[Senate Hearing 117-6]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 117-6
BUILDING BACK BETTER: INVESTING IN TRANSPORTATION WHILE ADDRESSING
CLIMATE CHANGE, IMPROVING EQUITY, AND FOSTERING ECONOMIC GROWTH AND
INNOVATION
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON
ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 24, 2021
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
44-094 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware, Chairman
BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont Virginia,
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island Ranking Member
JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts KEVIN CRAMER, North Dakota
TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
DEBBIE STABENOW, Michigan RICHARD SHELBY, Alabama
MARK KELLY, Arizona JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
ALEX PADILLA, California ROGER WICKER, Mississippi
DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska
JONI ERNST, Iowa
LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina
Mary Frances Repko, Democratic Staff Director
Adam Tomlinson, Republican Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
FEBRUARY 24, 2021
OPENING STATEMENTS
Carper, Hon. Thomas R., U.S. Senator from the State of Delaware.. 1
Capito, Hon. Shelley Moore, U.S. Senator from the State of West
Virginia....................................................... 4
WITNESSES
Whitmer, Hon. Gretchen, Governor, State of Michigan.............. 9
Prepared statement........................................... 12
Response to an additional question from Senator Carper....... 18
Responses to additional questions from Senator Whitehouse.... 19
Response to an additional question from Senator Inhofe....... 22
Responses to additional questions from Senator Lummis........ 23
Hogan, Hon. Lawrence J., Jr., Governor, State of Maryland........ 25
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Response to an additional question from Senator Carper....... 32
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Whitehouse....................................... 33
Senator Lummis........................................... 36
Hancock, Hon. Michael B., Mayor, City and County of Denver,
Colorado....................................................... 38
Prepared statement........................................... 40
Response to an additional question from:
Senator Carper........................................... 55
Senator Cardin........................................... 56
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Whitehouse....................................... 57
Senator Lummis........................................... 58
Sheehan, Hon. Victoria, Commissioner, New Hampshire Department of
Transportation; President, American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials........................... 61
Prepared statement........................................... 63
Response to an additional question from Senator Carper....... 71
Responses to additional questions from Senator Whitehouse.... 72
Response to an additional question from Senator Inhofe....... 74
Responses to additional questions from:
Senator Lummis........................................... 76
Senator Shelby........................................... 77
Senator Sullivan......................................... 82
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
We can come together for smart infrastructure, the Washington
Times, February 24, 2021....................................... 90
Letter to Senator Charles Schumer et al. from the National
Association of Truck Stop Operators et al., February 24, 2021.. 92
Letter to Senators Carper and Capito from:
The Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, February 23, 2021. 121
The Consumer Technology Association, February 23, 2021....... 127
Associated Builders and Contractors, February 24, 2021....... 129
The Diesel Technology Forum, February 23, 2021............... 131
The Truck Safety Coalition, February 23, 2021................ 135
The Intelligent Transportation Society of America, February
24, 2021................................................... 138
The National Marine Manufacturers Association, February 24,
2021....................................................... 140
The National Stone, Sand and Gravel Association, February 24,
2021....................................................... 144
The Portland Cement Association, February 25, 2021........... 146
The SmarterSafer Coalition, February 23, 2021................ 148
Letter to Senators Carper and John Barrasso from Clean
Transportation Technologies and Solutions, March 2, 2021....... 152
Statement from:..................................................
The American Trucking Associations, February 24, 2021........ 157
The American Society of Civil Engineers, February 24, 2021... 162
The Design-Build Institute of America, February 24, 2021..... 167
The Conference of Minority Transportation Officials, February
24, 2021................................................... 170
40 Proposed U.S. Transportation and Water Infrastructure Projects
of Major Economic Significance, AECOM et al., Fall 2016........ 174
BUILDING BACK BETTER: INVESTING IN TRANSPORTATION WHILE ADDRESSING
CLIMATE CHANGE, IMPROVING EQUITY, AND FOSTERING ECONOMIC GROWTH AND
INNOVATION
----------
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 24, 2021
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Environment and Public Works,
Washington, DC.
The Committee, met, pursuant to notice, at 10:18 a.m. in
room 406, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Thomas R. Carper
(Chairman of the Committee) presiding.
Present: Senators Carper, Capito, Cardin, Sanders,
Whitehouse, Merkley, Markey, Duckworth, Stabenow, Kelly,
Padilla, Inhofe, Cramer, Lummis, Boozman, Sullivan, Ernst,
Graham, and Rounds.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS R. CARPER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF DELAWARE
Senator Carper. Good morning, everyone.
I want to call this hearing to order.
We are delighted to be joined today virtually by a
noteworthy panel of witnesses to discuss with us surface
transportation infrastructure: Governor Whitmer, Governor
Hogan, Mayor Hancock, and Commissioner Sheehan. We want to
welcome each of them to the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works' first policy hearing of the 117th Congress.
Here in Washington today, as I walked up from the train
station, Union Station to the Capitol, I couldn't help but
notice that the sun has come out. The weather forecast is 60
degrees, thank you, God, after a week of brutal winter storms.
But despite the sun and the blue skies that greeted us this
morning, our country still faces some major hurdles, as we all
know.
While our economy is starting to show signs of life, close
to 15 million people in the United States remain unemployed,
and roughly half of them have given up looking for a job.
Across Texas, families are struggling to recover, as we
know, from a catastrophic ice storm, with over 8 million
people--8 million people--still without safe drinking water,
the latest tragedy in the increasingly frequent extreme weather
and climate events of recent years.
This comes on the heels of last year's raging wildfires in
California and Colorado the size of my State, hurricane force
winds in Iowa that flattened a third of that State's crops last
year.
Get this, this is what John Neely Kennedy told me
yesterday. He said every 100 minutes, Louisiana loses a
football field of land to rising sea levels. Every 100 minutes.
If that happened in Delaware, we would be gone in about a year,
but they are disappearing in Louisiana, as well.
Scientists tell us that if climate change is left
unchecked, these disasters are not going to get better; they
will just get worse. A raging pandemic, as well, we face a
raging pandemic. Millions of jobless Americans. A growing
climate crisis that demands bold action.
The question is, what do we do about it? What do we do
about it? Well, there is some good news. That is, as it turns
out, smart investments in our transportation infrastructure
will enable us to tackle all three of these challenges.
We can improve the conditions of our roads, highways, and
bridges in ways that create millions of good paying jobs, lift
up our communities, build a more sustainable economy, and
improve our air quality for a healthier, more prosperous future
for all of us.
The American people are counting on us to make this happen.
They don't want to hear us talking about what needs to be done.
They want us to work together and get it done.
As we gather today, less than half of our Federal aid
highways and bridges are in good condition. Much of our
infrastructure is significantly outdated. It was built for
different ranges of temperatures, rainfall, and sea levels. In
the last 10 years, we have put nearly $19 billion in emergency
funds in addition to what we have already provided from the
Highway Trust Fund.
Poor road conditions and design flaws create safety
challenges, too. Motor vehicle crashes are one of the top
causes of unintentional lethal injuries in the United States.
Pedestrians and bicyclists face particularly grave
challenges as roads are too often designed without a safe place
to bike or even cross the street. In the last decade, we have
seen a 44 percent increase in pedestrian fatalities on our
roads. Think about that: A 44 percent increase in just one
decade.
The burdens of poor road conditions are disproportionately
shouldered by marginalized communities. Low income families and
peoples of color are frequently left behind or left out by our
investments in infrastructure, blocking their access to jobs
and educational opportunities.
So, there is a clear need for modernized transportation
infrastructure that is safer and more sustainable while better
ensuring that we treat other people the way we want to be
treated. Fortunately, our Committee has a roadmap that will
enable us to meet these needs and more.
Last Congress, as many will recall, our Committee
unanimously reported a bipartisan reauthorization bill that
outlined an historic investment in our Nation's surface
transportation programs. Unfortunately, the full Senate never
acted on it. But now, we have an opportunity to build on that
promise and actually enact a bill that transforms our
transportation sector into one that is more innovative, more
resilient, and safer, while creating good paying jobs, lots of
them.
Let me briefly touch on some of the key policy priorities
for our next reauthorization bill that will help make that
vision a reality. Auto manufacturers are preparing to greatly
expand their lines of electric and hydrogen fueled vehicles,
but too often, drivers lack access to the charging and fueling
stations that these vehicles require.
America needs to build corridors of charging stations and
hydrogen fueling stations across the country. We also have to
make it easier for people to walk safely, bike, or take public
transit, so driving isn't the only way to get where we need to
go.
We need to strengthen our infrastructure so that it can
withstand the devastating effects of extreme weather and
climate change, which we are witnessing with alarming
frequency. Last year alone, natural disasters fueled by climate
change cost us over $95 billion in economic damage. Smart
planning to make our infrastructure more resilient will save
American taxpayers dollars while helping us avoid rebuilding
the same infrastructure projects again and again after severe
weather events.
As we work with State and local partners, there must be
accountability to ensure that Federal funds are invested in
well designed projects that expand equity and lift up our
Nation as a whole.
Now, the most challenging part of any discussion on
transportation infrastructure: How are we going to pay for it?
When I was new in the Senate, the guy who sat behind me was
Ted Kennedy. I didn't know him very well, and one day, I
suggested maybe we have a cup of coffee. He actually invited me
to his hideaway for lunch, which was quite a thrill. I asked
him there, during lunch, I said, ``Why do all these Republicans
want you to be their lead cosponsor on their big bills? Why is
that? You are such a big, liberal Democrat from Massachusetts.
Why is that?''
I will never forget what he said. He said, ``I am always
willing to compromise on policy; never willing to compromise on
principle.'' That is what he said. Always willing to compromise
on policy; never willing to compromise on principle.
Well, let's talk a little bit about some of the principles
I hope we ought to be able to agree on in this regard. For one,
much of our transportation infrastructure is in sorry shape.
Unfortunately, a lot of it is getting worse, not better. This
is not something the Federal Government should do alone. This
is an all hands on deck moment.
The second principle that I think most of us can agree on
is that things worth having are worth paying for. We can't just
continue to put all of our improvements that are needed on our
country's credit card.
I would suggest that a third principle should be that those
of us who use our Nation's roads, highways, and bridges have a
responsibility to help pay for them. Now, with principles like
that, what I hope we will do is develop a bunch of policies
that are consistent with those principles.
A growing number of people believe that a national vehicle
miles traveled approach will eventually fund much of our
transportation infrastructure in the not too distant future.
Mary Barra announced that General Motors, as Senator
Stabenow knows--what is it, by 2035, they will not be building
any more vehicles, cars, trucks, or vans powered by gasoline or
diesel. That was a wake up call, wasn't it?
The reauthorization bill this Committee adopted unanimously
in the last Congress called for a national VMT pilot for all 50
States. It was a good idea then; it is an even better idea now.
If vehicle miles traveled turns out to be a big part of the
future of transportation funding, we are going to need a
bridge, or likely, several bridges, to get us to that future
for the next decade or so. For that, we are going to be looking
to the Finance Committee for help; some of us serve on that
Finance Committee, for help in funding the next 5 year
reauthorization, and the Senate Committees on Banking and
Commerce have major roles to play, too.
In closing, I am going to say last Congress, EPW led by
example, something that we learned in the Navy, didn't we,
Mark? We unanimously approved our bill to improve and expand
our surface transportation programs, and we did it 14 months
before the last 5 year surface transportation reauthorization
bill expired. That was one, I think, authored by Senator
Inhofe, if I am not mistaken.
It is imperative, however, that this year, our sister
committees join us now to begin the critical work that needs to
be done and to help get it across the finish line and signed
into law long before this fiscal year ends.
Senator Capito and I, along with our staffs, are already
getting to work. Last week, we invited all of our Senate
colleagues, not just on this Committee, but all Senate
colleagues, Democrat, Republican, Independent, to share with us
their States' policy priorities, transportation policy
priorities with us so we can begin drafting legislation not
this summer, but this spring. Our goal is to mark up our bill
and report it out of our Committee no later than Memorial Day.
I don't want to get our bill there alone without having
some company from the Banking Committee and also from the
Commerce Committee. They have to do their part as well, and
then Finance.
The conversation we are about to have today in this hearing
is critical to that effort. The stakes are high, and a lot of
people across the country are counting on us to do our jobs in
order to better ensure that they will have the kind of jobs
that will enable them to support their own families far into
the future.
Before we hear from our distinguished panel of witnesses,
we are going to have some introductions. Before we hear those
introductions, Senator Capito is going to be recognized, our
Ranking Member, for her opening remarks.
Let me just say what a joy it has been serving with you on
this new partnership, and we look forward to doing great work
for our States and for our country.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WEST VIRGINIA
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Thank you, and I share the sentiment, Chairman Carper. We
have a great thing going here, communication-wise. I thank your
leadership and your partnership for today's hearing to kick off
this process, which I think is important to every member, and I
think we all tune into what we are going to do on a surface
transportation bill.
I would also like to thank our witnesses, who are going to
be with us remotely today. We look forward to hearing your
perspectives on surface transportation policy and other issues
of infrastructure importance to your State.
Mr. Chairman, I enjoy our regular conversations on the bill
and other important matters before the Committee, and I enjoyed
your opening statement, particularly talking about, since I
serve on Commerce as well, I am in a good position to gig our
chairman there, and the other committees that need to be so
important.
I was really encouraged by the conversation that we had
last week, or I guess 2 weeks ago now, with President Biden,
Vice President Harris, and Secretary Buttigieg on the
importance of what we are talking about today. I think the
meeting signified a commitment by the Administration to see
that this bill becomes a reality, as this is one of my top
priorities as our Ranking Member.
It is also about more than just building our
infrastructure. This bill can facilitate a recovery from the
pandemic that has devastated our communities and wreaked havoc
on our communities and our economy. Transportation
infrastructure is the platform that can drive economic growth,
all American jobs, right there, right on the ground, now and in
the future, and improve the quality of life for everyone, on
the safety aspects which you so well addressed.
I am optimistic we can deliver that bill before the current
extension expires on September 30th, and I noted your
commitment to Memorial Day is a good marker.
Our Committee has a strong track record of developing these
bills in a bipartisan manner. Our former Chair can attest to
that. We passed an excellent bill out of Committee, 21 to
nothing, in 2019, that represented bipartisan consensus on
issues such as climate change and expediting project delivery.
We can come together, and once again, use this bipartisan
process to develop a bill that includes priorities from both
parties. I know such a process is what you want as well, Mr.
Chairman.
From my perspective, a surface transportation
reauthorization bill must, No. 1, provide long term investment
in our Nation's roads and bridges in a fiscally responsible
manner without partisan or lightning rod pay fors, of course,
that would be over in the Finance Committee, that could sink a
bill.
The last thing we want to do is have a bill getting out of
here that doesn't go anywhere. We experienced that last time;
we don't want to experience that again.
We want to give flexibility to our States, and I think our
panelists will give us a good idea of that, to address unique
transportation needs. We want to keep the Federal interest
focused on providing a connected network of roads and bridges
to assure that all communities and the economy can thrive.
We want to facilitate the efficient delivery of projects,
perennial issues, so that we can improve safety and resiliency
of our surface transportation system, and we want to drive
innovation. I think that is critical to help pave the way for
the system of the future.
As we will hear from our witnesses today, certainty of
funding, consistency of regulations, and flexibility in
tailoring investments to suit the diverse needs of State,
rural, and urban communities is essential. In West Virginia,
for instance, we need additional highway capacity and bridge
improvements to improve safety and increase our efficiencies.
Corridor H, which goes through the middle of our State, has
been one of my biggest West Virginia transportation priorities.
I have been working on this throughout my time in Congress. It
is the last piece of the Appalachian Development Highway System
needed to better connect West Virginia for interstate and
intrastate traffic.
Our job is to provide a policy and programmatic framework
that recognizes the different transportation needs across the
country while balancing important national goals.
We also need to efficiently deliver projects that improve
our roads and bridges. With an average of 7 years to complete
an environmental impact statement for a highway project, surely
everyone can agree that this process should be reviewed and
improved upon.
We know time is money. The longer the time, the more money
it costs, and the less likelihood that it actually gets
complete.
We also know to look at other issues that can impact the
delivery of projects and create a better process to move
forward from concept to completion. For example, removing
impediments to constructing reliable high speed broadband
across the country in concert with our road projects. We cannot
afford to delay the benefits to States and communities that
come from these projects.
We should be forward leaning in tackling the transportation
needs not just of today, but those needs of tomorrow. Driving
innovation will be critical to supporting the surface
transportation system of the future. It will also aid our
efforts to reinvest in our existing system. That includes
cutting edge technologies, like the Virgin Hyperloop, which
will be tested and certified in Tucker and Grant Counties in
West Virginia.
I am committed to working on these issues that are
important to my friends on the other side of the aisle, and I
know they are willing to do the same. There is a lot of common
ground from both of our sides. We share the same goal: Getting
a bill across the finish line that delivers on addressing the
transportation needs of our entire Nation.
I will add, I hesitate to do this, because we have got a
lot of good feeling going here, but to temper my optimism--
should I stop now?
Senator Carper. Your time has expired.
[Laughter.]
Senator Carper. No, go ahead.
Senator Capito. I temper my optimism with a word of
caution, particularly, when I read this morning the words from
the Budget chair in the Senate on the direction this bill may
go. The strong bipartisan support that exists for a surface
transportation reauthorization bill and other infrastructure
legislation should not extend to a multi-trillion dollar
package that is stocked full with other ideologically driven
one size fits all policies that ties the hands of our States
and our communities. I look forward to being a partner and
advancing infrastructure legislation in a bipartisan way.
Thank you very much, and I look forward to hearing the
testimony.
Thank you.
Senator Carper. Senator Capito, thank you very much for all
of your statement. All of it.
Before we turn to our witnesses to hear from them, we are
fortunate to have a panel of public officials who have all
wrestled with the challenges of transportation at the State and
local levels. I am privileged to know several of them, but not
all of them.
We are going to hear their testimony in a moment, but let's
just start with a few brief introductions. I am going to begin
by recognizing Senator Stabenow to introduce our first witness
from her State, her home State, the great State of Michigan.
Senator Stabenow, we are delighted that you are a member of
this Committee. Delighted.
Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you so much, Chairman Carper
and Ranking Member Capito. I have great confidence in both of
your leaderships, and I am looking forward to really important
work in a number of areas, particularly around surface
transportation reauthorization.
Thank you for bringing together this distinguished panel to
offer their collective insights and perspectives on how to
address our Nation's pressing transportation needs.
I first have to say that I want to thank Governor Whitmer
for her outstanding leadership in addressing the COVID
pandemic, as well as, I know, Governor Hogan. I can't imagine
more difficult decisions than the ones that you have had to
make, certainly in Michigan, to keep people safe and save
lives, so thank you. I know, again, Governor Hogan has had the
same challenges.
I am very pleased that Governor Whitmer could join us today
to speak about investing in infrastructure and what it means to
the State of Michigan and to the Midwest and to our country,
and frankly, our future. You have her bio in front on you, but
I would like to add a few additional comments.
Governor Whitmer was elected in 2018 in part because of her
promise to fix Michigan's aging infrastructure systems. Since
being elected Governor, she put forward bold proposals to
address the condition of Michigan's roads and bridges. She
launched the Rebuilding Michigan Program to rebuild the State
highways and bridges that are critical to our local economy and
carry the most traffic.
So I look forward today to hearing her thoughts and ideas
on how we are addressing climate change through infrastructure
that is creating good paying jobs and leading us to a more
sustainable future. I welcome Governor Gretchen Whitmer from
the great State of Michigan.
Senator Carper. Thank you, Senator Stabenow, and welcome,
Governor Whitmer. I know you are out there, and we welcome you
to our hearing today. We are honored to have you here.
I will now recognize my friend, Senator Ben Cardin, for
another special introduction of my neighboring State's
Governor, Governor Hogan.
Ben, please proceed.
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It really is a
pleasure to welcome Governor Larry Hogan to our Committee.
Let me just assure our guests that are coming to us
virtually that we are in a committee room that is complying
with the CDC guidelines. We are distanced apart. But Governor
Hogan, I am following your advice, and I am wearing the damn
mask.
[Laughter.]
Senator Cardin. For those of you who have seen the
commercial that he has used, it is been, I think, very
effective. I just really want to thank Governor Hogan and
Governor Whitmer for being very clear from the beginning about
the seriousness of COVID-19. The advice that you gave our
citizens clearly saved lives.
So first, thank you for the leadership that you have shown
during this pandemic. We all appreciate it. We are very much
trying to work in partnership.
Governor Hogan was first elected in 2014 as the Governor of
Maryland. As I think most of you know, he became the head of
the National Governors Association. In that capacity, he worked
with us in regard to the passage of the CARES Act, and in
regard to the passage of the December COVID Relief Package.
Thank you very much for your work in that regard.
We have Team Maryland. Our congressional delegation works
very closely with our Governor on the needs of our State. We
couldn't have, I think, a more important witness to talk about
the transportation needs.
Maryland set up many years ago a consolidated trust fund,
so that we can share the resources in any mode of
transportation and use it to be able to advance the
transportation needs of our State. It gives us much more
flexibility.
But I know Governor Hogan will share with us the tremendous
needs that we have in the State of Maryland, and we need a more
robust Federal partnership.
Yes, Senator Capito, I could talk about the Appalachia
Highway Program. We need to complete that, and we need
resources for that. I could talk about the Bay Bridge and the
eastern part of our State.
But when we look at our urban centers, we have desperate
equity needs. We need to advance our transit in the Baltimore
area. It is absolutely essential. We have the WMATA system in
the Washington area, the Purple Line. We have the concerns in
Southern Maryland as far as transit is concerned in regard to
rail. Very appreciative that we got an INFRA grant that allows
us to move forward with the Howard Street Tunnel, which is
critically important for freight traffic on the East Coast of
the United States.
But we have passenger rail needs for high speed rail in
order to deal with the gridlocks that we have in our community.
Yes, we have bridges that need to be replaced, we have roads
that need to be done, we have the I-270 issue.
So there are so many issues in our State that we need a
more robust Federal partnership so that we can deal with the
issues Chairman Carper has mentioned, and that is the equities
and the climate change and those issues, in a way that can be a
win-win situation that we modernize our transportation needs,
and we can also deal with our equity and environmental issues.
I am pleased that Governor Hogan is here to share his wisdom on
those issues with our Committee.
Senator Carper. Thank you, Senator Cardin. I just want to
say, Senator Cardin and I like baseball, and so does Senator
Stabenow and maybe some other folks on this panel. Every now
and then, Ben will take me with him to see an Orioles game. I
am a huge Detroit Tigers fan, and I have a baseball signed by
Al Kaline, Mr. Tiger, who grew up and played sandlot baseball
where?
Senator Cardin. Baltimore City.
Senator Carper. Baltimore. He won the American Batting
Championship at the age of 21, and he passed away last year. A
great human being.
Senator Cardin. Are you going to give me that one?
Senator Carper. I have several of these; I could probably
do that.
In any event, I brought my Detroit Tigers hat, and I would
just say, and my Al Kaline baseball, from where Al Kaline
started in the sandlots of Baltimore.
That is a little bit of a history lesson that involves all
of us, but one that I think is maybe worth mentioning at least
briefly here today.
I take my hat off to our panel today, and again, Governor
Hogan, our neighbor across the water, welcome to this hearing.
We have two other esteemed witnesses on our panel today,
Mayor Michael Hancock, who is joining us from Denver, Colorado,
the mayor of Denver since 2011, a decade.
Thank you, Mayor, for taking time out of your busy schedule
to join us.
We are also fortunate to have Victoria Sheehan, not
Shaheen, we have a Senator named Shaheen, but Commissioner of
New Hampshire.
I wonder if people get that confused, Ben. I bet they
probably do, up in New Hampshire.
Anyway, Commissioner, we are delighted you are here to
testify with us virtually. Currently the President of the
American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials. So I can tell my wife tonight that we actually heard
from the President, which you don't really hear from every day.
Our thanks to all of you for joining us. Thanks for your
preparation. Thanks for joining us virtually.
Governor Whitmer, we are going to start with you. You may
proceed when you are ready. Thanks so much.
Thank you all. Welcome, one and all.
Governor Whitmer.
STATEMENT OF HON. GRETCHEN WHITMER,
GOVERNOR, STATE OF MICHIGAN
Ms. Whitmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and go, Tigers.
I am glad to be with you and Ranking Member Capito and
members of the Committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify
before your first hearing of the 117th Congress.
I also want to thank Michigan's own Senator, Debbie
Stabenow, for the kind introduction.
I am honored to appear before you today to discuss how
investing in transportation and leading on climate change are
pathways to economic growth in Michigan and across the country.
I want to talk about what is possible if we work together
to address the big challenges head on. I am glad to be here
with my friend, Larry Hogan, who you quoted as saying, ``Wear
the damn mask.'' Well, before that, I was known for running on
and getting elected to ``fix the damn roads'' in Michigan. I
have to say that we need significant investments in our roads
and bridges.
Since taking office, my administration has been focused on
taking action to build and to rebuild a better Michigan. Our
focus on infrastructure has not waned during the COVID-19
pandemic. I will work with anyone who wants to build up our
roads and bridges, including our Federal partners. We welcome
it, because without significant investments in infrastructure,
my State and our Nation will struggle to remain competitive.
A total of 43 percent of Michigan's major roads are in poor
or mediocre condition, and approximately a thousand local
bridges are in poor or critical condition. Driving on
deteriorated roads and bridges costs Michiganders $4.67 billion
annually. That is $659 per motorist. Damaged infrastructure in
any area affects personal mobility, affects our safety, and it
slows our economic recovery. We have a big opportunity in front
of us.
At the start of my term, I proposed spending $2.5 billion
to fix Michigan's roads, but we could not reach a consensus in
Lansing. Doing nothing was not an option, so I implemented Plan
B, and that is a $3.5 billion bonding program called Rebuilding
Michigan to restore our State trunklines. This year, I proposed
$300 million in my budget to begin tackling our backlog of
closed or critical condition bridges.
The pandemic has had a devastating impact on our
transportation revenues, and we desperately need Federal
assistance. Doing nothing shouldn't be an option at the Federal
level, either, and I am heartened by the opening comments of
today's hearing. We need long term, sustainable, Federal
sources for our infrastructure.
I hope the Committee considers the stakes of the moment
that we are in as it drafts the transportation reauthorization
bill this year. But we also need a plan that goes beyond just
roads. We need a national vision when it comes to
transportation, much like the interstate highway system offered
65 years ago. To build a more equitable economy and tackle
climate change, we need your help, your leadership.
For too long, there is been a misconception that preparing
for the future comes at the expense of economic growth and good
paying jobs today, but it is not a binary choice. It is not an
either-or; it is really a both-and. The health of our economy
is inextricably linked to the health of our people and our
planet.
Whether it is a global pandemic or natural disasters caused
by climate change, we have seen first hand how failing to
invest in environmental protection and public health can
devastate our country. In the industrial States like Michigan,
we have lost jobs to automation and modernization.
In the past, big changes created winners and losers, and
the government didn't get involved until after the fact. This
time, we have got to put workers and communities first, and
ensure that people who are threatened by change are able to
benefit from it.
Electrification will create jobs, and Michigan is leading
in this space. Since I was sworn in in 2019, we have announced
over 11,400 new auto jobs, and more on the way. We have
committed to being carbon neutral by 2050, a goal that is
aggressive and means that we are going to have to work together
to achieve it. We have incredible assets, like the American
Center for Mobility, and a 40 mile driverless lane from Detroit
to Ann Arbor that Senator Stabenow was a part of announcing.
There are great jobs that can be created by new mobility
technologies as well, but it is going to require a new set of
skills, and that is something where I think we can partner as
well.
Michigan has earned several names or expressions over the
years. We are the State that put the world on wheels, the
birthplace of Motown, the arsenal of democracy during World War
II. In the next century, Michigan is going to be the arsenal of
ideas and innovation.
At the national level, we have to invest in resilient
infrastructure, emerging industries, and transportation. We
need policies that will uplift communities that are
disproportionately impacted by the transition, address
environmental justice, and tackle climate change.
We can't shrink away from the crises that we face. We have
to go big and be bold, so let's get to work.
I thank you so much for having me today, and I am really
looking forward to your questions, and of course, hearing from
my fellow witnesses. Glad to be with you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Whitmer follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Governor Whitmer, thanks for your
testimony.
Senator Barrasso, who used to sit, actually, used to sit
right here as the Chairman until very, very recently; he and I
love music. Every now and then, we have quips about music. I am
trying to think of a Motown song that might be appropriate for
us as we get ready to get started. I don't know it was the
Temptations or the Four Tops, but Get Your Motor Runnin', Head
Out on the Highway, Get Ready, Here We Come, one of those two
probably works. So, get ready, here we come.
Thank you, Governor, and thank you also for sending us Gary
Peters and Debbie Stabenow, two of our best.
Again, Governor Hogan, thanks for joining us this morning.
You may proceed with your testimony. Thanks, Governor.
STATEMENT OF HON. LAWRENCE J. HOGAN, JR.,
GOVERNOR, STATE OF MARYLAND
Mr. Hogan. Well, good morning, Chairman Carper, Ranking
Member Capito, my Team Maryland member, Senator Cardin, thank
you, and members of the Committee. Thanks for having me.
It is also really good to be with my colleague and friend,
Governor Whitmer, this morning.
As chairman of the National Governors Association, pre-
COVID, I launched a national infrastructure initiative, which
was focused on repairing and modernizing America's
infrastructure in ways that will drive long term economic
growth while addressing short term recovery needs. It would
encourage innovation and efficient approaches to delivering
projects that build the transportation networks of the future.
For this national initiative, we brought together thought
leaders from all levels of government, from business and labor
and academia to get their input. We held a series of
stakeholder summits across the country and around the world to
tackle an issue that is so fundamental to our economy, our
environment, and our way of life.
We released a final report with a series of
recommendations, including a number related to the
reauthorization of a long term Federal surface transportation
bill. The National Governors Association recommends that States
should be granted maximum flexibility to relieve congestion and
to invest in adaptable and innovative solutions with more
reliability and certainty of formula funding.
To reduce program burdens and improve project delivery, we
recommend that the One Federal Decision policy should be
codified for highway projects, to establish a 2 year goal for
completion of environmental reviews and a 90 day timeline for
related project authorizations.
We recommend that Congress make investments in resiliency
and security to allow us to harness the full potential of
financing and leveraging private sector investment, which has
been critical to our success here in the State of Maryland,
where we have taken a balanced approach, an all inclusive
approach to infrastructure.
We are moving forward on nearly all of the highest priority
transportation projects in every jurisdiction all across our
State, and investing far more in roads and transit than any
other administration in Maryland history.
We have over 800 projects, totaling $9 billion, in roads,
bridges, and tunnels currently under construction. We have
improved more than 85 percent of our entire State highway
system, invested $150 million in innovative traffic congestion
solutions, smart technology, and cutting edge smart
signalization networks.
We advanced the Purple Line from Prince George's County to
Montgomery County in the Washington Capital region, which is a
partnership between the Federal, State, and local governments
and the private sector. It is the largest P3 transit project
under construction in North America.
Just last week, we announced the procurement of a developer
for the largest P3 highway project in the world to relieve
traffic congestion on I-270 and I-495, the Capital Beltway, and
to finally build a new American Legion Bridge across the
Potomac River. My fellow Governors all across America have
similar success stories to share.
In States throughout the Nation, they are upgrading roads,
bridges, and mass transit; they are improving airports and
ports, fixing aging water systems, and expanding rural and
urban broadband. Investing in infrastructure is more important
than ever as we work to bring the pandemic to an end and to get
more people back to work and to build a sustainable economic
recovery.
As I said recently to President Biden when I was with him
in the Oval Office, the Governors urge that any major
infrastructure effort be bipartisan. Democrats and Republicans,
business and labor leaders, all of us believe that
infrastructure should be a top national priority.
Governors on both sides of the aisle have shown that there
are more than enough good, common sense ideas where we can find
bipartisan support.
We stand ready to work with you in this effort. Together we
can rebuild America's infrastructure so that it will once again
serve as an example for the rest of the world. We hope that
this hearing will serve as a springboard for real progress.
I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the
Committee, for giving me the opportunity to be here with you
today.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hogan follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Governor Hogan, thanks so much. Thank you
for your leadership in the National Governors Association. As a
former Governor, former NGA Chair myself, we value very much
the NGA and look forward to partnering with the NGA. You could
probably play a key role in that, and we look forward to that.
Mr. Hogan. Thank you, Chairman.
Senator Carper. You bet.
Next, we are going to stay with the baseball theme, on the
on deck circle, is Mayor Hancock from Denver. It is one of the
positions I always thought would be fun to have, but maybe yes,
maybe no. We will see.
Mayor Hancock, welcome today, and you are recognized.
Please proceed.
STATEMENT OF HON. MICHAEL B. HANCOCK,
MAYOR, CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER, COLORADO
Mr. Hancock. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, to the Ranking
Member, and Committee members. It is an honor to be here with
you.
First, let me thank you as well for your leadership and for
acting on COVID-19 relief in the last Congress. I speak on
behalf of all local governments. We thank you for your
tremendous leadership and support. I am honored to be here with
Governors Whitmer and Hogan and with Secretary Sheehan.
Now as we address the new Congress, the first thing I want
to share is that we hope and encourage you to act on the
American Rescue Plan to deliver much needed fiscal relief to
cities and counties across this country. We have been the first
responders to this pandemic, our first line of defense for the
majority of our citizens in this great country. But we need
your continued help and support, and we thank you for what you
have done in the past, and we are encouraged by what we hope
you will do in the future.
Mr. Chairman, let me recognize your personal efforts on our
behalf, as well. It is not been lost on us that you have
advocated for direct funding to cities and counties throughout
this country, and we are greatly appreciative of your efforts.
As a former Governor, you know all about State and local
finance. We thank you for talking to your colleagues about the
challenges we face.
Now, as we look to build back better, it is about reviving
our economy at every level and doing it in ways that confront
the key challenges before us.
Mr. Chairman, you mentioned just recently in this hearing
about what Motown song might be appropriate for this moment. It
got me to thinking as a music fan myself, that the song Ain't
No Mountain High Enough by Marvin Gaye and Tammi Terrell might
be appropriate for this theme of building back better. Local
governments have recognized there ain't no mountain too high
for us, for our residents, to make sure that their quality of
life is sustained, and that we provide safe passage on our
roadways.
Investing in transportation and other infrastructure we
recognize is the cornerstone of that effort. Let me speak to
the surface transportation specifically, because FAST Act
reauthorization is before you this year.
The structure of the FAST Act is sound. It is built on the
foundation of the ISTEA that this Committee set 30 years ago,
and the law can be adapted to confront the challenges we are
discussing today: Climate, equity, economic recovery, and
innovation. It can advance recovery in local areas where people
and small businesses have been most harmed by this pandemic.
My written testimony addresses these challenges in more
detail, but I want to share this message with you all today. We
ask you to rely on your local leaders. Invest in us, and again,
there has been no mountain too high for us as we work to
address the challenges facing our citizens. We ask you to lean
on us, to challenge us, to lead us out of this pandemic and
help recover our economy.
My recommendation is simply this, and I recognize that this
is a pebble in the pond that is going to send a ripple effect
and might be contrary to what some of the previous testimony
has been, but we believe that one, you need to use the Surface
Transportation Block Grant to accomplish this. Two, we ask you
to direct all these flexible resources to local areas, to metro
areas like Denver, and to smaller areas, working through the
States. This expanding commitment means using local leaders to
address key priorities in areas where most people live and
work, and by investing more in metropolitan areas, cities, and
counties, where most of our economic output is generated.
Today, I offer this division of labor: Keep States focused
on intercity and interstate corridors with resources from the
National Highway Performance Program; and two, use the Surface
Transportation Block Grant to local areas to lift the economy
for the local level up and accelerate progress on the key
priorities before us.
Increasing STBG funds to local areas, we believe, is the
best way to deal with conditions on the ground during a
pandemic, and after. It is also the best way to move the needle
on key priorities before us and put us on the track for
transitioning from rescue to recovery. It is efficient; it
means we can address equity and climate much more prudently on
the local level.
Mr. Chairman, this is a seminal moment for Federal
transportation policy and for broad infrastructure policy.
Mayors will be prepared to support this Committee as we learn
more about the direction you take on a broader infrastructure
recovery package. Mayors and other local leaders are ready,
willing, and more than capable of delivering for the future.
Thank you for this opportunity to join you today, and we
look forward to the testimony and your Q and A session.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hancock follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Mayor Hancock, Senator Stabenow and I heard
it through the grapevine that you were a big Marvin Gaye fan. I
guess you are.
Mayors are going to play a big role in this legislation as
we go forward, and we welcome your participation, but also
mayors across the country, just as we welcome the involvement
of our Governors.
Next, the fourth witness today on our panel is Victoria
Sheehan.
Commissioner Sheehan, thank you for joining us, and please
proceed with your statement.
STATEMENT OF HON. VICTORIA SHEEHAN, COMMISSIONER, NEW HAMPSHIRE
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION; PRESIDENT, AMERICAN ASSOCIATION
OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION OFFICIALS
Ms. Sheehan. Good morning, Chairman Carper, Ranking Member
Capito, and members of the Committee. Thank you for this
opportunity to appear today and speak to the critical need for
timely reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation
legislation.
My name is Victoria Sheehan, and I serve as the
Commissioner of the New Hampshire Department of Transportation,
and as President of the American Association of State Highway
and Transportation Officials, or AASHTO. Today, it is my honor
to testify on behalf of the Granite State and AASHTO, which
represents the State Departments of Transportation in all 50
States, Washington DC, and Puerto Rico.
First, allow me to express on behalf of all the State DOTs
our gratitude for your leadership on the $10 billion in COVID-
19 relief provided last December. We also thank you for your
firm commitment to getting the Federal surface transportation
bill done on time, as well as possibly providing infrastructure
funding as part of a future economic stimulus and recovery
package.
This morning, I would like to begin by discussing why
timely reauthorization of the Federal surface transportation
programs is so important. New Hampshire, as a small, rural
State, relies heavily on Federal funds to make infrastructure
improvements. Any delay, or even worse, a series of short term
extensions, would wreak havoc across the country and would
impact not just State DOTs, but our partners, which are local
governments and the construction industry.
Further, a stable Federal surface transportation program
has become even more crucial as States like my own continue to
deal with the loss of State revenue with the impacts of the
pandemic.
Here in New Hampshire, we use Federal funds to complete
projects across the State, projects such as the reconstruction
of Route 16 in rural communities like Cambridge, Gorham, and
Errol, and to make safety improvements like the intersection of
Routes 16 and 41 in Ossipee, New Hampshire.
We also invest in large scale projects in more urban areas
using the Federal program and the funding tools it provides to
ensure that major projects are not advanced at the expense of
smaller projects in less populated regions of the State. As an
example, to complete the reconstruction of Interstate 93 from
Salem to Manchester, New Hampshire secured a TIFIA loan. This
loan has allowed the Granite State to pledge State revenues to
rural paving and bridgework, and stretch the value of the State
gas tax increase, that otherwise would have funded only this
one, large scale project.
Now, I would like to talk about how transportation
investment can serve as a key economic stimulus to drive a
recovery nationwide. A well performing transportation network
allows American families to benefit both as consumers for lower
priced goods and as workers by gaining better access to
employment. It also allows businesses to manage inventories and
move goods more affordably while ensuring employees can
reliably get to and from work.
As Congress considers providing additional financial
support to stimulate the economy and to recover from the
effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, AASHTO asks you to provide
funding through existing highway and transit formulas, that
they provide funding in the quickest, most efficient manner,
understood by our State DOTs, and provide funding to every
State and locality. It is also important that Congress not
attach unrealistic timelines related to the obligation of
economic recovery funding, nor should such funding come with
additional Federal requirements that delay obligation and
expenditure of funds.
Last, as you consider surface reauthorization policies,
know that AASHTO strongly supported the bipartisan process this
Committee used in the last Congress to develop the America's
Surface Transportation Infrastructure Act. Based on that
foundation of partnership, we believe the next bill's core
policy principles should look at the following: First and
foremost, like I said earlier, timely reauthorization of long
term build. A long term sustainable revenue solution to the
Highway Trust Fund, increased and prioritized formula based
funding to States, increased flexibility, reduced program
burdens, and improved project delivery and support to ensure
State DOTs are able to harness innovation and technology.
Meanwhile, our State DOTs will continue addressing ongoing
and emerging policy issues, such as performance and asset
management, infrastructure resiliency, equity, carbon
reduction, as well as broadband and other technology deployment
in our highway right of way.
To conclude, this week hundreds of State DOT leaders from
all corners are gathering virtually at AASHTO's 2021 Washington
briefing. While we won't be able to visit with you in person as
we normally do, AASHTO and the State DOTs will continue
advocating for strong Federal-State partnership to address our
surface transportation investment needs.
Thank you again for the honor of being here today and the
opportunity to testify. I am happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Sheehan follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Commissioner Sheehan, thank you very much
for your testimony, and to all of our witnesses here today. It
is hard to think of a better panel to begin consideration of
our surface transportation bill than this panel.
I want to start off, I am going to just run through quickly
the names of those who have shown up in person or virtually, In
this order, myself, followed by Senator Capito, Senator Cardin,
Senator Inhofe, Senator Sanders, Senator Cramer, Senator
Whitehouse, Senator Lummis, Senator Stabenow, Senator Kelly,
and Senator Padilla. All right, that is about nine people.
Let me just start off with a quick question for Governor
Hogan.
Governor Hogan, as you know, the Northeast Corridor runs
from down by rail, down and around Washington, DC, all the way
up to Boston. There is a stretch between Aberdeen, Maryland,
and Newark, Delaware, where it goes from three rails to two.
There has been talk for a long time about adding a third rail
between Aberdeen and Newark, Delaware, that is probably about 6
or 7 miles.
Is this a project that you have ever heard discussed in
Maryland? Is this something that people of Maryland might be
willing to collaborate with Delaware and the USDOT on?
Mr. Hogan. Senator, I know that our Department of
Transportation has had discussions, and we certainly look
forward to continuing to talk with you about that possibility.
I think those bottlenecks where, we have gone through this in
Maryland, we are moving forward on the Howard Street Tunnel,
where we moved from where we could only do single stack trains
and it was a real bottleneck, I think, in a similar way. If you
have multiple lanes going up multiple tracks going into a fewer
number of tracks, it causes congestion. We think it is probably
something that we would love to work with you on.
Senator Carper. All right. Thanks so much.
Question, if I could, for Governor Whitmer.
Governor, reducing transportation emissions is a top
priority for reauthorization. The good news is that the world
is moving toward zero emission vehicles. A decade ago, the
number of electric vehicles on the roads in the United States
could be counted in the hundreds. Today, we are approaching 2
million, and it seems that a week doesn't go by that automakers
don't announce an increase in ambition.
I mentioned General Motors' announcement that come, what,
2035, they will not be building any more gasoline or diesel
powered vehicles, but the Ford Motor Company apparently has
recently announced that all of the cars that they sell in
Europe will be electric by, I think, by 2030.
Yet the market forecasts predict that the EV share of new
car sales in the U.S. will lag in comparison with Europe and
China. I am concerned that if the U.S. lags on EV policy,
investments in manufacturing will flow to other parts of the
world.
My question, Governor Whitmer, is how do we ensure that
U.S. consumers are purchasing zero emission vehicles, and what
are the perils of ceding our leadership here to other nations?
Ms. Whitmer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the
question, and at the risk of taking this Motown question too
far, I think Dancing in the Streets by Martha Reeves and the
Vandellas might be the right song for this undertaking,
hopefully. That means we are successful in it.
I think you are asking a very important, thoughtful
question. As we are trying to transition our economy and our
consumption, address climate change, and our work force needs
as well, and do it equitably, this is an important part of the
conversation.
In Michigan, our economy is inextricably linked to the auto
industry. The future of our mobility and our decarbonization
goals all need to be woven together, so that we can tackle
emissions.
We have to invest in and push for bold electric vehicle
policy as a pathway to economic opportunity for our country and
a way to address climate change. These are linked; you can't
pull them apart. It is not if-or; it is both-and.
We are heavily focused on building a statewide connected
charging network in Michigan. We are working to help
communities and businesses transition their fleets and ensuring
that we have got tools to attract and retain electric vehicle
employers and to reskill our work force. All of these are
important pieces of it.
I would like to highlight just one quick thing. My State's
Office of Future Mobility and Electrification, one of our
efforts is called Flip Your Fleet. It is a $3 million program
aimed toward small businesses and school districts that we
proposed in the Mobility Futures Initiative in my fiscal year
2022 budget.
So, thinking creatively about how do we incentivize this
transition, how do we upscale our work force so that we are
prepared? How do we build up the infrastructure across the
State so that when you buy your EV that is American made, that
you are able to utilize it and have confidence in that?
So these are all important pieces to incentivizing this
investment in this American transition that I think we are
going to need to partner at the Federal level, at the State
level, at the local level, as the Mayor was speaking to. I
think these are all aspects of being successful doing that.
Senator Carper. Governor, it is encouraging to hear you
tell us of the leading role that the State of Michigan is
playing toward beginning to create this corridor of charging
stations and fueling stations.
Senator Kelly is a retired Navy captain, a pilot,
astronaut, and he knows we have a saying in the Navy, all hands
on deck. When it comes to creating these corridors of charging
stations and fueling stations, it really is all hands on deck.
It is just not all on the Federal Government; it is not all on
the State and local governments; it is not all on State
Departments of Transportation. It is not all on the convenience
stores of the world, the Wawas, it is a burden that we all
carry, but it is an opportunity that we all share.
All right, thanks. Thank you, Governor, and next, we will
turn to my colleague.
Senator Capito. Thank you all.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My first question is to Governor Hogan, our neighbor to the
north of West Virginia. Your western part of Maryland is, we
often say, is just West Virginia again, or maybe you would say
maybe our part of our State is Western Maryland, but we are
very much tied to one another. I know that is where you have
your Appalachian Development Highway System that Senator Cardin
talked about. We have been working together.
My question, really, is aimed at, because you have talked
about the congestion in Baltimore. You have massive
transportation challenges in your more populated area, but then
as you move to Western Maryland, you have the rural areas. What
do you see in terms of being able to meet the transportation,
that we need to put in this bill to make sure that you, as the
Governor, have the ability to meet the transportation needs of
both your rural and urban areas?
I do want to thank you for mentioning the One Federal
Decision. We thought that was a very good part of the last bill
that we passed, and we hope to incorporate it into this one.
So Governor Hogan, could you talk about the rural-urban
flexibilities that you may need?
Mr. Hogan. Sure. Thank you very much, Senator. It is great
to have you as a neighbor.
I think you are absolutely right. I think the flexibility
is something that I think we agree on, that the States need to
have that ability to be flexible.
But it is also really important that we balance, that we
address issues in both our rural and our urban and suburban
communities. That is what I mentioned earlier, what we have
tried to do in a very balanced plan by moving forward on every
priority project in every one of our jurisdictions, from
Western Maryland to the Eastern Shore.
We have done some really big projects in the urban areas,
but some really important projects in all of our rural areas,
as well.
I think it is critical that we come up with a certainty of
a funding formula that gives us flexibility on surface
transportation dollars, rather than some prescriptive regs
regarding exactly how we have to use. I think new discretionary
grant programs that could be awarded through other entities.
But we look forward to working with you. There is no
question we have to find a balance, and going back to my
comments earlier about getting a bipartisan bill, I think if we
want to get everybody on board, we have got to address the
transportation and infrastructure needs of all the States and
all the communities across the country.
Senator Capito. Let me just, as a point of clarification
here, in terms of the formula funding that is built into all of
these bills that, as we have moved along the 5 or 6 year
increments, we have, from time to time, earmarked certain parts
of that formula for certain, specific types of projects, like
transportation enhancement projects, and others.
Is basically what you are saying, don't take away from the
formula money where you have the greatest flexibility as the
Governor to create new discretionary programs that might take
from your ability to be able to make those decisions at the
State, local, and municipal level?
Mr. Hogan. That is exactly right, Senator. We agree with
that, and it is hard with the discretionary funding, it is hard
to make long term planning decisions. Transportation projects
happen over a long number of years, and for us, to really plan
for all the improvements we want to make, to have some type of
certainty is better, having flexibility to do what we want. But
a reliability and a certainty of the funding formula is
something that the Governors would prefer.
Senator Capito. Thank you.
Commissioner Sheehan, you mentioned in your statement about
the failure to act. If we fail to act, what consequences, or if
we do another short term, could you expound on that a little
bit on our failure to get to a lengthy bill, a very robust,
lengthy bill, as opposed to kicking the can down the road for
another year? What impact does that have on you as a State
commissioner, and all States?
Ms. Sheehan. Thank you for that question, Senator. As
transportation professionals, we work closely with communities
to understand what their transportation needs are, and then we
set forth and develop either 5 year or 10 year transportation
plans.
You make some assumptions around what Federal funding will
be available. In the case of New Hampshire, for our 10 year
plan, we assumed level Federal funding into the future. That is
so that we can prepare the projects and have them ready to
access dollars when you make them available.
Any interaction in the Federal program means that we lose
an entire construction season potentially, if we are dealing
with short term extensions and having to really meter the
projects that we advertise and move into construction.
It is very concerning for the State DOT that directly
impacts State and local governments, as well as all of the
contractors and vendors that we do business with. They are
staffing up and preparing to bid on all of the work that they
see us advancing through our advertising programs. When we
don't have the financial resources, it is devastating to those
sectors of our economy as well.
Senator Capito. All right, thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Carper. Thank you, Senator Capito.
Senator Cardin.
Senator Cardin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me thank all
of our witnesses for their presentation.
I want to follow up on Senator Capito's point dealing with
the topic of our hearing, building back better, investing in
transportation, fostering economic growth.
So, if I could, Governor Hogan, start first about your
thoughts about how we can tailor this transportation program to
deal with challenges in our urban center.
I specifically mentioned Baltimore City. I am aware of one
major transportation request we have in for Baltimore City in
regard to the I-95 exit for Port Covington. But it seems to me
that, in many respects, it is more challenging to use public-
private partnerships in urban centers. For a city like
Baltimore that really doesn't have a rapid rail transit system
and has two lines, but not a system, transit development has
become more challenging.
So, as we look at reauthorizing a transportation program,
do you have thoughts as to how we can make it more attractive
for transportation to assist economic growth in cities like
Baltimore?
Mr. Hogan. Thank you, Senator. Yes, I do think that we have
to focus on looking at every mode of transportation. I am a big
believer in a balanced transportation system. We have invested
$14 billion in transit in both the Baltimore and Washington
region, and we re-did the entire bus system in Baltimore,
hundreds of millions of dollars. We run the transportation
system for Baltimore City.
There is no question that, I mentioned earlier that we did
a P3 on the Purple Line and the Washington suburbs. You could
do the same thing in Baltimore. But the previous plan was just
one line that didn't really provide any kind of a system. But
you have to make it attractive to the private sector. We would
have to have the flexibility of funding.
But we have invested money to save the Washington Metro
System, to build the Purple Line, and to re-do the transit
system in Baltimore. But there is no question that as we try to
come out of this pandemic, and we head into economic recovery,
particularly in some of our urban areas, investment in
infrastructure can help us create more jobs.
Just on the road project in Metropolitan Washington, on the
Capital Beltway and fixing the bridge, that is going to provide
11,000 jobs for every billion dollars invested in that project,
and it is going to be about a $10 billion project.
So there is no question that this is going to be a big part
of our economic recovery, and it is why we have got a number of
labor groups that are just as excited as some of the business
entities and the State and local governments.
Senator Cardin. There is no question we have an aggressive
program for the Washington area dealing with both transit and
roads. I find Baltimore has challenges that have not yet been
met. So I would just welcome your thoughts as we go through the
process as to what incentives we can put into a transportation
reauthorization that makes it easier for urban centers
themselves, not necessarily suburban areas, but the centers
themselves to be able to attract economic growth.
Mayor Hancock, I would like to ask you a question,
following up on Senator Capito. I am the author of the
Transportation Alternative Program. It gives flexibility on the
use of transportation funds for local government units, so that
they can deal with their needs and have some ability to deal
with paths, bike paths, bike safety, tourism type
transportation needs, et cetera.
Can you just tell me, how important is it for a mayor of a
major city to have some flexibility on the use of
transportation money coming from the Federal Government and not
have to solely rely upon the allocation and partnership with
the State?
Mr. Hancock. Senator, your questioning is so on target with
what most mayors across this country are dealing with and are
asking for with regard to our plan, from the U.S. Conference of
Mayors to the U.S. Congress and to the Biden administration.
Local governments have the ability to be much more nimble
with their ability to address the challenges facing their
residents. Here is the reality: 80 percent of all the roads
that we as citizens travel on, are sitting in front of our
homes. They are sitting in front of our small businesses. It is
the road that we use to get to work every day.
Yet, we are only seeing a small portion of the resources
that are coming to our States to, particularly, our metro-urban
centers. You mentioned Baltimore. Denver is not much different,
as well as the other large, metropolitan areas in the State of
Colorado, namely down south in Colorado Springs and here in the
metro Denver area.
We could take those resources and create the multi-modal
role that we feel we need to do and address the issues around
equity and again, climate change, that we put forth as
priorities.
If we have greater flexibility and more resources directed
to city governments, I think you will see us move much more
efficiently to address the overwhelming infrastructure
challenges that face, again, 80 percent of the roads that our
people are traveling on every day.
Let me just mention this. Post-pandemic is going to mean
that we are going to have a different work culture in this
country. We believe that most people are going to have a
rotational basis of working remotely and then in person. You
are going to see small businesses who have been
disproportionately harmed working to try to come back and
recover as quickly as possible.
I think the faster, more efficient way for us to address
the roads will help everybody get to a better state of recovery
in the next economy, and that is going to be critically
important. We won't have time, as the Ranking Member talked
about, bogging down municipalities in bureaucracy and having
this intermediary of the State, again, playing a role.
Although the State, and I am going to say, the States have
been great partners. But we can move much more efficiently and
be more nimble and accountable in moving forward with these
road improvements that we have to have, be more multi-modal,
and again, addressing the issues of climate, equity, and
improvement on a much more fast track basis.
Senator Cardin. Thank you very much.
Senator Carper. Thank you, Mayor, and thank you, Senator
Cardin.
Now, another former mayor, and a mayor of Tulsa, if I am
not mistaken, who has led this Committee, led the Armed
Services Committee, and knows a thing or two, having authored
major legislation for years on transportation.
Senator Inhofe. It is been a joy working with a lot of the
people who have--Ben is leaving right now, and the rest of us
here. This is what we are supposed to be doing, the two most
important things are defending America and infrastructure. At
least, that is what I have always believed.
Real quickly, I have a couple of UCs I want to propose at
this time. One would be, I wrote an op-ed piece in the
Washington Times this morning having to do with the bipartisan
necessity that we are going to be dealing with right now to
have a successful bill, and I ask unanimous consent that it be
made a part of the record.
Senator Carper. Without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Inhofe. I have a second one, it is a letter
submitted by the National Association of Truck Stop Operators
stressing the urgency for Senators to protect the ban on
commercializing interstate rest areas. It is kind of the old
fashioned idea that the private sector does things better than
the public sector does. I would ask unanimous consent.
Senator Carper. Without objection.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Inhofe. All right. The second thing, we have done
some really good work on this Committee. In the last Congress,
we tackled something that had not been successfully addressed
before, and that was on streamlining, not talking about it, but
actually streamlining it.
We had a Committee report, a bipartisan highway bill with
the needed streamlining provisions, including codifying the One
Federal Decision process.
Governor Hogan, you come from a perspective of not just
your own personal experience, but also chairing the National
Governors Association.
People are talking about it now, some people who are not on
this Committee, but individuals, saying that we have already
done the streamlining, we did that last year, and we don't need
to do any more.
So I would like to ask you, how do you respond to that, and
how do project delivery delays affect the investments that are
made by the States and the Federal Government?
Governor Hogan.
Mr. Hogan. Thank you very much, Senator. First of all, let
me again agree with you on the importance for reaching a
bipartisan solution to this. If we can't reach a bipartisan
solution on something like infrastructure that everybody agrees
is a priority, then it is going to be difficult to do that on
anything else.
But you are right. Enhancing efficiency and eliminating red
tape, making the process go smoother, cutting the timeframes
down will be very important to continue to make progress on.
There was some progress made, but it is still much too
long, much too confusing of a process that adds cost. It adds
timeframes. Time is money. We don't get these projects moving
forward, we are not solving the infrastructure needs, the
transportation problems.
It is also costing taxpayers a lot more money because of
the delays, and when we are dealing with private sector
investment, which we are doing a lot of, taking some of the
risk out of the process by having some certainty about how long
it is going to happen, I think is important.
I mentioned earlier about how the One Federal Decision
policy should be codified. We should establish a 2 year goal
for completion of environmental projects and a 90 day timeline
for related project authorizations. At the beginning of the
discussion, somebody was talking about the 7 year timeframe
that it takes to go through the environmental process.
We all want to make sure that we very carefully ensure the
safety of our environment, and we go through, and not skip any
steps. But we have to speed up, do things simultaneously,
concurrently, and speed the process somehow. It is going to
mean a lot to doing more projects, putting more people to work,
and making improvements to all these different things.
Senator Inhofe. I appreciate that very much. I think it is
significant, too, that we keep in mind, well, first of all, I
have never seen a 5 year program that can't be done in 1 year,
and we demonstrated that real clearly, I think, in the last two
bills that we had, and we are on the right road there.
Also, you brought up this idea of prioritizing. I think
that we have done a really good job in Oklahoma. We were
prioritizing prior to the last two bills that we had, Oklahoma
had been, a lot of people don't know that they rank us in terms
of the conditions of our bridges, and we were No. 49 in the
country on the condition of our bridges. As a result of the
efforts that we did, we now are No. 9. We have gone all the way
from 49 to No. 9 in the condition of our bridges. We have some
1,600 bridges in the State of Oklahoma.
So I think that the important thing here, and I would ask
you to respond to this also, both Governors, the significance
of having the States be the movers of the priorities. A lot of
times, people would rather the Federal Government do that, so
States should determine the priority of surface transportation
within their boundaries. What do you think?
Mr. Hogan. I agree with you. I agree with you, Senator, and
we even do that at the State level. We get input from each of
the local governments on what their priorities are, and then as
a State, we try to take those priority considerations in as we
are putting together our State transportation plan.
But it is the same way. Senator Cardin can tell you, when
we meet with our Federal delegation, we lay out, these are the
priorities of our State, and we are the ones on the ground that
can make those decisions, get more input. Obviously, we want to
work together with our Federal partners, but the States can
help prioritize. There is no question about that. There is a
lot of need, and we can't do everything at the same time. We
want to make sure that we all agree on the priorities.
Senator Inhofe. My time has expired, but I will ask, for
the record, that you send something to us, Ms. Sheehan, about
your work force development thing. We have been very active on
this, not just in roads and highways. We have provisions in the
FAA bill. If you could, for the record, send us something as to
what we could do, Congress, to help in that area of work force
development. OK?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Thank you, Senator Inhofe.
Another former mayor, not only is Senator Sanders is a
former mayor, but he was mayor of Burlington, he was a
Congressman, and now a Senator. He ran for President a couple
times, and he is in the on deck circle.
He is joining us by Webex today.
Senator Sanders, you are recognized, if you are able to
hear us.
Senator Sanders. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman, and thanks
to all of our panelists who are with us.
I don't know if I have anything profound to offer that
hasn't been said already. What I can tell you is that in a
rural State like Vermont, we are struggling big time with
crumbling roads and bridges. We waste a lot of money just
trying to rebuild rather than maintain our roads, which is just
throwing good money after bad.
And as everybody has said, we have the potential now as we
rebuild our roads and our bridges, our water systems, our
wastewater plants, our public transportation. We are behind
many other countries around the world in terms of rail, and we
are also focusing on climate change, the need to transform our
energy system, which means, among other things, a whole lot of
charging stations throughout rural America. As we do all of
those things, we can create millions of good paying jobs, make
our economy far more efficient, save lives, have safer
transportation.
Mr. Chairman, all that I wanted to say is count me in. This
is a problem impacting urban America, but it is also a problem
impacting rural America.
And I do say this in a very divided political climate in
this country. I think we can come together, at least on this
issue. Whether you are a Republican Governor or a Democratic
Governor, you have problems with your infrastructure. So let's
go forward together, create the jobs, rebuild our
infrastructure, and do the right thing for the American people.
Senator Carper. Senator Sanders, thank you very, very much
for that message, and for joining us today.
Next, Senator Cramer, you are up.
I have to return a phone call; I will be right back.
In the meantime, Senator Capito, you are in charge.
Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Senator
Capito. Thank both of you for your leadership on this important
issue, both in the last Congress and now in this one.
I thank all of the witnesses for your expert testimony and
your thoughtfulness today, and for being with us today.
Commissioner Sheehan, I don't know if you know North
Dakota's commissioner, but we feel really blessed in North
Dakota to have lured away from the mountains of Wyoming to the
prairies of North Dakota Bill Panos, who is doing a great job.
Every discussion I have with Bill, he of course, brings up an
issue that has been alluded to a number of times today, and
that is, of course, the formula.
But North Dakota, being very rural, much like Wyoming, much
like parts of some of these States that we are talking about
today, I think every State has some part of it that is rural,
but North Dakota is very rural.
Could you elaborate a little bit on the importance,
Commissioner, of the formula remaining the way it is, why it is
so important for the entire system to maintain this formula?
Ms. Sheehan. Thank you for that question, Senator, and yes,
I know the head of the DOT in North Dakota, Bill Panos, well.
He is one of my colleagues at AASHTO.
The reason that States advocate strongly for formula
funding is that it provides predictability into the future. As
we advance our projects, we want to have certainty that the
commitment that we are making to municipalities and counties,
we can truly deliver on.
In rural areas in particular, those formula dollars are
being used each and every day to make lasting improvements in
infrastructure, whether that is replacing deficient bridges,
working to improve pavement condition, making safety
improvements, or ensuring that our infrastructure is resilient
to an increase in future extreme weather. So we as State DOTs
continue to emphasize the need for that traditional funding.
While in addition, you might look at increasing some of the
other programs that could benefit communities more directly, we
would not want to see those efforts move forward at the expense
of the core program.
Senator Cramer. Thank you for that. So, along the lines of
funding, obviously, a lot of the discussion that takes place
here deals with the funding, and there is never enough to do
all the things we should do.
However, one of the things, I think what the Commissioner
of AASHTO has advocated for is a sustainable funding source, so
the Highway Trust Fund obviously being the main source for
infrastructure development and surface transportation
development. You have advocated for the sustainability of that.
Yet Governor Whitmer is understandably and appropriately
proud of the work that the manufacturing sector is doing in
creating more electric vehicles and hybrid vehicles. Of course,
that ambition for that type of a climate response and a
sustainable formula or revenue stream obviously intersect and
conflict at some point.
Could I ask each of you, Governor Whitmer and Commissioner
Sheehan, to talk about what a future funding source would look
like in terms of the revenue stream, please?
Maybe Governor Whitmer, first.
Ms. Whitmer. I will start. Thank you, Senator, for that
question. I appreciate it.
I knew that, eventually, this conversation would go to this
part, and I know that is also the hard, tough job that you all
have ahead of you. I know it is a long debated question, and I
am talking about the solvency of the Highway Trust Fund and how
to pay for needed transportation investments. I am not here to
answer the question on the Federal gas tax. I can only speak
from what I know.
After decades of under-investment in Michigan, the people
of my State elected me. One of my big tasks that I heard all
across the State in all 83 counties was to fix the damn roads.
My team and I looked at all the options as we came in to
improve the funding outlook in Michigan. There is no question:
We need a predictable, sustainable, and sufficient solution.
That is the best case scenario.
When I took my solution to the legislature, we couldn't
find common ground, and so I had to pivot and do bonding.
Because we know that doing nothing is not an option.
As you know, festering infrastructure problems get harder
to tackle and get more expensive. So I know that you are going
to have this debate about how we prioritize this and make this
a reality. I look forward to that debate, and I am happy to
share any thoughts that we have from the ground of how we can
improve the tenor and the substance of that debate.
Senator Cramer. Thank you.
Commissioner Sheehan, do you have some thoughts?
Ms. Sheehan. Senator, thank you for the question.
I, too, don't envy you the challenging work that you have
ahead of you to identify a sustainable source of revenue for
the Highway Trust Fund. We are having similar conversations at
the State level, and our State legislature is hesitant to move
toward a new source of revenue without understanding what
direction the Federal Government might move in.
But what I do know is that since the last gas tax increase,
our cost of doing business has continued to increase, and we
have lost buying power over the last 28 years. So we truly
appreciate the efforts of the Congress to identify a
sustainable solution.
When the Highway Trust Fund receipts have not kept pace
with the investments that we need to make, the fact that there
has been other sources of revenue needed available so that we
can continue our programs, that is extremely important to
States, and we appreciate that continued support for
transportation investment.
Senator Cramer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Carper. Thank you, Senator Cramer.
Senator Whitehouse is joining us by Webex.
Sheldon, if you are out there somewhere, please join us.
You are recognized.
Senator Whitehouse. Yes, I am, and thank you. I am
delighted to have this terrific panel of witnesses.
I wanted to talk first about coastal infrastructure.
Governor Whitmer, Michigan counts, because the way we define
coastal includes our Great Lakes. It is estimated that coastal
communities are going to need to invest more than $400 billion
in the next 20 years. That is based on our present, very
conservative, and probably inadequate estimates of the damage
that climate change portends through sea level rise and extreme
weather.
This is a new and very alarming demand for these local
communities. As we look around at the places for support for
coastal communities, we look at things, particularly in this
Committee, like the Army Corps of Engineers Flood and Coastal
Damage Reduction Fund. What we see in the last decade is that
in our best year, $19 went inland for every single dollar that
went to coasts. That was our best year in the last decade. In
our worst year, $120 went inland for every single dollar that
went to coasts.
Everybody is familiar with the Land and Water Conservation
Fund. That has a less egregious, but similar bias toward inland
and upland projects over coastal projects. CoreLogic has done
its 2020 storm surge report, and it estimates that over 7
million single family homes are at risk of storm surge in the
U.S., and that the cost to rebuild those homes would exceed
$1.7 trillion.
So we have a big coastal problem on our hands. It is a
coastal problem that we are ignoring. The Chairman comes from a
State that is similar in size to Rhode Island and has even
lower topography. So Delaware and Rhode Island share a very
strong concern about these issues.
We were able to get into the last highway bill that came
out of our Committee unanimously some very good work on coastal
infrastructure. Because it is not just going to be homes that
are flooded; it is also going to be infrastructure. When
infrastructure goes, you can also lose homes and access to
emergency services to homes. So it is a big problem.
I would like to ask the Governors to comment on what they
see as the needs in their States to protect coasts. I think
Maryland is more immediately affected, because of the oceans
problem. But Michigan and the Great Lakes have their own
issues, as well.
Mr. Hogan. Thank you. Thank you very much, Senator. Thanks
for raising the issue.
A lot of the discussion around climate change is about
mitigation and about clean air, and not enough, I think,
discussion about how we mitigate some of the problems that are
going to be caused by flooding, and as you just touched on very
eloquently, the coastal flooding issue.
We did touch on this, and a lot of our focus was on
transportation infrastructure during the NGA Initiative. But we
did talk about resiliency, and trying to address some of these
issues in our State, along with what Governor Whitmer said
earlier.
But we have made great strides with respect to climate
change. We have cleaner air standards than 49 other States, we
put tax credits in for electric vehicles and charging stations,
and are taking a lot of actions on mass transit to get people
off the roads.
But this is one we have invested some dollars in. But you
are right, there has been not enough funding. It is something
we do have to address as you are looking at infrastructure. Not
just coastal flooding, but further upstream, the flooding is
going to occur as well.
As a small coastal State adjacent to the Chairman's State
of Delaware, it is obviously an issue and a concern for us with
the Chesapeake Bay, which is one of America's greatest natural
resources. It is an issue that we deal with, and I will pass it
on to my colleague to weigh in. But it is an important issue we
have to address.
Ms. Whitmer. Yes, thanks, Governor Hogan, and Senator
Whitehouse, thank you so much for the question. I think that it
is really important.
I am glad that you highlighted the coastline in Michigan.
We have 3,200 miles of coastline in Michigan, all fresh water.
Twenty-one percent of the world's fresh water is in and around
the Great Lakes. So this is something that we take very
seriously, and we have seen the impact of climate change.
We need to address this through resilient infrastructure.
High water levels have eroded our shoreline and washed away
roadways, and we have had devastating flooding in communities
that have forced evacuations.
We had to evacuate 10,000 people in Midland, Michigan. That
wasn't along the Great Lakes, but it was just another example
of the need for resilient infrastructure, because it washed out
a number of dams and bridges when that 500 year flooding event
happened.
So whether it is in Texas, or it is in the freshwater
coastline of Michigan, or along the Nation's borders all across
the country, this is something that is of critical importance.
When we see high water levels that are eroding our shorelines,
they are impacting everything from our drinking water to just
our ability to conduct life and be safe in doing that.
So we have a lot of needs in this area. But there is no
question that resilient infrastructure along the coastlines is
an important part of the overarching problem that we are
hopeful that you will help us address.
Senator Whitehouse. Mr. Chairman, I am probably close to
out of time, if not completely out of time. So let me just let
Governor Whitmer know that, as the fix the damn roads Governor
and as the auto Governor with GM having made these commitments
to going to all electric vehicles, we have in the bill that we
passed significant support for electronic vehicle charging
infrastructure. We are eagerly trying to get tax support for
electronic vehicle charging infrastructure.
As you know, it is going to be a very bad thing for GM if
they commit to electric vehicles and we haven't built the
infrastructure to charge those electric vehicles. So we are on
the case, but we need your help and the help of our Republican
colleagues to make sure that that all gets done aggressively
and energetically.
Ms. Whitmer. Thank you.
Senator Carper. All right.
Senator Whitehouse, something you just said reminds me of a
conversation I had with one Senator Stabenow's constituents,
Mary Barra, CEO of General Motors. We were talking a year ago
about what it was going to take to convince consumers in this
country to buy electric powered vehicles and hydrogen powered
vehicles.
She said, with respect to EV, she said we need three things
to convince our customers to buy them if we are going to build
them. She said, the first thing we need is a 300 mile range on
a charge; we have that now. The second thing we need is
charging stations across the country corridors, both for
electric and hydrogen vehicles. The last thing she said that we
needed is the technology to enable them to charge batteries in
minutes, not hours. Luckily, we are knocking on those doors.
The one thing that we really need is No. 2, to your point,
Sheldon.
Senator Whitehouse. Mr. Chairman, I am driving one, and
anybody who has had the pleasure of driving an electric vehicle
knows what a thrilling experience it is.
Senator Carper. Yes, they are fun. They are a lot of fun.
Our States may be small, Sheldon, but we punch above our
weight. There you go.
All right, I think Senator Lummis is next.
Welcome aboard.
Senator Lummis. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, and
Ranking Member.
I really appreciate this topic. It is so important to my
State of Wyoming.
My first question is for Mayor Hancock and for Victoria
Sheehan.
Thank you both for being here.
Greetings, Mayor, I am from your State to the north,
Wyoming, and spend a lot of time in your beautiful community.
My question for both of you is related to Senator Cramer's
question earlier. He asked about the importance of the formula.
My question is about the flexibilities within the formula fund.
How important are the flexibilities in formula funds to ensure
the very needs of States can be met with Federal dollars, given
how very different the needs are of our States and our
communities?
Mr. Hancock. Senator Lummis, first of all, as we like to
say here, between Colorado and Wyoming, we forget the
boundaries, so we consider you family. So it is an honor to
meet you, at least virtually.
I appreciate your question, because I think you get to the
heart of the real opportunity before all of us as we try to
think about what the future investments around transportation
and infrastructure looks like, how we address the looming
challenges of climate and equity going forward. Cities, in
particular, have to have flexibility because we better
understand the nuances of our communities, and really, the
challenges that so many in our community face.
I often say, when I talk about transportation mobility, if
you want to know where poverty exists, show me where the least
number of options around mobility exist, and I will show you
poverty. That is true no matter where you are in this country,
rural or urban, suburban, doesn't matter.
The reality is that we have got to be able to adjust to the
flexibilities. That is why as mayors, we have proposed
utilizing some of the tools within the Federal Government,
working with our States and municipalities today, whether they
are STBG or the CBG, or even renewal of the Energy Efficiency
Block Grant, so that we can be much more facilitative and
flexible in addressing the challenges we face.
So many of our communities have been perennially overlooked
and underserved. We get a chance to provide those ladders of
opportunity, grant multi-modal options to those communities to
make sure that we are able to create connectivity and to create
affordable housing, good schools, access to good healthcare,
and particular transportation corridors and to lift them, give
them an opportunity to be lifted out of poverty.
So the flexibility within the formula is critical. And I am
glad you landed on that. It shows a great deal of insight,
coming from a Wyoming cowboy, or cowgirl.
Senator Lummis. Thanks, Mayor, and thank you, Ms. Sheehan.
On behalf of AASHTO, would you make some remarks on that
same subject?
Ms. Sheehan. Thank you, Senator.
So, as State DOTS, we are advancing projects that fulfill
numerous goals, and that is why flexibility is so critical. For
example, if we are replacing a bridge that is structurally
deficient, we may be replacing that bridge with a longer
structure that is more resilient and can handle an increase in
storm frequency.
We also may be widening, not to increase capacity, but to
provide more amenities for active transportation, whether that
is sidewalks or bike lanes or wider shoulders, depending on
that unique situation.
So as we advance the project, the flexibility is critical,
because none of our projects fit nicely into one category. We
are trying to work with communities, understand what their
needs are. We talk to them about what a successful project
looks like for them and incorporate all of those different
aspects into the projects that we do.
Flexibility of the funding allows us to be nimble and make
sure that we are not just doing one type of project one way,
that we can truly partner with communities and meet their
needs, as well as the regional transportation needs that the
State is focused on.
Senator Lummis. Thank you so much. With the little bit of
time remaining, I would just ask our Governors to respond,
perhaps, in the context of the next questioner, to the issue of
the permitting processes. Are there opportunities to improve
the Federal permitting processes to expedite completing
infrastructure projects?
You don't have sufficient time within my 5 minutes to
respond. So I will just thank you, Governor Whitmer and
Governor Hogan, for participating in this hearing and for your
work on behalf of your States. Having come out of State
government, I am deeply appreciative of the work that Governors
do, and thank you very much, all four of you, for participating
in this hearing today.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Senator Carper. Senator, thank you.
I would ask our Governors to just respond to Senator
Lummis's question for the record, and share that with all of
us, please.
Senator Lummis was State treasurer at one time, right?
Senator Lummis. Correct.
Senator Carper. I think you came close to running for
Governor, maybe did run for Governor. Didn't you?
Senator Lummis. Well, I came close. I did serve as general
counsel to our Governor once upon a time, and our current
Governor, you know, I suspect, and worked within the National
Governors Association. Great guy, and I salute Governors for
their hard work, especially during COVID. This has been
extremely challenging for all of you. Thank you for your
leadership.
Senator Carper. I will just mention, between all of us, we
have got some extraordinary backgrounds in terms of experience,
levels of experience in different kinds of jobs that our
members have held, and it is something we can take full
advantage of.
Next is Senator Merkley, who used to be my seatmate on the
Senate floor. He left me about 2 weeks ago, but he is still on
our side. He is sitting about 20 feet away now.
Jeff, you are recognized. I think you are on Webex, and I
think after you, Senator Markey. And after Senator Markey, it
would be Senator Duckworth, Senator Stabenow, and maybe Senator
Kelly before Senator Stabenow, I think. We will figure out how
to do that, but Senator Merkley, you are up. Thank you.
Senator Merkley. Sure, Chair Carper. Thank you very much.
It is a pleasure to join you all.
I wanted to start with a question to Mayor Hancock. I know
that Denver last year enacted its EV action plan, which
addressed in part charging infrastructure. I think part of the
strategy was to create more charging infrastructure in
underserved communities. Maybe you could just share what the
goal was, and what you have learned in the last few months,
what challenges you see ahead.
Mr. Hancock. Thank you, Senator, and I appreciate your
question.
The EV Action Plan was about, exactly as you are alluding
to, the proliferation of charging stations around the city,
with particular focus on communities to bridge the challenges
around equity.
We did a couple things. One, we changed our zoning code so
any new buildings and housing units would have charging
stations available to them, or at least a charging
infrastructure would be available for the creation of that.
But we also, the city started looking at our public
facilities, our parks, our recreation centers, that we own and
begin the process of funding installation of charging stations.
We have it already at our airport, for example.
But these facilities that are much more readily available
to underserved communities would be available to them as well,
as well as some of our meter stations. Our meter locations
around downtown Denver or wherever meters are located, we would
also have some charging stations available to that.
So, we began, in the last 18 months to 2 years, began the
process of rolling out that infrastructure, making appropriate
investments. We are really beginning the process of ramping up
more of that, but we are making progress under that. I can get
back to you in terms of the actual movement toward the
particular goal. We will make sure we get that to you from our
staff.
But I am pleased with where we are, and the fact that we
have laid the foundations for new builds to make sure that that
is available to them.
Senator Merkley. Thank you. Thank you very much, Mayor. I
see it as one of those plans that advances climate by
encouraging movement to electric vehicles, but it also helps
address environmental and economic justice. So I look forward
to more information.
Speaking of economic justice, I wanted to turn to Biden's
pledge to ensure that 40 percent of the benefits from the
infrastructure package are put forth to disadvantaged
communities, communities that have been disinvested in.
Mayor Hancock, do you support Biden's 40 percent pledge?
Mr. Hancock. I do, and I think if you look more closely at
a lot of that, on a local level, a lot of the cities are
already focused on doing exactly that.
We have in Denver a new equity strategy. I opened up a new
Office of Equitable Innovation and Sustainability to make sure
that we are advancing the goals of equity in everything that we
do, including our contracting. Of course, we must do disparity
studies to demonstrate the underserved and the
underutilization, but we are absolutely committed, and I think
President Biden's goal is right on target.
Senator Merkley. Thank you. I wanted to ask the same
question of our other colleagues, but to just get a very short
response, so I can move forward to another question.
Governor Whitmer, do you also support the 40 percent
dedication to disadvantaged communities?
Ms. Whitmer. I do think that it is important that we have
equity built into all of these policies. What we have seen in
transition is that that hasn't always been the case, and
communities have been left behind. So this is something that I
think is crucial in our deliberations and should be embedded in
the policy work that comes out on this front, and frankly, many
others.
Senator Merkley. Of course, part of the goal is sometimes
it is easy in theory, but it is hard in practice, because those
same communities may have less political power, which is why
the 40 percent is there. It is not just a commitment to the
ideal, but to the, well, let's actually make it happen.
Governor Hogan, do you support that same 40 percent
fraction?
Mr. Hogan. Well, in our State, I think that way more than
50 percent of our transportation investment goes into
disadvantaged communities and minority equity types of issues,
because we are mostly focused on the urban areas and the areas
that immediately surround them.
I haven't seen President Biden's proposal yet, frankly, but
tomorrow, both the Secretary of Transportation and the
President will be joining all of the Nation's Governors. We
look forward to hearing more details about their plans with
respect to transportation.
Senator Merkley. Governor, one of the reasons I felt this
was important to raise is because I was in DC when the Metro
system was built. Anacostia was left out because it was the
black neighborhood that had little political power. So the
Green Line didn't get built for forever.
Then similarly in Maryland, the Red Line has the same
national reputation as a line that was planned to connect low
income black neighborhoods with few jobs to job centers, and to
also develop transit and development in those disinvested black
neighborhoods, and to improve the air quality that was bad
because of the amount of traffic congestion and associated
pollution.
But that is a project you chose to cancel and put the funds
instead in predominantly white communities. So would a 40
percent pledge like this help fund projects, make sure projects
like the Red Line in Baltimore actually happen to serve such
disinvested communities?
Mr. Hogan. Senator, I would totally disagree with your
assertion for a number of reasons, but we don't have time to
debate that here this morning.
The Red Line, according to the Washington Post editorial
board, never made any economic or transportation sense. Our
Transportation Department recommended against it. But we did
move forward on the Purple Line, which goes through Prince
George's County. It is 16 stops in minority communities and
ties into the Metro system, which I came up with a funding
stream to try to keep functioning when there wasn't enough
Federal investment.
Senator Merkley. We are out of time.
Senator Carper. Thanks for those questions, Senator
Merkley, and for the responses as well.
Senator Markey, you are up, my friend.
Senator Markey. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much, and
thank you to our great panel which is joining us today.
We are obviously at a crossroads in terms of our
relationship with greenhouse gases and the impact they have
upon minority communities, communities of color, historically
disadvantaged communities, and the role the United States must
play in finding the solutions and exporting those solutions
around the rest of the planet.
So that is why this hearing is so important. Obviously,
Governors play a huge role, mayors play a huge role in helping
to set the course for where we have to go.
We have to think big; we have to act big. We are running
out of time to deal with the climate change crisis, and the
transportation sector is a central part of the solutions.
I have introduced a bill called the Green Streets Act with
Senator Carper and other members of the Committee. That bill
would require very strong standards to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions in vehicle miles traveled for transportation planning
and projects.
I am also introducing today the Freezer Trucks Act to help
replace diesel powered refrigerated trucks with cleaner,
electric versions in overburdened communities as well.
In Chelsea, Massachusetts, which is our poorest community,
we have diesel trucks just idling all day long near the most
vulnerable communities that already have the highest levels of
asthma and the highest levels of coronavirus because of their
obvious preexisting vulnerability, because they are both lung
diseases.
So, Governor Whitmer, can you talk about the future, as you
see it, of the new announcement by General Motors and other
motor companies to move to 100 percent electric vehicles by
2035, what that might mean in terms of this partnership that we
can have with the States to ensure that we telescope the
timeframe to reach a day where we have a new fleet, jobs are
being created by the millions, and at the same time, we are
making sure that those who are most vulnerable are being
protected?
Ms. Whitmer. Absolutely, Senator Markey. It is good to see
you, and I appreciate the question.
I am going to have to pre-apologize, this will have to be
my last question. I have to give my press conference on our
updates about what is happening in the State. So I am glad for
an opportunity to answer this question now.
Last year, I created the Council on Future Mobility and
Electrification, and it was intentional to bring diverse
stakeholders together to help build a mobility strategy for
Michigan and help identify where opportunities for growth and
improvement are. With those stakeholders, we are working to
build an electric vehicle charging network that connects the
entire State by 2030, and hopefully connect with other networks
across the Midwest.
I can tell you, I was in a call last night with a number of
my colleagues from the Midwest, and we are thinking about ways
that we can collaborate. This moment has brought us together in
ways we couldn't have imagined, but there are opportunities out
of this that we are already talking about. Significant
investments in our electric grid, renewable energy, and
charging infrastructure to ensure reliability and drive the
market for EVs, to address issues like range anxiety, as we
talked about earlier in this hearing.
Over the past 2 years, between State and local governments,
our utility providers, our auto manufacturers, we have invested
millions in electric vehicle charging infrastructure, which is
really important, and we have some of the most in the Midwest.
In addition to this though, we have to lead by example and
increase the number of electric vehicles in our State and
federally controlled fleets. Tax incentives should be reviewed,
I believe, to be more useful for commercial fleet owners, as
fleets represent the greatest near term commercial opportunity
for large scale deployment of electric vehicles.
Then building up a network of publicly available charging
stations that are capable of serving medium and heavy duty
vehicles. To your idling comment, I think that is particularly
important.
My State is looking to take a lead in doing a lot of this
here in the Midwest. But certainly, this is something that is
important for our entire Nation.
The program that we have developed is looking to take
applications for partnerships through the recharging
infrastructure grant program. With our new Office of Future
Mobility and Electrification, with our Department of
Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, we are working alongside
industry partners, and that is, I think, really important.
As we tackle this problem, we have much greater odds of
success if we are bringing in partners from all different
spaces to solve this problem, and it will be good for the job
front, it will be good for the climate problems that we are
having, and good for our economy.
Senator Markey. Thank you, Governor. I do believe that
Michigan, in a lot of ways, is going to be at the center of
leadership. Thank you for your great work and your vision on
these issues.
We can begin to create millions. We can save all of
creation while engaging in massive job creation in the
automotive sector and the sectors of our economy. It is just
important for us to continue to deliver that message that this
is a job creation moment and at the UAW, the auto industry is
signing up, and that is something that we have to focus on. We
have to focus on the freezer trucks, diesel fuels, others that
don't oftentimes get to be a part of this conversation, which
necessarily have to be if we are going to solve the whole
problem.
Thank you so much, Governor, for your great work.
Ms. Whitmer. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Carper. Thank you, Senator.
Senator Markey. Has my time expired?
Senator Carper. It is more than expired.
Senator Markey. OK. Thank you, sir.
Senator Carper. Thank you.
Governor Whitmer, thanks so much for being a part of our
panel today. This is a terrific panel. We have a couple more of
our colleagues who have questions to ask, and we appreciate the
other three panelists staying on board.
Governor Whitmer, I would just say that when the baseball
team has the worst record in baseball, they get the top draft
choices, and hope springs eternal for our Tigers. They have got
some great young arms, and I look forward to maybe seeing a
game with you and Debbie and Gary someday soon.
Ms. Whitmer. Let's do it.
Senator Carper. Thanks so much for joining us.
Ms. Whitmer. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Next, we have Senator Duckworth, and after
Senator Duckworth, Senator Stabenow, and then Senator Kelly,
and maybe some words from Senator Capito to wrap it up, and we
are going to work Lindsey Graham into this, somehow. All right.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Chairman Carper. Can you hear
me?
Senator Carper. Yes, you are fine. Just fine.
Senator Duckworth. Wonderful. I appreciate your leadership
in making sure our Committee's top priority is passing a
comprehensive infrastructure package that rebuilds our roads,
rail, and transit systems.
Of course, if we are truly to build back better, in
Congress, we need to do a lot more work. We need to also
prioritize drinking water and wastewater infrastructure in any
proposal. After all, there is one fact of life that ties all of
us together, the absolute necessity for safe and reliable water
systems.
It is long overdue for Congress to place as much importance
on what is built underground as we do on above ground projects
that all can see. I also believe in the ``dig once,'' when we
are going to fix the roads, might as well fix the sewer systems
while you are at it.
Unfortunately, years of neglect have created a crisis that
this Congress must solve. EPA estimates that to deliver safe
drinking water to every household in America, we would have to
invest half a trillion dollars over the next 20 years to
maintain or upgrade our pipes, storage, tanks, and treatment
facilities. Let that sink in a little bit. Half a trillion
dollars, $500 billion over two decades.
I have a two part question, I would like to also send this
to Governor Whitmer, but Governor Hogan, I hope that you will
be able to address this issue first. Do you agree that water
infrastructure should be a centerpiece of our build back better
efforts? Second, could you discuss how robust Federal
investments in State and local water systems would help create
jobs, foster economic growth, and most importantly, protect the
health and safety of your constituents?
Governor Hogan.
Senator Carper. Senator Duckworth, Governor Whitmer had to
leave for another event.
Senator Duckworth. I knew, yes. I am just saying, if
Governor Hogan could also address it.
Senator Carper. Oh, that is great, OK.
Governor Hogan. You are batting cleanup here.
[Laughter.]
Senator Duckworth. It was really to both Governors.
Senator Carper. Governor Hogan, are you there?
Senator Duckworth. I can go to Mayor Hancock, I have a
question for Mayor Hancock, as well.
Senator Carper. All right, let's do that. Thank you.
Senator Duckworth. Mayor Hancock, it is estimated that
Chicago drivers lose 138 hours each year due to congestion, a
tremendous loss of productivity that I am confident is also
experienced in communities across our Nation. That is why one
of my top priorities is making sure our forthcoming
reauthorization proposal treats reducing roadway congestion as
the national priority it is for the millions of Americans who
are stuck driving to work every day.
I am confident we can build broad, bipartisan support of
these efforts as evidenced by the inclusion of my proposal to
establish a competitive congestion relief grant program in the
surface transportation bill that our Committee favorably
reported last Congress.
Mayor Hancock, can you explain how authorizing a
congressional relief grant program would help local governments
like Denver advance innovative roadway congestion solutions?
Mr. Hancock. Thank you, Senator Duckworth, and I appreciate
your question. Yes, I believe that with regard to people taking
other modes of transportation, you have to offer just as many
or more competitive driving options, or options for them than
driving alone. Our single occupancy rate in Denver was over 73
percent. That is just unsustainable in a city that has grown as
fast as the city of Denver.
So it is important that we offer options that give them the
reliability, the predictability, and of course, cost efficiency
as well for them to choose different modes of transportation or
to have multi-occupancy within a vehicle or multi-occupancy in
a mode. There should be focus on different modes and options
for municipalities, whether it is simply building highways or
streets. That why we are focused in Denver on things such as
bike lanes and transit and other modes that move people, moving
people and not just vehicles.
So we actually agree with what you found in Chicago, and
recognize that until we get serious about that, in terms of
creating options that make sense for people, that are just as
competitive as driving alone, we won't be able to break through
on this challenge of congestion.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to go ahead and submit my
previous question for the record for the two Governors and have
them answer in writing. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Yes, that will be fine. I am happy to do
that.
Senator Duckworth. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Any other comments, questions, Senator?
Senator Duckworth. No, I yield back. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Thanks so much for joining us today.
We have also been joined by Senator Lindsey Graham, who I
know from experience has a real interest in some of the issues
that we are talking about here today.
Lindsey, we are happy you have joined us, and welcome. You
are recognized, and you will be followed by Senator Stabenow,
Senator Kelly, and last but not least, Senator Padilla.
Senator Graham. OK. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, I look
forward to working with you and Senator Capito.
This should be the most bipartisan committee, because we
all need roads and bridges and all that kind of good stuff. So,
I will make a comment, and then I will ask a question. I think
we have got a Highway Trust Fund shortfall. Increasing gasoline
taxes may be a necessary idea.
But what I want to share my thoughts with the Committee is
about the future. Our friends in Michigan, they tell me that
most cars being made in the future are going to be electric,
not gasoline driven. So, General Motors said that by 2035, they
will do away with their gasoline operated vehicles. That is a
major societal change.
So whatever we do with the trust fund, we need to capture
the fact that most cars, by the middle of the century, by 2050,
probably won't run on gasoline. That will be good for the
environment, but it will certainly require us to put new
infrastructure in place and redesign the trust fund.
What I would like to do as we try to reauthorize the
current system is to put some money aside to develop the
infrastructure of the future. I think drones are going to be
more available when it comes to transporting material. I think
trucks are probably going to be not just electric, maybe
hydrogen vehicles in terms of long haul trucking.
So the bottom line is, if it is true that the gasoline
driven car is going to be less plentiful on the road by the
middle of the century, and maybe the dominant mode of
transportation will be something other than gasoline, we need
to start now redesigning the trust fund. We need to start now
plowing money into infrastructure consistent with a new way of
transportation. And if it is true that most cars in the future
are going to have a driverless component, seems to me we should
be investing in the technology to make it as safe as possible.
The only thing I want to add to what has been said is the
future. Let's take an opportunity in 2021 to start laying the
groundwork for a more sustainable trust fund in terms of the
way vehicles are going to be changing from gasoline to
electric, let's look at the emergence of driverless vehicles
and try to make them safer quicker.
If we can own this space in the 21st century as America and
develop this technology and sell it around the world it would
be one of the biggest things we have ever done as a Nation, I
think, since maybe developing the car itself.
I don't know who we have as witnesses left, but here is a
question to anybody out there. In your States, do you have a
plan to deal with the fact that there is going to be more non-
gasoline driven cars on your roads? Have you embraced the idea
that the driverless vehicle is coming sooner rather than later?
What thoughts do you have about how to accommodate these
changes, and what plans do you have to capture money for the
trust fund from non-gasoline driven cars in your State or your
city?
So whoever is out there, that is my question.
Senator Carper. I think we still have a mayor, and we still
have a commissioner out there, so ladies first, please.
Senator Graham. We will start with the two that we got.
Mayor.
Senator Carper. Commissioner, go ahead.
Ms. Sheehan. Senator Graham, I appreciate your remarks. We
as State DOT leaders are very excited about the opportunity of
connecting automated vehicles, and we also have been preparing,
building out our EV charging infrastructure and planning for
the future.
Senator Graham. If you don't mind, what percentage of cars
in your State are electric vehicles at this point?
Ms. Sheehan. It is a relatively low percentage. It is only
approximately 4 percent, I believe, as of this time. However,
we are seeing that number increase year over year. So, here in
New Hampshire, we established an electric vehicle charging
commission. All of the State agencies have been supporting the
legislature so much that the programs that were discussed
earlier in Michigan and other parts of the country.
We are trying to bring all of the stakeholders to the table
to make sure that we understand at what rate things will
change, but most importantly, we do want to reassure the
consumer that if they were to purchase an electric vehicle,
that there is the infrastructure to support them moving freely
within the State, especially when it comes to visitors. New
Hampshire's economy is really driven by travel and tourism, and
so we want to ensure that visitors to our State don't have that
anxiety either about what infrastructure is available to them.
You also touched on connected and automated technologies.
In 2019, there were over 36,000 individuals lost on our
Nation's roads. That statistic is incredibly troubling, and the
promise that connecting automated vehicles bring is the
opportunity to ensure that, in the future, there are truly zero
deaths in our system.
Those are initiatives that State DOTs are excited to work
on, and we are preparing for the future. Our State legislatures
are asking us to look at our existing State statutes, our
administrative rules, our design criteria, and make sure that
we are addressing the regulatory aspect of our work, and that
is not a barrier to being able to deploy these technologies
quickly and effectively.
Senator Carper. Senator Graham's time has expired. I still
want the Mayor to respond briefly to his question, so Mayor, if
you could do that, that would be great. Thanks.
Senator Graham. Yes, Mayor, if you could give us 30
seconds, I am sorry to go over here.
Mr. Hancock. Sure, Senator Graham, I can respond in 30
seconds. First of all, I appreciate your comments and your
thoughts about the future. I want to submit that we are already
behind the rest of the world, and all you have to do is leave
our coast and go to a different country and find that the
technology is advancing in terms of electrification, use of
electric vehicles.
The real challenge, of course, is the lack of supply. More
auto makers are rolling out more electric vehicles, so that is
critical. Second is the cost, and we have got to make sure to
get it down so that there is some equity within the system.
Finally, of course, is the infrastructure. We lack
infrastructure. Let me submit that we talked about, at least, I
suggested that the renewal of the Energy Efficiency Block
Grant. That would be critical to help States and cities to
proliferate charging stations and the infrastructure around our
States.
If I could just add one last thing to your list in terms of
looking to the future, that is the urban air travel system.
Within urban areas, very soon, we won't be on surfaces. We have
technology today that can move people without being on the
ground, and we need to begin to prepare for that as well.
Senator Carper. Senator Graham, your question is prescient.
Remember the old movie, Back to the Future? Earlier in the
hearing, we talked a little bit about the last bill that we
passed out of here unanimously. I think it was 21 to nothing, a
5 year reauthorization.
Included in that reauthorization was a 50 State pilot on
vehicle miles traveled. We have so far, done about six or seven
State pilots for vehicle miles traveled, and I described it as
part of the future for transportation funding, maybe eventually
the principal place. We are still going to have a bunch of cars
and trucks and things on the road, because people keep their
vehicles, on average, about 10 or 11 years. So they are going
to be around for a while.
Thank you, it is great having you on the Committee. Welcome
aboard.
Next, Senator Stabenow.
Senator Stabenow. Well, thank you again, Mr. Chairman. When
we are talking about electric vehicles, I certainly feel like
we are in the Michigan wheelhouse. I appreciate so much
Governor Whitmer being with us this morning, as well as
Governor Hogan.
Let me just add to the discussion on this. I couldn't agree
more that we have to look at our financing around
transportation, given where we are going. I would also say
this: That our companies are investing tens of billions of
dollars on the future right now. They cannot get there without
a partnership with us.
China has invested $100 billion to get ahead of us, to not
only own the technology, and part of this, to build these new
vehicles, the plants that have to be open. We are going to need
a number of battery cell plants to be able to deal with the new
technology and the parts that are needed.
This is very exciting, because we have all kinds of new,
clean energy jobs in manufacturing to give us the supply chain
to be able to do it, but China is already doing it. They are
already out there trying to own all of this, as well as the
charging infrastructure, as well as all of it.
So we really are in a race, a competitive race that we can
win. Right now the majority of the expertise and technology is
in America, but it won't be unless we are partnering with them
to get there.
I would just say not only are charging stations critical,
we have got to deal with range anxiety, we have got to deal
with how folks feel they can drive across the country in these
wonderful new vehicles, not only small vehicles, but your F-150
truck is going to be all electric, Mr. Chairman, coming next
year with Ford, as well as all kinds of others. I could do ads
for all kinds of vehicles.
But the other thing I would say, until we get to the price
point for consumers as well, the consumer tax credit that we
have had in place that is now running out needs to be continued
for a piece of time until we get the volume up. It is like any
other kind of technology. Until there is enough purchasing
power, you don't see the price go down. So electric vehicles,
the cost points, and having the supply chain to be able to do
this.
I just have one question, as we conclude, I appreciate very
much all of our witnesses.
I want to ask Ms. Sheehan, from your vantage point as
President of the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials, if Congress were able to meet the
entirety of the investment backlog you have indicated there is,
the investment backlog is $836 billion for highways and bridges
and $122 billion for transit. If somehow, we could reach all of
that or reduce it substantially, what would that mean to
economic growth as we come out of the economic crisis and the
pandemic?
Ms. Sheehan. Thank you, Senator. First and foremost, it
would create immediate economic stimulus across the country.
Jobs in transportation are good paying jobs. Given the impacts
of the COVID-19 pandemic, investing in infrastructure will
truly help us build back better.
Further to that, we as State DOTs are in the business of
asset management. We want to make the most financially sound
investments in our infrastructure, reducing the life cycle cost
of operating that infrastructure.
So if we can address the backlog and move forward in a way
that we can maintain the existing system in a good state of
repair, that will save taxpayers money into the future. When we
allow things to fall apart, it can cost four times to ten times
as much to build the infrastructure back and have it in a good
state of repair.
So as the owners of this infrastructure trying to manage it
as effectively as possible, we really want to address that
backlog and then move forward in a new day with a much more
efficient way to maintain our systems.
But more than that, I talked about the high number of
fatalities on our systems. These investments would save lives.
We would be making long term safety improvements, we would be
improving quality of life for communities, building sidewalks
and bicycle and pedestrian facilities, that are fantastic ways
to stimulate economic activity in downtown areas. We would be
addressing different aspects of quality of life, improving
access and opportunity for every American.
Senator Stabenow. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that one of the reasons I
am so pleased to be on this Committee is that I think this
Committee has the opportunity to fundamentally change the
future for our country and for our citizens, and this is a huge
part of it, so thank you.
Senator Carper. Senator Stabenow, I think you and Senator
Kelly, Senator Padilla, and Senator Graham are really smart,
because you joined this Committee at a time when we can work on
job creation at a time when we very much need it.
We can work on improving the air quality that we breathe;
we can work on climate change; we can just do so many good
things. We can work on equity issues, and we really make a good
Committee better, but this is a great time to be on this
Committee. Thank you for joining us.
All right, Mark, my friend, welcome aboard, Captain. You
are recognized.
Senator Kelly. Well, thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I am
pleased to be on this Committee as well.
This question is for Commissioner Sheehan about NEPA
reviews. I frequently hear concerns from transportation
planners in Arizona about the limitations of when and how NEPA
approvals can be completed.
As you are aware, current guidelines from the Federal
Highway Administration prevent States from making NEPA approval
decisions on projects that are not included in a statewide or
metro transportation plan. In most cases, Federal funding
cannot be used to complete the NEPA review of the project,
which places an increased burden on State and local planning
agencies.
Arizona has a number of large transportation projects,
which are preparing for costly tier two environmental impact
statement assessments, including a project to expand highway I-
10 between Phoenix and Tucson. There is another project called
the Sonoran Corridor Project in Tucson. And the I-11 Project
which could finally, and this is a big deal, finally connect
Phoenix and Las Vegas via an interstate highway.
These projects, and projects like them throughout the
country, deserve to have thorough environmental reviews that
allow affected communities with the opportunity to provide some
feedback. Yet cost constraints and requirements that States and
localities fully fund these reviews slows the process of
getting these projects off the ground. That delays efforts to
make infrastructure upgrades needed in Arizona and across the
country.
So, Commissioner Sheehan, as this Committee considers
surface transit reauthorization legislation, what steps can we
take now to ensure transportation planners have the resources
and flexibilities to produce high quality, timely, and accurate
environmental reviews while preventing delays to the overall
transportation planning process?
Ms. Sheehan. First and foremost, providing adequate
funding. If these projects have that dedicated stream of
funding, then it is much easier to move them forward. So making
sure that we have the resources so these projects can be
included in our long term transportation plans, and that
everyone understands they are truly priorities to our States.
Beyond that, I believe we are up to eight States that
currently have taken ownership of NEPA reviews. This provides
them the opportunity to significantly streamline the delivery
of their projects. As an example, I think California was the
first State to pursue this. They are taking on that liability
of ensuring their projects are in full compliance with all
Federal regulations.
But in return for that, it expedites the advancement of
those projects because we are not submitting documents to other
agencies for their review and feedback. We are ensuring full
compliance internally at our respective State DOTs. So
continuing to advocate for those types of changes, where the
States who are willing to can step up and take on more
responsibility, but in no way circumvent or fail to meet their
environmental commitments and obligations.
Senator Kelly. Commissioner, is New Hampshire one of those
eight States?
Ms. Sheehan. We have not moved in that direction as of yet,
but it is certainly something that we are exploring, seeing the
tremendous success across the rest of the country.
Senator Kelly. Thank you, that is very helpful.
Mr. Chairman, you were mentioning songs earlier, and I
think the appropriate song might be the Rascal Flatts' Life Is
a Highway. Appropriate today. I yield back the remainder of my
time.
Senator Carper. All right. It is always great to hear the
Rascal Flatts; that is good.
All right, Alex, Senator Padilla, our new member from
California. Welcome.
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Does this make me
the clean up hitter?
Senator Carper. It does, you know.
Senator Padilla. Thank you for the welcome to the
Committee. I am eager. There is a lot of great work to be done
this session.
I have two related topics I want to touch on, so if I may,
Mr. Chair, I will get through both questions, and acknowledge
who they are addressed to, and then sit back and hear the
answers for both.
First, on the topic of resiliency and disaster
preparedness. It is not just California's recent record
wildfire seasons, plural, not in a good way, of course, but
severe flooding across various parts of the country, to recent
events in Texas. We have seen in recent years how the climate
crisis is leading to more dangerous and more numerous natural
disasters. As we work to address this reality, we must improve
the resiliency of our roads, our bridges, and our
infrastructure at large to adapt to and recover from extreme
weather events.
I know Governor Whitmer is no longer with us, but she in
her written testimony spoke to many of the roads that were
washed out due to recent floods in Michigan.
So let me just address this question, then, to Commissioner
Sheehan, who also mentioned in her written testimony how the
Department uses Federal dollars to carry out a significant
number of resiliency projects.
I understand that AASHTO has supported recent efforts by
this Committee to improve system resiliency, including by
expanding project eligibility for the National Highway
Performance Program, the Surface Transportation Block Grant
Program, and the Emergency Relief Program.
I would love for the Commissioner to touch on the
importance of resiliency projects for planning, and what steps
this Committee can take in the upcoming reauthorization bill to
support States' efforts to improve resiliency in transportation
systems.
The other question, more related than you may think, is for
Mayor Hancock. While the National Highway System connects
cities and facilitates economic activity across the Nation, its
construction historically has been deeply destructive for many
communities, particularly lower income communities and
communities of color. The construction of highways through some
neighborhoods has caused a displacement of predominately
minority residents, and in many cases, fosters isolation from
opportunity, heightened exposure to pollution, and chronic
disinvestment.
Mayor Hancock, in his written testimony spoke to concerns
about equity, and equity considerations going into planning
efforts, and specific examples of not just Denver's experience
in the past, but how Denver is now working in partnership with
the State of Colorado to reconnect communities in the
reconstruction of Interstate 70, which bisects the city.
So I would love for the mayor to speak to how this can
serve as a model for reconnecting communities in other cities
across the country, and once again, how the Federal Government
can play a bigger role in supporting projects that mitigate the
detrimental impact of highways on historically disenfranchised
communities.
Thank you both.
Ms. Sheehan. Thank you for the question, Senator. As part
of the development of our transportation asset management
plans, State DOTs are required to do a risk and hazard
analysis. Many of us have been working to build out our GIS
information.
We have significant storm events in our States. We are
mapping exactly which locations on our transportation system
are impacted by those events and making sure that in the
future, as we are advancing improvements in those locations, we
are incorporating resiliency and ensuring that the impacts from
prior storms are not allowed to occur in the future.
So we have really integrated resiliency into every aspect
of work that we do. From day one when we are scoping a project,
we are looking at that history of where we have seen
significant impacts, especially from flooding, either in
coastal areas or inland, when we have significant rain events,
and making sure that we build it back better.
Senator Padilla. Thank you, Commissioner.
Mr. Mayor.
Mr. Hancock. Senator, with regard to your question around
the I-70 Project and of course the issues of equity, it was
when the city of Denver got involved in this conversation about
the I-70 Project that we were able to bring to light the values
of equity. This highway was placed, as you pointed out, in a
primarily minority, low income community, dividing the
community, creating barriers and lack of investment for the
foregone future. We had some options available, but none that
were, quite frankly, feasible in going forward.
So there were a few things that the city of Denver brought
forward as a municipality who understood the challenges that
this community faced, as well as the historical actions of
environmental injustice. One was community engagement. The FHWA
said this was probably the [indiscernible] model effort around
community engagement that they have ever seen. We are proud of
that. Between engaging the community and hearing the voices of
the people who live there, but also understand the history was
very important.
Empowering the local government to engage, the State
Department of Transportation really helped us by allowing us,
opening the door for us to be involved, we can bring forward
the issues of equity and opportunity. Connecting roads in that
community that would help provide new life and opportunities
was also increasingly important as we moved in, as well as
amenities. These were underserved communities, they didn't have
access to parks. As part of this highway project, we lowered
it, and we are capping it with a new park for the community
that everyone can enjoy.
We have also built in some remedies to some of the
environmental challenges, including pollution, but also
flooding, helping to remedy the historic flooding in these
neighborhoods in a project called Plot to Park. We merged two
very important but very expensive infrastructure programs,
including this project, to alleviate the flooding of these
neighborhoods that has been happening for hundreds of years and
make it more, quite frankly, improve the quality of life for
residents in the area.
So the Plot to Park Program was extremely important. Making
sure that you are engaging municipalities, we have, again, a
better understanding of the residents, the challenges of
equity, the environmental injustices that have occurred, and
creating opportunities around connectivity and renewed
opportunities of investment was critically important on the I-
70 Project.
Senator Padilla. Thank you both.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Senator Carper. Senator Padilla, thank you for some great
questions.
I am going to yield now to Senator Capito, and she will
give some closing statements, and then hand the gavel back to
me.
Senator Capito. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank
our witnesses. I thought they were tremendous and gave us great
insight and a broad understanding of how many of these programs
impact their communities, their States, and I appreciate it, I
know it is been a little bit lengthy for some.
I also would like to call attention to the fact that we had
almost unanimous membership here in our Committee asking
questions and engaging in this issue. I think if you close your
eyes and didn't know who was asking the questions or from what
party that person might be from, I think you see that there is
a solidarity of interest and a grand desire to really get
something done together in the surface transportation
infrastructure area.
The variety of questions, whether it is formula funding or
electric vehicles or bridge repair, or kind of cuts across
every single State, we know that. Every State has more urban
areas and lots of rural areas. So I think that the perspectives
that all of our members have given us show the great interest
that we all have in making sure that our States' needs are
addressed.
I said in my beginning statement that flexibility was going
to be very important. I think the Governors backed me up on
that. One size fits all doesn't work for Denver, it won't work
for Maryland, it might not work for West Virginia, and so the
flexibility built into the program is really critical.
One of the areas that I think we had good agreement on is
the speed to projects, the delivery of the actual project. I
talked in my opening statements about the 7 year timeline, and
how that is costly and may result in obviously fewer jobs, but
also maybe incomplete projects or projects that are only
partially able to be completed, and therefore not as useful and
not as critical to the infrastructure development of our
individual States.
Certainty is something that we have all asked for, and that
would be the predictability of a lengthy bill, 5 or 6 year
bill, which I think provides the certainty that many folks
talked about.
Innovation was a huge topic. We heard a lot about electric
vehicles, charging stations, which we had in our bill, we had
the first climate chapter ever in a highway bill that we passed
21 to nothing.
We are very much committed to that on a bipartisan basis,
and we want to make sure that it is in the best interest of
everybody for the environmental reasons as well as the
infrastructure development reasons.
I will say that we did hear a lot about--I thought it was
interesting to hear from the different topics about electric,
and when you are talking about electric vehicle charging
stations, how that different municipalities and States are not
waiting for the Federal Government to fill the gap.
I am sure that there are ways that we can help, but at the
same time, we need to be relying on the resources that are
available on the local and State level. They are ready to
commit resources, and have. Certainly from the private sector,
we don't want to displace that commitment, I don't think, with
a Federal commitment. We are going to have enough on our plate
without co-opting where our States and municipalities are
already willing to go with the private sector.
So I would say with all the electric vehicles that are
being projected to be on our roads, the main thing is, we have
to have safe highways, we have to have modernized highways, we
have to have bridges that are safe. We have to go back to the
core function of a surface transportation bill, not to say we
are not going to build transportation for the future, because
we will.
But we have to have--it is almost like the food and water
aspects of our lives. There are basic things that we have to
have as we move toward different parts of our society in
different ways. Certainly, our job, I see, with all of the
great things that we see in our future, we still have that core
function. That is where I think you saw a lot of interest from
our Committee.
So I think you did a great job, Mr. Chairman, with great
witnesses, and I am glad to participate. I want to thank my
staff; they got us all prepared, and your staff as well. We are
working well together; let's keep it up.
He wants the gavel back, all right. Thank you.
Senator Carper. Thanks for sharing.
In closing, I want to just follow up, it is been just a
great hearing. What a great hearing to start off our new
Congress.
I think we have had all but two of our members who were
able to participate, which is terrific attendance. I know that
everybody has other committees and other hearings that they are
trying to get to. So thanks to our colleagues, and a warm
welcome to our new colleagues who were here today.
I want to say a special thanks to our staffs. I used to
admire the way Max Baucus and Chuck Grassley worked together in
the Finance Committee. They initially started by meeting, just
the two of them would meet maybe once a week. Then over time,
they would have another, like a chief of staff of something
like that with them. But eventually, you could walk into a
meeting between their two staffs, Max Baucus, a Democrat, Chuck
Grassley, a Republican, on the Finance Committee, the two
leads, and if you didn't know who was working for who, you
wouldn't know.
I think that is a good goal for us, and I am encouraged
that we are going to have some terrific collaboration.
I want to thank our witnesses. What a lineup.
Staffs, thank you for bringing together four terrific
witnesses.
We are deeply grateful to the Governors, Governor Hogan,
our neighbor not far away in Maryland, and Governor Whitmer,
who is the Governor of my favorite baseball team, the Tigers,
and Mayor Hancock from Denver, and Commissioner Sheehan up in
New Hampshire. You all did a wonderful job, and we appreciate
your joining us virtually.
I want to just say one thing, maybe one or two things in
closing. We are so lucky to be here. We are so lucky to serve
on this Committee.
I like to quote Einstein, and Einstein used to say, ``In
adversity lies opportunity.'' Plenty of adversity, I talked
about it when we began the hearing, but there is also
opportunity here. If we are smart about it, and we find ways to
collaborate and work together, we are going to rise to the
occasion. I am hopeful and encouraged that we will. The
American people are counting on us.
I said earlier, at the beginning of the hearing about the
train, Union Station, I walked up to the Capitol, the sun was
out, it was so beautiful. The skies were blue, the sunshine
over the Capitol. It felt like morning in America again. That
is a good note for us to close on.
I have a couple of unanimous consent requests. I would ask
unanimous consent to submit for the record a number of letters
from associations focused on safety, electric charging,
construction jobs, technology, and others. They are all eager
to see Congress get to work on infrastructure for the benefit
of all the American people, and so are we.
One other one, there has been a fair amount of discussion,
and rightly so, on delay. We have included streamlining
provisions in every reauthorization bill in the last 30 years.
I know every one that I had a chance to work on. We also need
to recognize the delays that are caused by funding shortfalls;
that is something we can do something about, and we need to.
I want to ask unanimous consent to submit for the record a
report from AECOM, a consulting firm that looked at 40 major
infrastructure projects and found that a major challenge to 39
out of 40 was inadequate funding, not completion of
environmental reviews, so let's keep that in mind.
I hope our next bill will encourage innovative project
delivery and also address our funding shortfalls. We need to do
both.
[The referenced information follows:]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Senator Carper. Let me just ask the receptionist, anything
else that we need? No.
All right, I think we are ready for takeoff. It was a good
day.
Thanks, everyone.
And now with that, the hearing is concluded.
[Whereupon, at 12:50 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[all]