.
5. Airports must remind all airport employees of their shared
responsibility to keep intoxicated passengers from boarding planes by
notifying gate agents and crew members in advance.

We believe consequences for violent behavior need to include loss
of ability to fly on commercial airlines when the acts warrant and
after due process. AFA supports Senator Reed and Representative
Swalwell's bill, the Protection from Abusive Passengers Act, because it
does not allow those abusive passengers to fly for a period and revokes
certain privileges, such as TSA Precheck or Customs' Global Entry.
AFA would like to work with you and all stakeholders to act
together to keep us safe and flying friendly. Aviation is about
bringing people together, not tearing us apart. Every person matters,
and we can only have the freedom of flight when we recognize the
reality that we are all in this together.

Question from Hon. Brian K. Fitzpatrick to Sara Nelson, International
President, Association of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO

Question 1. Recent years have brought a wide variety of new
challenges to maintaining the physical and mental wellbeing of
essential workers, especially in the transportation sector, while on
the job. As Congress continues to prioritize this issue moving forward,
what impact has the safety funding already allocated by the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act had on flight attendants and
other aviation employees?
Answer. Thank you for the question, Congressman Fitzpatrick. The
bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) is another
critical investment in the quality and safety of our nation's
infrastructure. As you know, $5 billion is designated for airport
terminals, which includes concession projects. When concessions are
down, or poorly staffed passengers cannot as easily get a meal before a
flight. This increases anxiety, medical issues, and sometimes leads to
violence. While seemingly small, funding for concessions is actually
very important for the safety and well-being of everyone at the
airport.
In addition, $15 billion was set aside for airport infrastructure,
such as the runways, gates, taxiways, safety and sustainability
projects, airport transit connections, and roadway projects. A tragic
example comes to mind of the importance of airport transit projects
after learning about a Ryanair (UK and Ireland based airline) Flight
Attendant, Cinzia Ceravolo, who was hit by a car and died. She was
trying to walk home in the dark from the airport after her shift
because she could not afford a taxi and there was no public
transportation option. Had public transit been available to get her
safely off the airport road to connect her to a bus stop or to subway,
she would still be alive today.
I am confident the funding provided in the infrastructure bill will
yield positive safety outcomes for Flight Attendants now and in the
future. Thank you for your leadership on this and your vote to adopt
this critical legislation.

Question from Hon. Dina Titus to Sara Nelson, International President,
Association of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO

Question 1. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provides an historic
$25 billion to help rebuild our airports and aviation infrastructure.
How can this money be used to improve the wages and benefits that
aviation workers receive, especially lower-income workers who don't
receive good benefits like healthcare and pensions?
Answer. Thank you for the question, Congresswoman Titus. The IIJA
includes many key provisions championed by labor unions, including
local hiring preferences, Buy America provisions, and prevailing wage
requirements. Transportation unions came together to ensure that many
of the requirements to receive infrastructure funding from the IIJA
protected workers from cheap business models that underpay and overwork
their employees, sometimes in unsafe workplace settings. This funding
will be used to improve the wages and benefits that aviation workers
receive because of these worker protections, in addition to creating
more good union jobs in the communities in which the projects are being
built. That provides job security and stability for Flight Attendants
and other aviation workers on the job too.

Question from Hon. Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia to Sara Nelson,
International President, Association of Flight Attendants--CWA, AFL-CIO

Question 1. In 2020 I led a letter to leadership expressing concern
with airlines spending over 96% of free-cash-flow on stock buybacks
from unused funds under the CARES Payroll Support Program. I even
questioned former Boeing CEO Dennis Mulienburg for reaping millions in
stock buybacks. Are you concerned with the expiration of the stock
buyback and how that will be tied to pay? Would you agree that these
funds can be used to prioritize payroll payments, staff levels, benefit
and minimum wage assurances?
Answer. Thank you for the question, Congressman Garcia. And thank
you for your leadership on this issue. Stock buybacks are a greedy tool
that has assisted in massive inequality and growing poverty. They were
once illegal, and they should be made illegal again if we want a
thriving economy where everyone can benefit from their hard work.
The CARES Payroll Support Program (PSP) halted the greed of Wall
Street by banning stock buybacks and dividends until September 30,
2022, and it also capped executive compensation through March 2023.
This was purposely done so federal funding would be directed to
frontline workers for our pay and benefits and to prevent taxpayer
money from going to airline shareholders and investors during this
economic crisis. This plan first codified in the CARES Act, originating
from House Transportation and Infrastructure Chair Peter DeFazio, not
only served as the most effective COVID relief plan in the world, it
also stopped growing inequality as aviation was the only industry not
to increase inequality between frontline workers and executives during
the pandemic.
The hearing was very timely because the provision banning airlines
from initiating stock buybacks expired the next day. We know you are
aware our union, along with the Air Line Pilots Association, Int'l
(ALPA), the Association of Professional Flight Attendants (APFA), the
Communications Workers of America (CWA), International Association of
Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAMAW), the International Brotherhood
of Teamsters (IBT), Transport Workers Union of America (TWU), and
Service Employees International Union (SEIU), representing hundreds of
thousands of aviation workers, announced the launch of
nostockbuybacks.org. The campaign demands pledges from the CEOs of U.S.
airlines to extend the COVID relief ban on stock buybacks until:
1. Operational meltdowns are not the norm and staffing and flight
schedules are aligned to support public demand; and
2. Labor contract negotiations are concluded.

While airlines are just now starting to make a profit, the recovery
is not complete and the austerity of the twenty years following 9/11
has not been corrected for airline jobs. We can't allow CEOs to send
one dollar to Wall Street before fixing operational issues and
concluding contract negotiations currently underway for more than a
million workers. We need investments in the operation, staffing, and
pay and benefits to keep and attract people to aviation jobs.
Airlines have yet to take the pledge, but so far, our public
position has helped to stave off announcements of stock buybacks in
aviation. This twitter thread includes a review of the public
statements from airlines since we launched our campaign: https://
twitter.com/afa_cwa/status/1575867566953676801
Emphasizing the concerns we're raising, thank you for signing the
letter sent on September 29, 2022, to the trade associations who
represent commercial airlines, urging their members to publicly pledge
that they will not engage in stock buybacks on October 1, 2022.
Millions of frontline transportation workers have worked through the
devastating effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and many put contract
negotiations on hold during the crisis. Minimum staffing and high
productivity put in place pre-pandemic exacerbate problems now until we
can address these issues in bargaining and/or legislation. We
appreciate your efforts to solicit the concerns of airline workers who
continue to bear the brunt of chronic understaffing and languishing
labor contracts.

Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Gregory R. Regan,
President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Question 1. Mr. Regan, every business in America is struggling to
find workers. Your organization represents millions of employees. What
suggestions do you have for bringing more people into the nation's
workforce?
Answer. First, it's important to note that we do not have a
shortage of workers, but a problem with the supply of good jobs that
attracts and retains workers. Employers must pay workers fair wages and
ensure they are safe on the job and have good training opportunities
and other benefits that help create opportunity and dignity in work.
Second, we cannot meet our workforce needs without creating an
equitable environment for all workers in this country. I encourage you
to read our recent policy statements on the topics of good jobs and
equity.

Question 2. Mr. Regan, we averted an economic disaster with the
financial support provided in the legislation we're discussing today.
Without these bills, would the workers you represent have been able to
pay their bills and feed their families?
Answer. The simple answer is no. Without the financial support
provided by Congress, entire industries and the jobs they provide would
have disappeared almost overnight. The emergency investments that
Congress made to stave off the worst economic effects of COVID
preserved millions of jobs in this country and ensured that the
affected industries would still exist as we emerged from the pandemic.
Critically, these investments came with strong protections that ensured
continuity of pay for workers, and not just their employers.

Question from Hon. Brian K. Fitzpatrick to Gregory R. Regan, President,
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Question from Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr. to Gregory R. Regan,
President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Question 1. One of the key priorities of the three legislative
victories under President Biden was to provide a major win for workers,
such as pathways to secure, good-paying jobs in the transportation
sector and beyond. Democrats accomplished this goal by protecting
against involuntary furloughs and expanding unemployment benefits.
Mr. Regan, can you please speak to how the ARP, IIJA, and IRA have
elevated workers from historically disadvantaged backgrounds, such as
Black and Brown Americans, in their ability to secure quality jobs
across the transportation industry?
Answer. The three Covid relief packages, including the American
Rescue Plan, delivered industry-saving investments that kept aviation
workers well-trained and ready to work, maintained critical transit
service so the communities who rely on public transportation to get to
work (often communities of color) could continue to support their
families, and extended federal unemployment and sickness benefits for
many rail workers affected by the pandemic. These are just a few
examples of how the ARP directly benefited workers at risk of losing
their jobs during the pandemic. With high union density in the
transportation sector, and with many workers of color more than
proportionately represented in certain transportation trades, Black and
Brown Americans were also able to benefit from the compounded
advantages of a union job that was kept on the rolls because of these
policies. We encourage you and the Committee to read more about the
advantages of union jobs in transportation for Black and Brown
Americans, and our unions' work to broaden access to those jobs, in our
policy statement, Building a Strong and Equitable Transportation
Workforce.
The Infrastructure and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act
made generational investments in our transportation infrastructure,
boosted the domestic job market for clean energy, and helped to create
a more equitable economy overall. The strong labor protections and
domestic content requirements tied to these federal investments, and
the overturning of the ban on local hire in federal infrastructure
projects, will pave the way for Black and Brown Americans to build
wealth for their families by securing high quality jobs in the
industry. Moreover, the IIJA gave the Biden Administration a larger
forum to bolster the creation of high-quality jobs and advance equity
goals through several executive actions involving the implementation of
IIJA, including: the Memorandum of Understanding between the Department
of Transportation and the Department of Labor, which commits to
harnessing transportation investments for the creation of pathways to
high-quality jobs for all workers; the Executive Order on Use of
Project Labor Agreements For Federal Construction Projects, which helps
to standardize wages across gender, racial, and ethnic groups; the
Executive Order on Implementation of the Infrastructure Investment and
Jobs Act, which directs agencies to invest public dollars equitably,
and the creation of the Infrastructure Talent Pipeline Challenge, which
partners with many of our affiliate unions in supporting equitable
workforce development in construction and electrification jobs.
The investments made in our infrastructure and in our economy this
Congress have provided, and will continue to provide over the next
decade, immeasurable value for transportation workers and those seeking
a career in the transportation trades, especially for workers of color.
We encourage you and the Committee to read more about the opportunity
IIJA provides to advance racial, gender, and economic equity. and our
unions' work to advance those goals, in our policy statement, Building
a Strong and Equitable Transportation Workforce.

Questions from Hon. Dina Titus to Gregory R. Regan, President,
Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Question 1. One of the provisions from the House-passed INVEST Act
that unfortunately did not make it into the final Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law was the requirement for two-person crews on most
freight and passenger trains. Could you please talk about the
importance of this provision and why it is necessary for ensuring
safety for workers and our communities through which hazardous
materials are transported?
Answer. Yes, a requirement for having two-person crews on most
freight and passenger trains is a fundamental safety issue that still
needs to be addressed. TTD and our rail labor unions were disappointed
that this vital provision was not included in the final IIJA
legislation, but we applaud the leadership of Congresswoman Titus,
Chairman DeFazio, and others who continue to fight for this important
provision.
In the U.S., a freight train can weigh up to 15,000 tons, averages
over a mile long and last year the industry transported 2.47 million
carloads of hazardous materials.The Class I railroads are now operating
trains up to five miles in length as a result of their implementation
of so-called ``Precision Scheduled Railroading.'' It is absurd to argue
that such a massive piece of equipment can be safely operated by one
individual, especially given the many tasks for which at least two
people are needed in order to operate a freight train and the myriad of
FRA regulations and railroad operating rules that must be followed. No
average American would feel comfortable with
If a train operated by a single crewmember were to encounter an
emergency situation like a highway crossing collision with an
automobile, a release of hazardous materials or a mechanical problem,
that crewmember could not leave the engine idling in order to
investigate the issue. Those emergency response needs would have to
wait until another crewmember could arrive from many miles away. Should
a train breakdown and block a highway crossing, a second crewmember
would be needed to quickly disconnect the train to unblock that
crossing.
Such a basic safety issue should not be open for negotiation and it
should not be something for which unions have to give something else up
in order to achieve. The safety of rail workers, the communities that
freight trains pass through, and our rail system should not be bartered
at a bargaining table.

Question 2. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law pairs robust
investments in workforce training with funding for transit agencies to
transition to zero emission buses which will ensure workers do not get
left behind as we move to a clean energy economy. This is already
coming to fruition in Southern Nevada. I was proud to secure a $2
million earmark in the IIJA for the Regional Transportation Commission
of Southern Nevada to purchase zero emission buses. In August, the RTC
was awarded another $6.7 million for additional zero-emission buses and
workforce development initiatives.
Can you talk more about how these initiatives are working in
practice and how the pairing of workforce development and clean energy
funding may serve as a model for other innovations in transportation?
Answer. Pairing new investments in cleaner transit with dedicated
funding for workforce training is already proving a success. The first
round of funding for the revised Low/No program went out last year and
ensured that nearly every procurement for Zero Emission Buses is tied
to investing in the skills needed for the maintenance workforce to
maintain those buses. We are working cooperatively with the National
Frontline Workforce Training Center, created by Congress several years
ago to create better procurement standards and training standards so
that transit agencies and the frontline workforce can cooperatively
build the tools they need to ensure those dollars are well spent and
successful. We would be glad to update you on the progress of those
investments as we continue to learn more about their successes on the
ground.

Question 3. One of the major victories for workers in the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was the removal of a regulatory barrier
that prevented State and local governments from prioritizing folks in
their communities for jobs supported by federal funds.
How has your membership been able to take advantage of the
workforce development programs in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law?
Answer. The Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO (TTD) and our
affiliated unions have committed to capitalize on the investments made
in our industry by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to advance equity
goals. The removal of the ban on local hire was supported by TTD, and
we applaud Congress for including it in BIL. We encourage you and the
Committee to read more about advancing equity goals through federal
investments, union jobs, and workforce development, and our affiliated
unions' efforts to advance equitable access to those jobs through job
training in our policy statement, Building a Strong and Equitable
Transportation Workforce. This month, many of our affiliated unions
also partnered with President Biden's Infrastructure Talent Pipeline
Challenge to expand pathways into good jobs and build a diverse
infrastructure workforce through the expansion of pre-apprenticeships,
registered apprenticeships, and other high-quality training programs,
with many specifically catered to underrepresented communities,
including women and refugees.

Questions from Hon. Jesus G. ``Chuy'' Garcia to Gregory R. Regan,
President, Transportation Trades Department, AFL-CIO

Question 1. Midway Airport in Chicago is near my current district
and will be in my new district next Congress. I am also the lead
sponsor of the Good Jobs for Good Airports Act in the House, which
would establish minimum wage and benefit standards for airport workers
at airports across the country. I am pleased that several aviation
unions have endorsed the Good Jobs for Good Airports Act.
In light of the current picketing happening at O'Hare and Midway
airport, how can we ensure that this money is used to improve the wages
and benefits that aviation workers receive, especially lower-income
workers who don't receive a living wage or good benefits like
healthcare? And how will the $25 billion in the Bipartisan
Infrastructure Law for airports help rebuild our airports and aviation
infrastructure?
Answer. The Biden administration has made good jobs central to
implementing the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. Most Department of
Transportation's (DOT) discretionary grants follow the DOT's Grant
Application Checklist criteria. Using the DOT's requirements ensures
federal dollars will create good-paying jobs, a fair choice to join a
union, and high-quality training and education programs for workers.
The section criteria also ask applicants to implement policies during
procurement and project implementation to promote the hiring and
retention of underrepresented workers. In addition, the checklist
encourages applicants to use Labor Peace agreements, Project Labor
Agreements, and Collective Bargaining Agreements that help protect the
federal government's investment in future projects by ensuring that
workers establish fair wages, benefits, and scheduling, which have been
successful in preventing labor disruptions.
The BIL provides our aviation system with the long-overdue support
it deserves by investing in outdated technology and other components of
airport infrastructure needed to accommodate the industry's workforce
and continued growth. These investments will increase efficiency,
reduce waste, and allow for more significant job growth. We strongly
encourage the Committee to review TTD's policy statement, ``TTD
Supports Significant Investments In America's Infrastructure,'' and the
press release, ``Transportation Labor Appleasuds Largest Investment in
Transporation, Jobs in America's History.''

Question 2. The State of Illinois and the City of Chicago have
applied for grants from USDOT's new MEGA program for the critical I-
290/CTA Blue Line rebuilding and the expansion of Chicago Union
Station. How can the State of Illinois and municipalities in my
district best partner with labor to ensure grant applications have
strong labor components just like the latest round of INFRA grants?
Answer. We encourage all members to review the USDOT Grant
Application Checklist for a Strong Transportation Workforce and Labor
Plan and to ensure that project sponsors and representatives of the
labor workforce are working together in your districts to meet the
standards outlined by this administration. Ensuring labor support for
projects is a dramatic shift by this administration--and one that we
are incredibly thankful for--and this tool will help both project
sponsors and labor work more cooperatively towards our shared goals of
creating good jobs and fixing America's infrastructure.

Question 3. Chicago is the center of this country's rail network.
The IIJA takes a number of important steps towards improving highway
and trucking safety with the goal of reducing tragic accidents and
fatalities on our roadways. It's evident that these efforts are more
needed than ever, as NHTSA reported that traffic deaths reached a 16-
year high in 2021. With that in mind, I was very disturbed to read an
article in the Wall Street Journal last week about the dismal safety
records of the companies Amazon contracts out its services to, and its
failure to correct these issues. I was particularly struck by finding
that these contractors were cited for committing certain safety
violations at a rate 70 times greater than represented UPS drivers. To
be blunt--what's going on here? Why are Amazon's operations so unsafe,
and what threat do they pose to the promises of the IIJA?
Answer. There is no other way to say this: Amazon has placed a
premium on profits over safety, fair employment, and other public
goods. Reining in corporate greed that places more value on profit than
the wellbeing of contract workers, the traveling public, and in many
cases, their customers is the only solution to this problem.

Questions from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Stephen Gardner, Chief
Executive Officer, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

Question 1. Mr. Gardner, thank you for meeting with me and the I-20
Corridor Coalition earlier this year. I wanted to reiterate my strong
support for Amtrak Service between Dallas-Ft. Worth and Atlanta and
encourage you to include this corridor in any future long distance
service plans developed by Amtrak or FRA. Could you update me on any
progress being made on this project?
Answer. Amtrak has provided data on our long-distance trains to the
Federal Railroad Administration's (FRA) Long-Distance Service Study,
which is intended to evaluate potential expansion of the long-distance
network. We will continue to participate in the FRA's study and provide
them with data to help them identify options to improve the long-
distance network, as well as the capital and operating costs associated
with such changes to inform Congress on future funding decisions.
Additionally, Amtrak has requested that the Surface Transportation
Board (STB), as a condition of approving the merger between Canadian
Pacific Railroad and Kansas City Southern Railroad, require that the
two companies participate in a joint study with Amtrak and other
affected railroads with the goal of introducing a daily round-trip
train service between Meridian and Dallas, with potential for a second
daily round trip. A copy of our letter to the STB, including that
request, is attached with these responses.\\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\\ Editor's note: The documents referenced by Mr. Gardner
are retained in committee files and are available online at https://
dcms-external.s3.amazonaws.com/DCMS_External_PROD/1643835362179/
303645.pdf.

Question 2. Mr. Gardner, the Northeast Corridor has so much
potential for increased speed and expanded service, especially with the
new Acela trains coming online next year. You mentioned in your
testimony that work has begun on addressing the bottlenecks on this
line. Do you have any timelines on when these projects will be
completed?
Answer. Key to Northeast Corridor (NEC) increased speed and
expanded service is to first address the backlog of state-of-good-
repair (SOGR) needs, including the replacement of 100+ year old bridges
and tunnels. As part of the Acela program, Amtrak has already made a
number of improvements to the NEC's infrastructure which will help us
increase the maximum speed from 150mph to 160mph. Examples of this
infrastructure work include a project to add two new platforms at
Baltimore-Penn Station, and another platform expansion at the New
Carrollton, Maryland stop--both of which will accommodate the increased
capacity that comes with the new Acela trainsets.
Additionally, we and our partners are advancing many major
infrastructure projects including Portal North Bridge in New Jersey and
the Frederick Douglass/Baltimore and Potomac Tunnel Replacement Project
in Maryland that will simultaneously improve performance and increase
reliability along the Corridor. As you may be aware, the FRA will soon
publish a project inventory for the NEC, which will serve as the basis
for future FRA grant funding through the Federal-State Partnership
grant program. This grant program is a major anticipated source for the
funding of all of these major projects and the IIJA's $24 billion for
this program is an essential down payment in support of these SOGR
improvements. While Amtrak is grateful for this funding, the NEC's SOGR
backlog is vast and many needed projects over the coming decade will
require additional federal and state support in order to advance. This
is particularly true for ``pure'' speed and trip time projects which
are not directly related to core SOGR needs. To address the important
work of gaining higher speeds and further reductions in travel time--
which we believe is vital to increasing the competitiveness of
intercity rail in the NEC and creating more capacity in the future--
additional investments beyond this initial IIJA funding are needed, and
we stand ready to work with Congress to identify options and
opportunities.

Question from Hon. Brian K. Fitzpatrick to Stephen Gardner, Chief
Executive Officer, National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

Question 1. This August, Rep. Fitzpatrick (PA-01) and Rep. Moulton
(MA-06) led 28 of their colleagues in a bipartisan letter expressing
concern about the current trip times on Amtrak's Northeast Corridor and
hope that historic investments set aside for this line in the
Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act will be used to improve
timetables. What progress has Amtrak made in prioritizing modernization
projects that will directly decrease long trip times between Boston and
Washington, D.C.?
Answer. As part of the Acela program, Amtrak has already made a
number of improvements to the NEC's infrastructure which will help us
increase the maximum speed from 150mph to 160mph and begin improving
trip times. Examples of this infrastructure work include a project to
add two new platforms at Baltimore-Penn Station, and another platform
expansion at the New Carrollton, Maryland stop--both of which will
accommodate the increased capacity that comes with the new Acela
trainsets and enhance reliability.
In further support of reduced trip times on the Northeast Corridor,
Amtrak is actively working to implement projects that address the
backlog of state-of-good-repair (SOGR) needs, including the replacement
of 100+ year old bridges and tunnels and replacement of rail and ties
to allow increased operating speeds. Our Portal North Bridge Project in
New Jersey and the Frederick Douglass/Baltimore and Potomac Tunnel
Replacement Project in Maryland exemplify this twin aim of
simultaneously improving performance and increasing reliability along
the Corridor.
This work is being closely coordinated with state partners across
the corridor. As you may be aware, the FRA will soon publish a project
inventory for the NEC, which will serve as the basis for future FRA
grant funding through the Federal-State Partnership grant program. This
grant program is a major anticipated source for the funding of all of
Amtrak's major projects on the NEC and the IIJA's $24 billion for this
program is an essential down payment in support of these SOGR
investments. While Amtrak is grateful for this funding, the NEC's SOGR
backlog is vast and many needed projects over the coming decade will
require additional federal and state support in order to advance. This
is particularly true for ``pure'' speed and trip time projects which
are not directly related to core SOGR needs. To address the important
work of gaining higher speeds and further reductions in travel time--
which we believe is vital to increasing the competitiveness of
intercity rail in the NEC and creating more capacity in the future--
additional investments beyond this initial IIJA funding are needed, and
we stand ready to work with Congress to identify options and
opportunities.
While much more work awaits, the record levels of increased
infrastructure funding for the NEC provided by the Administration and
Congress and the arrival of the new Acela fleet will combine to begin a
new era of improved customer experience on the Corridor, and we look
forward to working with you to extend and amplify these opportunities.

Questions from Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr. to Stephen Gardner,
Chief Executive Officer, National Railroad Passenger Corporation
(Amtrak)

Question 1. Mr. Gardner, last year Amtrak presented an ambitious
long-term vision that would connect Atlanta to Savannah, Nashville, and
Montgomery vis-a-vis passenger rail. Earlier this year, the Georgia
Department of Transportation received $8 million in federal funds to
study the Atlanta-Savannah link.
Question 1.a. Can you speak to the value of bringing this vision to
life, including the impact on communities of color who have
historically been denied access to quality passenger rail?
Answer. Amtrak's Connects US vision (May 2021) outlined a vision
for new service to 160 new communities, many of which are underserved
by intercity passenger rail and also communities where many residents
are people of color. New intercity passenger rail service not only
creates additional transportation options, but also benefits the
environment by reducing greenhouse gas emissions, benefits the economy
by creating jobs and encouraging development around new and existing
stations, and increases connectivity between communities by connecting
new city pairs and smaller communities to large towns and cities. The
FRA's Corridor Identification and Development Program will play an
important role in determining how we bring new and expanded intercity
passenger rail service to communities across the country, and we are
hopeful that states and other eligible entities partner with us to
pursue funding opportunities under this new FRA program.

Question 1.b. The creation of the Atlanta-Savannah connection would
lead to a plethora of jobs and opportunities for small businesses. What
plans does Amtrak have in place to ensure that Black and Brown
Americans, including historically disadvantaged, minority-owned small
businesses, participate in project development and contribute to
regional economic growth in a meaningful way?
Answer. As we and our state partners look to improve and expand
service, we have a great chance to engage diverse and local businesses
in the business opportunities created by these new investments. Because
our supplier diversity program is a national program, we are always
working to be inclusive through our outreach across our network which
helps Amtrak to meet and exceed its Corporate Diversity Goal (15%) year
over year. Outreach includes virtual and in person for national expos/
conferences as well as our own Amtrak events which include pop-up
events in stations, panel discussions that include various selections
of small businesses, and 1:1 sessions. While national events assist our
efforts for opportunities from a broader scope, we recognize that we
also must be more intentional for specific projects that may require us
to go where the suppliers are to engage and make them aware of the
opportunities coming down the pipeline.
Even before the pandemic, we have teamed up with the Minority
Business Development Agencies (MBDA) and the Procurement Technical
Assistance Centers (PTAC) as well as other agencies to reach
prospective suppliers across the map. We also utilize our diversity
spend reporting analysis to identify the areas in which we need to ramp
up outreach to ensure that we focus on areas/groups where participation
is not at an optimal level in contributing to regional economic growth.
We remain transparent with the procurement opportunities as posted on
the procurement portal (accessible at https://procurement.amtrak.com),
and our Supplier Diversity Office (SDO) is always available to connect
with businesses to assist them in learning how to do business with
Amtrak.

Question from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Samuel Desue, Jr., General
Manager, TriMet

Question 1. Mr. Desue, too often we hear from companies that it is
too hard to comply with Made-In-America requirements, yet I see that
all your buses and rail cars are built in America. Can you discuss your
experience purchasing American-made equipment? And do you think there
could be an opportunity to produce more American-made goods?
Answer. We have not had problems buying American-made buses or
light rail vehicles. As I mentioned in my testimony, TriMet recently
made our first bulk purchase of 24 American-made, battery electric
buses. This part of a multiyear effort to fully convert our fleet. With
all of the Nation's transit agencies similarly committed to multiyear
conversions to electric vehicles, there may be an initial supply issue,
but the significant public investments from all levels of government to
this conversion will lead to market responses that will expand domestic
manufacturing compacity. So, we do not envision the supply of new
American-made electric vehicles and charging infrastructure to be a
long-term issue.
The substantial investment in electric vehicles and charging
infrastructure contained in the IIJA will also likely result in
unforeseen innovations that will likely result in superior technologies
and products. This always happens. It's a rarely recognized result of
this kind of investment, and it will likely result in new American-made
products that benefit everyone.

Questions from Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr. to Samuel Desue,
Jr., General Manager, TriMet

Question 1. Democrats in Congress have invested heavily in climate-
combatting transportation options so that Americans can minimize their
carbon footprint. Among the travel options available, transit is
essential for getting around without damaging our planet. Last year, I
introduced H.R. 3744, the Stronger Communities through Better Transit
Act, which is designed to provide high-quality, low-cost and frequent
transit to communities across America, which a specific emphasis on
those in underserved neighborhoods.
Question 1.a. Mr. Desue, how would further federal investments in
public transit assist communities of color with mobility while also
combatting pernicious climate effects?
Answer. Communities across the nation are recognizing the long
overdue need to address long-neglected communities of color. These
equity communities tend to have a high percentage of transit-dependent
riders and--as we found out during the pandemic--essential workers.
Targeting investments to increase transit usage in these communities
will ensure that residents have access to jobs and critical services
and will begin to address the air quality challenges these communities
often face.

Question 1.b. What are some best practices you've witnessed in
Oregon involving mass transit that you believe would translate well
across the metro-Atlanta region and America?
Answer. As TriMet converts to an electric bus fleet, we have
prioritized placing these buses in service in equity communities first.
In addition to the Greenhouse Gas emission reductions from the diesel
engines, the health consequences of diesel buses must not be minimized,
and communities of color have been historically saddled with air
polluting industries and freeways. Removing the diesel buses is a
start. One secondary issue that we feel is important is noise
pollution. Diesel buses make a lot of it and health care officials say
industrial noise is a stressful irritant on people. Reducing the noise
impacts, we believe, will also have a significant effect in the quality
of life for people served by electric buses. This commitment will
ensure that those communities most impacted by environmental and public
health impacts of transportation emissions receive the initial benefits
of this transition to electric vehicles.

Questions from Hon. Dina Titus to Samuel Desue, Jr., General Manager,
TriMet

Question 1. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law pairs robust
investments in workforce training with funding for transit agencies to
transition to zero emission buses which will ensure workers do not get
left behind as we move to a clean energy economy. This is already
coming to fruition in Southern Nevada. I was proud to secure a $2
million earmark in the IIJA for the Regional Transportation Commission
of Southern Nevada to purchase zero emission buses. In August, the RTC
was awarded another $6.7 million for additional zero-emission buses and
workforce development initiatives.
Can you talk more about how these initiatives are working in
practice and how the pairing of workforce development and clean energy
funding may serve as a model for other innovations in transportation?
Answer. This is a great question, because all of America's transit
districts are in the same situation as we convert to electric vehicles.
Transit agencies have been using essentially the same technology
for over a century--diesel powered buses. Like the Regional
Transportation Commission of Southern Nevada, TriMet has secured $2
million grants for our initial purchase of electric vehicles. These
kinds of federal grants have helped introduce us to this new
technology.
Switching technologies is not like flipping a switch. That means we
need to learn its quirks and limits. For a century, our workforce knew
every gear and valve of a diesel engine, but now they are dealing with
vehicles that require a very different skill set to maintain and
operate. Our maintenance staff will need to acquire a new range of
skills to deal with the computer programming issues that are needed to
keep electric buses maintained and in operation. That is a huge shift.
We are part of several consortiums of transit agencies where we
share our information so we can learn from others as all of America's
transit agencies converts. We are also committed to working with our
workforce to ensure they have the resources necessary to gain the
knowledge and skills to further their careers as we transition to zero
emission buses.

Question 2. One of the major victories for workers in the
Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was the removal of a regulatory barrier
that prevented State and local governments from prioritizing folks in
their communities for jobs supported by federal funds.
How will the removal of this barrier benefit local governments and
agencies like TriMet, and how will this benefit workforce development
efforts in underserved communities?
Answer. Regarding the removal of barriers for prioritizing people
in their communities for jobs supported by federal funds, we believe
this will have long-term benefits. Currently, like most transit
agencies, we need more employees. With a workforce of 2,800 employees,
we are down 300 operators and over 50 mechanics. To attract more
employees, we have offered a $7,500 signing bonus and a like bonus to
retain workers. These are paid over three years and have proved to slow
the tide of early retirements and to attract new applicants. TriMet is
committed to ensure that residents in our service area have access to
career opportunities and benefit from the investments we make and
services we provide in our community.

Question 3. As you know, the IIJA made historic investments in
transit. Many transit agencies, however, around the country, including
in my district, are facing a shortage of workers in just about every
category. In order to maximize the potential of this funding, we need
to ensure transit agencies are able to meet their staffing needs.
Can you talk about some of the recruitment and retention efforts
the transit industry has implemented to address this issue and what
role Congress can play to provide assistance?
Answer. I appreciate this question because while it seems like a
lack of workforce a local issue--every transit agency is experiencing
this in Oregon--and we understand it is happening nearly everywhere.
TriMet provides good, middle-class jobs. The kind of jobs people can
support a family, buy a house, and sustain a community. Keeping transit
agencies staffed up will determine whether we can meet the mobility and
accessibility challenges facing our region, as well as whether or not
we can take the steps necessary to begin addressing the climate crisis.
It will affect traffic and whether people who have no other means of
travel can use something other than a car. Transit is critical to our
nation's vitality, so having a robust workforce is important to the
nation. If we are going to grow ridership, we cannot allow long-term
worker shortages to negatively impact our transit services levels.
As I mentioned in my previous responses, TriMet is committed to
building and maintaining the workforce we need to continue to provide
public transportation services for our region. There is no silver
bullet to address the near-term worker shortage issues and our long-
term workforce needs. We have dramatically stepped-up hiring efforts by
increasing pay, offering signing and retention bonuses, invested in
workforce development and training development efforts ensuring our
employees have the resources to receive and maintain the skills
training necessary to provide the services required by TriMet as we
implement innovative transit approaches and technology. We have also
taken steps to improve the quality of our employees' jobs--like
installing protective barriers for bus drivers. If a driver does not
feel safe on the job, it is not likely they will remain on the job.
TriMet is committed to providing the compensation packages and
skills necessary to provide middle class, family sustaining career
opportunities to our workforce. Our workforce is mission critical to
TriMet, and we are taking the steps necessary to address short-term
shortages while building the longer-term capacity to meet our future
needs.

Question from Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson to Adam S. Hersh, Ph.D.,
Senior Economist, Economic Policy Institute

Question 1. Dr. Hersh, how can the Congressional Budget Office
(CBO) improve their economic models to better assess the return on
investment we see in transportation infrastructure spending?
Answer. The most salient implications for shortcomings in CBO
economic modeling are found in the macroeconomic model CBO uses to
score legislation for its effect on federal budgets and providing
economic projections for the national economy. Among the methodological
limitations imposed by CBO's modeling choices, we can characterize them
as (a) overstating the actual costs of infrastructure projects and
other long-term return public goods investments, and (b) understating
their benefits. This results from unempirical macroeconomic assumptions
that form the core of CBO's model of the U.S. economy.
Congress, monetary policy makers, and private sector investors the
world over make critical economic decisions about the future based on
CBO projections. But time after time, those projections have proven
woefully inaccurate. Figure 1 compares successive CBO economic
projections for the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield--a key variable
determining the budgetary costs of fiscal spending programs--and the
actual market-determined interest rate.\i\ CBO consistently
overpredicted rising interest rates in its economic projections. The
result of these forecast errors is to systematically overstate the
borrowing costs of legislative initiatives--including for
infrastructure investment and other public goods like scientific
research and development, education, and public health measures--
providing misleading information about the potential economic impacts
of their policies. It also pushes policymakers to undersupply
countercyclical fiscal policy to manage recessions and other adverse
macroeconomic shocks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\i\ Reproduced from Adam Hersh and Mark Paul. 2021. Room to Run:
America has ample fiscal space and should use it to tackle pressing
economic and climate challenges. Available at https://
groundworkcollaborative.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/
GroundworkCollab_RoomToRoom_
r4.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For example, in 2011, the oldest vintage forecast available online
from CBO, modelers predicted interest rates on the 10-year Treasury
note would rise to 5.25% by the fourth quarter of 2019 as employment
recovered, creating upward inflationary pressure. We know now that the
recovery imagined by CBO never materialized and, in reality, Treasury
yields fell to 1.79% with the weakness of the recovery. Although
subsequent projections pared down the interest rate outlook, CBO
continued to severely overestimate the extent to which interest rates
would rise. Here, CBO is significantly out of step with the rest of the
economics, which has known for some time that equilibrium interest
rates were much lower than CBO's models suggest.\ii\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\ii\ Holston, Kathryn, Thomas Laubach, and John C. Williams. 2017.
``Measuring the Natural Rate of Interest: International Trends and
Determinants.'' Journal of International Economics. Vol. 108,
Supplement 1, pp. S39-S75; Laubach, Thomas, and John C. Williams. 2003.
``Measuring the Natural Rate of Interest.'' Review of Economics and
Statistics. Vol. 85, no. 4, pp. 1063-70.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Past policy choices have been guided by the Congressional Budget
Office's (CBO) mistaken projections that consistently overstated the
relationship between government spending and interest rates. This
follows from a common--though empirically inaccurate--theoretical
assumption known as ``Ricardian equivalence,'' that treats public
investment as crowding out private investment by bidding up interest
rates.\iii\ The assumption presumes both that capital markets are
inherently efficient and that savers and investors exhibit rational
expectations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\iii\ See, for example, Meissner, T. and Rostam-Afschar, D., 2017.
``Learning Ricardian equivalence.'' Journal of Economic Dynamics and
Control, 82, pp.273-288; Clausio Sardoni. ``The public debt and the
Ricardian equivalence: Some critical remarks.'' Structural Change and
Economic Dynamics. Volume 58, September 2021, Pages 153-160.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the real-world economy, though open international capital
markets that allow savings from abroad to flow into U.S. assets mean
that borrowing at the margin is unconstrained. And the financial sector
is not efficient, but defined by market failures from asymmetric
information and incomplete or unenforceable contracts that create
adverse selection, moral hazard, and principle-agent problems;
moreover, investors not only don't always exhibit rational behavior,
but are often epistemologically unable to make optimizing decisions
under conditions of fundamental uncertainty.\iv\ The repeated forecast
errors resulting from CBO assumptions shown in Figure 1 indicate that
policymakers take votes based on CBO models that exaggerate the true
federal budgetary costs of spending programs and lead policymakers to
withdraw countercyclical fiscal support too early in past recoveries,
entrenching longstanding racial and gender inequities and deterring
investments that would raise productivity and living standards over the
long term.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\iv\ These problems are discussed in detail by Gary Shackle. 1991.
Epistemics and Economics: A Critique of Economic Doctrines. Routledge;
and Hyman Minsky. 2008. John Maynard Keynes. McGraw Hill.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Another flawed component of CBO's model pertains to how it
evaluates unemployment in relation to consumer price inflation and
interest rates. The model is built on an assumption that when
unemployment falls below an optimal ``natural'' rate, price inflation
mechanically follows, prompting the Federal Reserve to raise interest
rates. But what is natural? CBO assumes unemployment for different
demographic groups (age, sex, education, and race) ``were approximately
at their natural rates in 2005''.\v\ In other words, whatever the
unemployment rate was for each demographic sub-group in 2005, that's
what CBO assumes is the lowest unemployment should get before
inflationary pressures are assumed to kick in.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\v\ Shackleton 2018
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I illustrate this graphically in Figure 2, showing the 2005
unemployment rate for white (4.4 %), Black (10%), Latino (6%), and
Asian (4%) workers as a red dashed line superimposed on each groups'
unemployment rate since that time in blue.\vi\ As Williams (2021)
emphasizes, this assumption surreptitiously embeds racial disparities
into policymaking decisions about how much employment is enough?
Essentially, CBO says unemployment for Black workers should stay
structurally double the rate for white workers, and 50% higher for
Latino workers. For context, the CBO's assumptions would mean the Black
jobless rate, which dropped to 5.2% in August 2020 with no inflationary
consequences, would never be expected to fall beneath the peak overall
unemployment rate during the Great Recession--10% in October of 2009.
Yet, all groups sustained unemployment below CBO's natural rate for
considerable time without causing inflation. In other words, the
perversely racialized distribution of unemployment that CBO's model
dictates affects all workers by embodying a bias toward excessive
unemployment for particular groups of workers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\vi\ Reproduced from Adam Hersh and Mark Paul. 2021. Room to Run:
America has ample fiscal space and should use it to tackle pressing
economic and climate challenges. Available at https://
groundworkcollaborative.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/
GroundworkCollab_RoomToRoom_
r4.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The above discussion considered the macroeconomic context in which
CBO models assess the impact of macroeconomically significant
investments in transportation and other infrastructure is the failure
to use capital budgeting for investments in long-lived public
infrastructure assets. Because fiscal adjustments in government
consumption and government investment have differential effects--with
cuts in investments having particularly large, negative economic
effects, Congress's current budgeting practices skew most cost-benefit
analyses in favor of costing too much.\vii\ CBO staff are aware of this
shortcoming and have proposed to Congress alternative approaches to
budgeting federal investment that separate investment spending into a
capital budget that accumulates returns on investment over longer time
horizons.\viii\ Additionally, to better understand the impacts of their
policies, Congress could require CBO to also report measures of
alternative economic welfare, such as those developed by the Commission
on the Measurement of Economic Performance and Social Progress.\ix\
These indicators encompass a range of social and economic development
metrics, and reveal that although policies can be seen to increase GDP
in the short-run, they don't necessarily enhance economic performance
or social development over the long term.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\vii\ See Jovanovic (2017) and Blanchard and Leigh's (2013).
\viii\ Congressional Budget Office. Budgeting for Federal
Investment. April 15, 2021. Available at https://www.cbo.gov/system/
files/2021-04/56900-capital-budgeting.pdf.
\ix\ https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/documents/8131721/8131772/
Stiglitz-Sen-Fitoussi-Commission-report.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CBO should reassess the biases inherent in the models it uses to
project the Federal fiscal position and the U.S. macroeconomy. It will
take time for CBO to adjust to potential new methodologies, and this
process should be informed with robust transparency and public
participation. In the meantime, and without altering their methodology,
Congress should require that CBO also report a confidence interval
around the point estimates produced by their models. This would tell us
although CBO predicts an average tendency of X, the model says that we
can expect an outcome between X e, but we should really
count on anything more specific than a dart thrown at this X
e interval. This will make more explicit to consumers of
CBO analyses the extent of uncertainty surrounding their predictions
for the future, and can be factored into fiscal policymaking as well as
economic decisions made by businesses and households.

Question from Hon. Henry C. ``Hank'' Johnson, Jr. to Adam S. Hersh,
Ph.D., Senior Economist, Economic Policy Institute

Question 1. Mr. Hersh, under the IIJA's Airport Terminal Program,
Atlanta Hartsfield international airport received a $40 million grant
from the federal government. How will this economic investment allow
the airport and the metro-Atlanta region to further develop its economy
while also providing quality jobs to Georgians?
Answer. The IIJA investments in Atlanta Hartsfield International
Airport would provide quality jobs to Georgians and help support
regional economic activity through several channels.
First, through well understood Keynesian multiplier effects, the
$40 million dollar Atlanta airport project would support employment
directly in completing the project, indirectly in other industries
related to the project, and via greater consumption from these workers'
additional incomes across the rest of the economy (referred to as
induced demand) for 425 job-years (a unit of measure equal to the labor
required for one year's full time work).\x\ Additionally, the IIJA
investments are expected to ``crowd-in'' a range of complementary
private investments that will similarly increase economic activity and
employment. Not all of the jobs created will be located in the Atlanta
metropolitan area, though a significant share will--particularly in
construction trades and in the additional regional economic activity
supported by the income of those directly employed in the airport
projects.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\x\ Based on estimates provided in Adam S. Hersh, `` `Build Back
Better' agenda will ensure strong, stable recovery in coming years,''
Economic Policy Institute. September 16, 2021. Available at https://
www.epi.org/publication/iija-budget-reconciliation-jobs/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jobs supported by IIJA projects are covered by ``Davis-Bacon''
requirements that ensure contractors pay workers on construction
projects a fair, prevailing wage rather than undercutting local labor
markets with a race-to-the-bottom in wages. These requirements ensure
that wages for millions of workers in infrastructure construction as
well as those in millions of jobs across the regional economy enjoy
stronger wages and working conditions, amplifying the project's local
contributions.
Second, a renewed and expanded airport will bring broader and
longer-term economic benefits through higher productivity, lower costs
of doing business, and increased opportunities for regional development
centered on the economic hub of metro-Atlanta. The capacity to handle
more flights and passengers enhances the attractiveness of Hart
International and the Atlanta region as a destination for tourists and
business travelers, a hub for air travel ensconcing Atlanta in regional
and global aviation networks, and a more efficient platform for
international airfreight serving regional exporting businesses.
Third, the Airport is a major energy consumer. Decarbonizing and
improving energy efficiency at ATL with IIJA support will significantly
reduce energy demand on the regional grid, in turn contributing to more
stable regional energy systems and improved air quality bringing long-
term health and economic development benefits.

Figure 1
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Figure 2
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

[all]