U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

97–584 PDF 2016

S. HRG. 113–748 

MAP–21 REAUTHORIZATION: THE ECONOMIC IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING FEDERAL INVESTMENT IN OUR TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

FEBRUARY 12, 2014 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS 

ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

BARBARA BOXER, California, Chairman 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

BENJAMIN L. CARDIN, Maryland 

BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 

SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon 

KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, New York 

CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey 

EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

ROGER WICKER, Mississippi 

JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska 

BETTINA POIRIER, Majority Staff Director 

ZAK BAIG, Republican Staff Director 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

FERUARY 12, 2014 

OPENING STATEMENTS 

Boxer, Hon. Barbara, U.S. Senator from the State of California ........................ 1 

Vitter, Hon. David, U.S. Senator from the State of Louisiana ............................ 3 

Merkley, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from the State of Oregon ................................ 4 

Wicker, Hon. Roger, U.S. Senator from the State of Mississippi ........................ 5 

Whitehouse, Hon. Sheldon, U.S. Senator from the State of Rhode Island ......... 5 

Inhofe, Hon. James, U.S. Senator from the State of Oklahoma .......................... 6 

Gillibrand, Hon. Kirsten, U.S. Senator from the State of New York .................. 8 

Fischer, Hon. Deb, U.S. Senator from the State of Nebraska ............................. 9 

Cardin, Hon. Benjamin, U.S. Senator from the State of Maryland .................... 9 

Sessions, Hon. Jeff, U.S. Senator from the State of Alabama ............................. 11 

Barrasso, Hon. John, U.S. Senator from the State of Wyoming .......................... 12 

WITNESSES 

Donohue, Thomas J., President and CEO, U.S. Chamber of Commerce ............ 13 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 15 

Response to an additional question from Senator Boxer .............................. 37 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Vitter ............................................................................................ 38 

Senator Inhofe ........................................................................................... 39 

Senator Sessions ........................................................................................ 41 

Trumka, Richard L., President, AFL-CIO ............................................................. 44 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 46 

Response to an additional question from Senator Boxer .............................. 53 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Inhofe ........................................................................................... 55 

Senator Sessions ........................................................................................ 57 

Hancock Hon. Mike, President, American Association of State Highway and 

Transportation Officials; Secretary, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet ......... 60 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 62 

Responses to additional questions from Senator Boxer ................................ 78 

Response to an additional question from Senator Vitter .............................. 80 

Responses to additional questions from Senator Inhofe ............................... 81 

Response to an additional question from Senator Wicker ............................ 83 

Ruane, T. Peter, Ph.D., President and CEO, American Road and Transportation Builders Association ................................................................................. 84 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 86 

Responses to additional questions from: 

Senator Boxer ............................................................................................ 103 

Senator Vitter ............................................................................................ 105 

Senator Inhofe ........................................................................................... 108 

Timmons, Jay, President and CEO, National Association of Manufacturers ..... 115 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 117 

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL 

Statement of PCA America’s Cement Manufacturers .......................................... 135 

(1) 

MAP–21 REAUTHORIZATION: THE ECONOMIC 

IMPORTANCE OF MAINTAINING FEDERAL 

INVESTMENT IN OUR TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE 

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2014 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS, 

Washington, DC. 

The full committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m. in room 

406, Dirksen Senate Building, Hon. Barbara Boxer (chairman of 

the full committee) presiding. 

Present: Senators Boxer, Vitter, Cardin, Whitehouse, Merkley, 

Gillibrand, Barrasso, Wicker, Boozman, Fischer. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA BOXER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Senator BOXER. Good morning, everybody. 

I am so happy to see you all here. This is such an important 

issue that we are discussing today. We are focusing on maintaining 

Federal funding for transportation, maintaining Federal funding. 

That is what is at stake here, for transportation. Ensuring the 

long-term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund and averting a 

major crisis later this year. 

We will hear from our witnesses who are national leaders representing businesses, States and workers who build, maintain and 

utilize our transportation system. 

I am so pleased to once again welcome Tom Donohue from the 

U.S. Chamber and Richard Trumpka from the AFL–CIO. I always 

feel when they are together we have a winning issue. They are 

joined by Hon. Mike Hancock, Secretary of the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet and current President of AASHTO; Dr. Pete Ruane, 

President and CEO of American Roads and Transportation Builders; and Jay Timmons, President and CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers. 

I want to say to all who are here that there will be devastating 

impacts felt across our economy if the Highway Trust Fund is allowed to run out of funds later this year. We must not let that happen. Here are the sobering facts. CBO and DOT estimate that the 

Highway Trust Fund may run out of funds as early as September 

2014, which would create cash-flow problems for States during the 

critical summer construction season. Due to the uncertainty leading up to that bleak scenario, States are already beginning to develop contingency plans to prepare for reductions in Federal transVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:39 Jan 05, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\97584.TXT VERN
2 

portation funding, which includes cutting pending projects from 

their current funding plans. This is terrible for businesses, for 

workers and for our Nation. 

According to Georgia’s department of transportation, if Federal 

funding is cut, ‘‘We wouldn’t be able to fund any new projects.’‘ Officials from other States have made similar statements and the effects are very negative, to say the least. As States postpone putting 

construction contracts out to bid, business will be more reluctant 

to invest, and that impact will be felt throughout the entire economy. 

Let me be clear. The pending Highway Trust Fund shortfall 

must be addressed by an infusion of funds. Otherwise, CBO estimates that obligations for new projects in 2015 would need to be 

reduced to zero, zero. This would result in Federal highway, highway safety and transit funding being cut by $50.8 billion in 2015 

with almost 1.8 million jobs lost. Only old projects could be funded. 

No more new projects. 

Again, this means that States will be unable to obligate any Federal funds for any new projects perhaps as early as this summer. 

It is critical for our Nation to continue investing in our aging infrastructure. Therefore, preserving the Trust Fund needs to be our 

No. 1 priority in this committee and other committees and in the 

Senate and the House. We must work together to find a sweet spot 

for the dependable bipartisan source of funding for the Highway 

Trust Fund. A strong transportation system is vital to ensuring the 

economic competitiveness of the United States of America. This requires maintaining Federal investments in our transportation infrastructure. 

A report last year from the National Association of Manufacturers, and I am so happy they are with us today, found that 70 percent of U.S. manufacturers believe America’s roads are getting 

worse, and 67 percent believe that infrastructure is important 

enough to American businesses that all options to fund investments should be on the table. I thank NAM for that. 

Roads and bridges are not Democratic, they are not Republican. 

And I am so proud of the bipartisan support on our committee, 

from my Ranking Member, Senator Vitter, to every member on this 

committee. I have met with almost every one of them. It is our intention to report out a bill, and I am hoping for a five or 6 year 

bill. 

I have begun discussions with Chairman Wyden and Ranking 

Member Hatch on funding the Highway Trust Fund. They know 

they have that responsibility. And I know we will all work with 

them. 

To all of our witnesses, tank you for being here and for your advocacy for a strong transportation system. We need you now more 

than ever. You have been with us through these battles before, and 

we have won those battles because of our unity. So whatever our 

differences may be in other areas, and we know we have them, but 

we don’t have them here. Being partners is critical to our success. 

With that, I would turn to my Ranking Member, Senator Vitter. 

3 

OPENING STATEMENT OF THE HON. DAVID VITTER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thanks to all of 

our witnesses. Thanks for today’s hearing, Madam Chairman. It is 

very appropriate that as we hopefully are finalizing a WRDA conference, our first big piece of infrastructure work on this committee, and we are very hopeful about that, we increasingly turn 

our attention to our next big infrastructure work, which is the next 

Highway Bill. We are both excited to do that and are both actively 

doing that. 

Thanks to our witnesses. You represent a diverse group of interests. But collectively, you represent a strong and common voice on 

this issue. 

Infrastructure is a critical component of our Nation’s economy 

and our quality of life. First class infrastructure is fundamental to 

connect people and communities. It is a critical building block for 

our economy. In 2011 alone, the U.S. transportation system moved 

17.6 billion tons of goods, valued at almost $17 trillion. However, 

as the Chair suggested, just last week CBO came out with their 

updated projections for the Highway Trust Fund. That trust fund 

is accelerating toward bankruptcy faster than anticipated. Action 

must be taken before the end of the Fiscal Year to avoid what the 

chair described, a nearly 100 percent drop in new Federal funds in 

Fiscal Year 2015. The economic impact of such a drop would resonate far beyond the lack of direct investment into our infrastructure. Inaction would drastically disrupt the project delivery supply 

chain, the efficiency and cost of movement of our goods and our 

overall competitiveness. 

The Highway Trust Fund was intended to not only facilitate the 

unique characteristics of funding transportation infrastructure, but 

also to provide funding safeguards for the highest priority projects. 

Putting such a structure on a sound fiscal footing will restore the 

stability and certainty of the trust fund that is so vital to economic 

growth. 

I have to say, some believe that for some reason it is a core conservative principle to adhere strictly to our current, flawed mechanism in perpetuity and that is all there should ever be to meet our 

infrastructure demands. I don’t understand that at all, and will be 

advocating for solutions that go beyond that. 

What I do understand is concerns about a net tax increase for 

cash-strapped middle class families. And I will be seeking a solution that fully addresses our Highway Trust Fund needs while not 

imposing such a net tax increase. 

When the trust fund structure was first established, it was designed to build the interstate highway system, and it was structured based on the simple principle that first you map out and define a detailed plan. You come up with a cost to complete that plan, 

and then you build a user-based financing structure to complete 

that task. Such thinking not only produces a certainty of a 13 year 

authorization bill, but it also established good government accountability and trust from system users. 

However, that type of thinking is almost unrecognizable in our 

transportation funding structure today. The actions of the last 6 

years represent a significant departure from the intent of the HighVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:39 Jan 05, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\97584.TXT VERN
4 

way Trust Fund and have prolonged economic uncertainty not only 

in the direct investment of our infrastructure but also the type of 

long term investment that drives economic development at home 

and makes us more competitive abroad. 

If we are going to be successful in restoring that type of structure, we fundamentally have to put trust back in the Highway 

Trust Fund. To me this means we can’t keep adding programs and 

eligibility to the trust fund that are narrowly focused, that don’t 

build or maintain infrastructure or do very little to benefit those 

who pay into the system. It means the trust fund needs to be even 

more transparent than before to rebuild that trust. We need to be 

able to show where taxpayer dollars are going and where future investments may or may not be utilized on a project by project level. 

And finally, we must rebuild that trust by continuing to reduce 

the cost burden and impact of red tape and bureaucracy. The Chair 

and I are hard at work putting significant reform ideas together in 

a new bill that can rebuild that trust and that can start the process 

and get the Finance Committee moving as a full partner on the finance piece. 

So we hope to be moving such a base bill through the committee 

to encourage the Finance Committee to take it up and address the 

finance piece as a full partner. So I very much look forward to your 

testimony, very much look forward to that work of rebuilding trust 

in the Trust Fund so that we can fully finance our clear infrastructure needs. Thank you. 

Senator BOXER. Senator Vitter, thank you. I think this gives the 

signal that we are very much of one mind as how to proceed, which 

is very important. 

Here is the situation. We have several votes at 11:30. So I am 

going to ask Members to keep their remarks to about 4 minutes, 

if you can, your opening remarks. And we will turn to Senator 

Merkley. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF MERKLEY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OREGON 

Senator MERKLEY. Thank you, Madam Chair. 

I think this is a very important project, that we pursue renewal 

of MAP–21. I know Oregon’s Department of Transportation is very 

nervous about the pending shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund. If 

our States have to delay projects, that of course results in much 

higher costs. It also results in a direct impact on jobs within the 

State. We anticipate that we would have a challenge, we would lose 

about 5,000 jobs in Oregon if we don’t succeed in this effort during 

2015. 

So I am very aware that America is spending only 2 percent of 

its GDP on infrastructure. Europe is spending 5 percent, China is 

spending 10 percent. The experience of going to Beijing 10 years 

apart, saw Beijing go from bicycles to bullet train in that time period. 

Our 2 percent can’t even repair the aging infrastructure we have 

from World War II. We have to do more. Let’s get it done. 

It is terrific to have Chair and Ranking Member working together to help take this project forward. It is extremely important 

5 

to our economy and to the infrastructure that will fuel our future 

economy. 

Senator BOXER. Senator, thank you for your support and our 

comments. 

We will turn to Senator Wicker. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER WICKER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI 

Senator WICKER. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you, 

Ranking Member Vitter, for holding this important hearing. Bipartisanship is breaking out all over in the Congress. It continues 

today and as we debate Federal transportation reauthorization, I 

hope we can build on this success. Funding transportation infrastructure is a combined Federal and State responsibility. We need 

to do better, because the Nation deserves better, as Senator 

Merkley said. We need to pass a reauthorization that lasts longer 

than 2 years. 

Earlier in this Congress, this committee held a hearing on the 

implementation of the provisions of MAP–21. Most of these provisions have yet to be enacted. State departments of transportation 

need the certainty of a long-term reauthorization to plain, maintain, build and expand. 

That said, we should still proceed with caution. We need to continue to let the States be the laboratories for best practices. More 

than 30 States are considering or have considered increasing revenues for transportation infrastructure. Over a dozen of these States 

have committed and passed these increases into law. We should 

allow and encourage these experiments to continue. Let the States 

be the proving ground for some of the more radical or innovative 

proposals that have been brought forward. What may work in one 

State may not work for all States. 

There are other issues that need to be addressed. We need to examine the root causes of our current situation. Over the last two 

decades, the buying power of gas tax revenues has slowly declined, 

not only as a result of increasing maintenance and construction 

costs, but also as a result of increasing fuel efficiency. We need to 

ensure that all users shoulder an equitable burden for the wear 

and tear on our Nation’s roads. 

Finally, Madam Chair, we need to safeguard the integrity of the 

gas tax as a user fee. We have an obligation to the users who are 

paying the fee, an obligation to ensure the revenues are going to 

their intended purpose; namely, building and maintaining our Nation’s roads and highways. 

Thank you, Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, sir. 

Now we will turn to Senator Whitehouse, followed by Senator 

Inhofe. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF RHODE ISLAND 

Senator WHITEHOUSE. Thank you, Chairman, for calling this 

hearing. It has not been that long since we were able to pass MAP– 

21 in an overwhelmingly bipartisan fashion. We did that because 

we recognized the value of investing in our transportation infraVerDate Aug 31 2005 15:39 Jan 05, 2016 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\_EPW\DOCS\97584.TXT VERN
6 

structure, projects that put Americans to work and ensure that our 

goods and services can get efficiently to market. 

That bipartisan view is reflected in today’s hearing. That bipartisan view is reflected in today’s hearing, which brings together 

groups that don’t agree on many things, but they do know that 

building roads and bridges can create quality jobs across the Country and help our economy move forward. 

That is nowhere more important than in my home State of Rhode 

Island, which still suffers an unemployment rate of 9.1 percent. We 

have no shortage of transportation projects that could put Rhode 

Islanders to work. The I–95 corridor runs through our capital city 

and the Providence Viaduct there, built in 1964, is showing its age. 

Its deck is badly deteriorated, the steel girders are cracked, wood 

plans have been installed to prevent concrete from falling off the 

viaduct onto cars crossing it below. And similarly for the Amtrak 

trains that go underneath it. 

Happily, with the help of a TIGER grant and other Federal 

funds, that project has broken ground, and a replacement bridge on 

one way of the highway is under construction. But there is a lot 

more work to do on the northbound lane, where Route 6 and Route 

10 converge with Highway 95 there. And that central location in 

Providence is just one example of how Federal transportation programs are necessary and can help put people to work. 

Less than 2 years ago, we put MAP–21 into place with some important reforms. But the thing we were not able to get done was 

to solve the problem of the diminishing and soon to be vanishing 

Highway Trust Fund. So it is headed for zero, and when it gets to 

zero, that is going to be a real disaster for transportation and infrastructure. So I am particularly interested in hearing from areas 

where our witnesses might find common agreement as to how we 

can address the central issue for the next reauthorization bill. I 

don’t think just raising the gas tax is going to help, as mileage increases, electric cars emerge, and hybrid cars also cut into the 

value of the gas tax as a source for highway infrastructure. 

I thank the Chairman, I thank the Ranking Member, who I understand is next door meeting with some constituents. I appreciate 

the panel being here together, even in some unusual pairings. 

[Laughter.] 

The Chair. Thank you. In my opening statement, I talked about 

how we have already begun talks with Senators Wyden and Hatch, 

because it is their purview to fund this. They are very, I think they 

are excited with the challenge, not that it will be easy. Nothing is 

easy. 

Senator Inhofe. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES INHOFE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA 

Senator INHOFE. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I do have a long 

and brilliant opening statement to give. But I will listen to you and 

submit that and just for the record make a couple of comments. 

Senator BOXER. Without objection. 

Senator INHOFE. There is one paragraph in here that I do want 

to actually read. As I see it, we have four choices moving forward, 

one based on CBO estimates, and if we don’t find any new revenue 

7 

in the trust fund, we are looking at a 90 percent cut in the program 

in less than 8 months. And some data actually has that figure at 

100 percent. 

Second, we simply, this is something we will talk about later on, 

transferring from the general fund. Third, raise revenue. And four, 

in the absence of answering the first three, before MAP–21 expires 

we once again rely on a series of short-term extensions. This is 

something I want to avoid. 

And I have to say, confession is good for the soul. Our problem, 

and it seems like every year, and I have been involved in these 

every year since I was on the T&K Committee in the House many 

years ago. It is not so much with the Democrats but with the Republicans. There is this passion for some Republicans to get the 

conservative ratings and somehow when something big on spending 

comes along, they use that as an example. But that is the bad 

news. 

The good news is, over on the House side, and I was privileged 

to go over, you guys need to understand this, you already knew 

this, I got all 33 of the House Republicans on the T&I Committee 

in one room. This was right after we passed this out of the Senate. 

I told them about the guys that were demagoguing this on the 

floor. I said, I know a lot of you guys are conservative. So I gave 

them my pitch as to the liberal vote would be to vote for extensions, the extensions that we had, nine extensions between the last 

two cost about 30 percent off the top. That is not something that 

conservatives should be doing. And I am not saying it was my influence there, but all 33 of them voted in favor of it and enthusiastically supported it. 

So I think we are making some headway there. Again, I look at 

the trust fund, and you just can’t tell me that maintaining unused, 

vacant Federal properties at $25 million a year is more important 

than reauthorizing a highway bill. There are a lot of things that 

come out of the general fund. And I think we are going to have to 

look at that. We may end up having to do that anyway, like we did 

last time. 

But if you read the Constitution, Article I, Section 8, it says 

clearly that the main thing we are supposed to be doing here is defense and infrastructure. So my case rests, we will go after it. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Inhofe follows:] 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. INHOFE, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Thank you chairman Boxer. And thank you to our panelists for making the time 

to be here as well. 

As we are all aware, CBO released their projections of the Highway Trust Fund 

last week that show that the accounts are in some real trouble. While this wasn’t 

unexpected, it is unacceptable that we continue to ignore the failures of the White 

House and Congress to commit to consistently funding multi-year transportation 

bills. We are not just talking about the construction jobs the President mentions, 

we are talking about the decision companies make when they are looking to expand 

and, in many cases, relocate back to the US yet are faced with an ill-equipped surface transportation network. As we focus on failed Unemployment Insurance extensions, we should be spending our time addressing the causes and not the symptoms 

of our economic woes. Whether we are facing a series of short-term extensions or 

long-term reauthorizations of MAP–21, I can assure you I will not let the Federal 

highway program cease to be the backbone of our economy as it has been for close 

to a century. 

8 

As I see it, we have four choices moving forward: One, based on CBO estimates, 

if we don’t find any new revenue in the trust fund, we are looking at a 90 percent 

cut in the program in less than 8 months, and some data actually has that figure 

at 100 percent. Two, we simply transfer more money from the general fund. Three, 

we raise revenue. And four, in the absence of answering the first 3 before MAP– 

21 expires, we once again rely on a series of short-term extensions to keep the program on life support. 

Now as many of you have heard me say over the years, dramatic cuts to the Highway program is not something I am going to let happen. We’ve turned to the general 

fund in the past and though it should be a last resort, it is ultimately something 

we will have to return to without consensus on new long-term, sustainable revenue. 

Realistically, the General Fund is our only option in the short run as we’re looking 

at a Highway Trust Fund that is going to have difficulty meeting its obligations 

sometime before the end of this fiscal year. Looking forward, if we want to do a 6 

year bill like we should, CBO estimates we’ll need $100 billion, or around $16.6 million a year in new revenue or general fund transfers. Raising revenue for the Highway Trust Fund should be our first focus, but the reality is that it’s going to have 

to come from the general fund in the short term and you can’t tell me that maintaining unused or vacant Federal properties at $25 million per year is more important than reauthorizing the highway bill which could provide jobs that Americans 

desperately need. Finally, I do not believe that short-term extensions are the answer. Our states, industries, and economy need long-term authorizations that ensure funding and allow for the planning of big, long-term projects of regional and 

national importance. I have often said the conservative position is to prevent short 

term extensions, because as history showed us after 9 extensions between 

SAFETEA-LU and MAP–21, we lose 30 percent of the Highway Trust Fund’s resources when we fail to achieve longer term funding bills. I believe we can do better. 

Senator BOXER. You always make a very good case. I just want 

to point out that in addition to your talking to the Tea Party members of there, I had tea, or coffee with quite a few of them. I enjoyed it, actually, and we did get tremendous support. Remember, 

Senators Wyden and Hatch are going to decide how this is paid for 

over there in that committee. 

Senator Gillibrand. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

Senator GILLIBRAND. Thank you, Madam Chair. I can’t tell you 

how grateful I am that you have pulled together this distinguished 

panel of witnesses to discuss the importance of investing in our Nation’s infrastructure and transportation systems. 

This is an issue, obviously, that unites both labor and business. 

Because the United States cannot maintain our competitive global 

edge without a strong network of roads, bridges and rails to move 

people and products safety and efficiently forward. It is as simple 

as that, but with deadlines looming to reauthorize MAP–21, and 

new funding to shore up the Highway Trust Fund, we run the risk 

of doing real damage to our economy if Congress fails to act. There 

will be serious consequences for each of our States, for businesses 

both large and small, as well as for working families who depend 

on our transportation networks just to get to school, to get to work, 

to get home safely and reliably. 

We all know that the Highway Trust Fund is projected to become 

insolvent by the end of the summer. The effect would have severe 

impacts in my State of New York. New York has 628 Federal aid 

highway projects scheduled to begin in 2015 which requires approximately $2 billion worth of funding. Forty percent of these 

projects are on bridges that are in need of construction or repair. 

Without the new funding from the Highway Trust Fund to start 

9 

these projects next year, New York State would have to begin restricting the use of roads and bridges that are no longer safe, or 

can no longer handle the capacity for which they were originally 

designed. This would result in detours, delays, problems with getting things that need to be brought into our commerce. It means 

more time and money lost for businesses and families who are just 

struggling to make it in this tough economy. 

New York State is by no means alone. This will hurt every single 

one of our States and ripple through our whole transportation system. So we really can’t afford the delays by Congress. We really 

have to make sure that Congress acts now. We risk falling behind 

other countries that are making these investments, sending businesses and jobs overseas instead of bringing them here and keeping 

them here where they belong. 

So the long term consequences of inaction, in my view, are extremely costly. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, for holding the 

hearing, and I look forward to the testimony of the witnesses. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much, Senator. 

Now we turn to Senator Fischer. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DEB FISCHER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEBRASKA 

Senator FISCHER. Thank you, Madam Chair and Ranking Member Vitter, for holding this hearing. Thank you to our panelists who 

came today as well. 

There is no doubt that our roads and bridges are essential to the 

economic health of our Nation. In Nebraska, our agricultural industry is especially reliant on an efficient transportation system to 

move goods from farm to market. Investment in infrastructure is 

the key to expanding and strengthening commerce and promoting 

opportunity for this business growth. 

With the Highway Trust Fund again on the brink of insolvency, 

it is clear that it is time for Congress to put infrastructure investment back on a sustainable course. I believe that a limited government should focus its resources on meeting its core duties. Infrastructure, including highway maintenance and construction, is one 

of those important responsibilities. 

As we work on the next highway reauthorization bill, I am hopeful that this committee will continue to work toward policy reforms 

that will ensure that the Federal dollars we are investing are devoted to tasks that truly add value to the projects and are not 

wasted on piling up paperwork that only serves to fulfill bureaucratic requirements. 

While MAP–21 made some needed improvements to accelerate 

project delivery, there is still much work to be done. I look forward 

to the hearing today and again, thank you. Thank you, Madam 

Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Senator Fischer. 

We turn to Senator Cardin. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BENJAMIN CARDIN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND 

Senator CARDIN. Madam Chair, thank you for conducting this 

hearing. We have a very distinguished panel before us. 

10 

It is always a pleasure, I remember last time we had Mr. 

Donohue and Mr. Trumpka together on a similar bill here. So it is 

nice to see the entire panel together, but labor and business recognizing the importance of a long-term surface transportation reauthorization. I want to stress that, Madam Chair. I think it is critically important that we do a long-term surface transportation reauthorization, to give predictability to our transportation program in 

this Country. You can’t plan transportation needs on a 1-year or 

2-year basis. You have to have at least a five or 6 year reauthorization bill in order to do the types of modernized transportation 

needs that we have in this Country. 

As many of the Members of this committee have already pointed 

out, and as our panel will point out, this is about jobs, it will create 

for our economy. Not only the direct jobs related to the construction 

of our transportation needs, but also establishing the way in which 

we can attract the type of economic activities in our community 

that modern transportation provides. 

It is also important for livability. It took me about 2 hours coming in this morning from Baltimore. That is not unusual. The traffic around Baltimore and traffic around Washington, every care we 

can get off the road into transit, believe me, helps everyone, not 

just the person who has a much nicer experience being able to get 

to work, but also allowing the commerce of our highways being able 

to move more efficiently, with less cars on the road. 

So all that is critically important. I can put a plug in right now, 

Madam Chair, we have three major, maybe four major transit 

projects in Maryland we would like to get funded. Obviously, without having long-term reauthorization it is hard to see those programs move forward. I can tell you, they are critically important 

to our national economy, to the Federal Government because of the 

Federal work force, but also critically important for all of our communities. 

It is also a matter of our environment, and we have heard that 

many times before, in modernizing our transportation system we 

also provide a much more efficient way to deal with our energy 

needs and can be friendlier toward our environment. 

So why aren’t we doing this? What is the hurdle? We have to 

make the tough decision. The tough decision has to be made in conjunction with our colleagues on the Senate Finance Committee, and 

all the members, I happen to serve on both committees. But we 

need to have the revenue necessary to support a long-term surface 

transportation reauthorization. And we have to recognize the realities that the current revenue flow into the transportation trust 

fund is inadequate because it is based upon the gasoline tax. And 

the gasoline tax, we have been very effective in bringing down the 

volume, in regard to use of gasoline and more efficient engines, alternative ways. 

So we need to look at ways we can have an adequate source. I 

would hope we would be open to things such as using carbon fees 

or other ways to get the revenue necessary. I know that transportation is a bipartisan issue. Senator Inhofe has been one of the 

great leaders on moving forward on infrastructure. Senator Vitter 

also strongly supports this. So let’s also try to find a way that we 

can get the revenues that are adequate, so that we can have the 

11 

type of transportation reauthorization that is befitting the record 

of this committee and befitting our Country. 

Senator BOXER. Senator, thank you. You raise a good point, a few 

of our members do sit on Finance, which is going to be extremely 

helpful working with Senators Wyden and Hatch, who both have 

expressed interest in working with all of us. 

So now we are going to turn to Senator Sessions. And I want to 

remind everyone we have four votes, I believe it is four votes, at 

11:30. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JEFF SESSIONS, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA 

Senator SESSIONS. Madam Chair, thank you for the hearing. It 

is important. Our infrastructure situation is facing a financial challenge in the future, and we are all worried about it. I believe it represents a valid, legitimate expenditure of Federal dollars. A lot of 

things we do around here are not valid and legitimate Federal interest. But I think certain infrastructure projects certainly are. 

We had the Director of Office of Management and Budget testify 

before the Budget Committee yesterday. Just for example, today, 

he testified, that last year interest on the debt that we pay out of 

our revenue that comes in was about $230 billion. He projected last 

year at the end of 10 years that would rise to $830 billion. This 

year he says in 10 years from today that annual interest payments 

will be $890 billion in 2024. This is a stunning diversion of money 

from productive use to an unproductive use. And the result, and a 

big part of the problem is the huge deficits we have been running 

up in the last few years. We have almost doubled the deficit in a 

few years. We will have doubled the deficit since 2007. 

So I know everybody wants to spend money. And I know you all 

have projects you want to spend. But Mr. Elmendorf told us that 

we are on an unsustainable path. You will hear that deficits are 

going down. They will go down for the next 2 years. But after that, 

they start an uncontrolled, steady, increase every year, and the deficit in the tenth year will be a trillion dollars, again. 

So we are in a real difficult place. I just would say to you, everybody comes before us with good projects they want to spend money 

on. I would say to you, those who believe in highway and infrastructure should never forget how you were taken to the cleaners 

in the Stimulus Bill. We spent $840 billion on the Stimulus Bill. 

Only 40 of it went to roads and bridges. It went to every kind of 

social program. And Mr. Elmendorf told us when it passed that you 

will see an increase in GDP in the short run, but over 10 years, 

carrying another trillion dollars in debt will actually reduce GDP 

over 10 years. 

So I just would say to you, colleagues, and to the witnesses 

today, we have a big challenge before us. If we don’t watch it, we 

can put us in a position where we have another financial crisis and 

Mr. Elmendorf warned us that could happen. We are in a danger 

area, our debt situation is in the red zone. So Madam Chair, the 

bill we passed last year, I think we stayed within reasonable limits 

in the budget. I know you tried to do that, and Senator Vitter 

worked hard on it, Senator Inhofe. And we were able to maintain 

a level of funding at minimal level we thought was necessary. 

12 

So I just would say, that is going to be an even bigger challenge 

this year. I look forward to working with you. 

Senator BOXER. Senator, same here. I happened to be here when 

we did balance the budget. And I think we can it again if we are 

smart about it. But I think the important thing about highways is 

we have that self-sustaining trust fund, which is so critical. I have 

always supported that. That is operational, we spend what we take 

in. We have to be smart about it, I agree with you. Of course we 

have long-term problems we have to deal with. 

So it is my pleasure now to call on the ranking member of the 

subcommittee that is going to work so hard on this, Senator 

Barrasso. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN BARRASSO, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman and 

Ranking Member Vitter, for holding the hearing. I appreciate and 

share your commitment to ensure that the Highway Bill program 

continues. I also want to thank our panel for being here today to 

testify. 

When we can get the business and labor communities at the 

same table, I think that sends a very strong message to all Members of Congress and both parties that this program must continue. 

The Highway Reauthorization is truly, to me, a jobs bill. We need 

more red, white and blue jobs in States like Wyoming, California, 

Louisiana and all across the Country. I think setting up roadblocks 

on construction projects with excessive red tape doesn’t really create meaningful jobs that we need all around America. 

For our State departments of transportation and for contractors, 

the highway program is already complicated enough. We need a 

program that cuts down on burdensome paperwork and puts people 

back to work. The Highway Trust Fund needs a solution that is reliable and responsible. 

The question before us is how do we accomplish this in a fiscally 

responsible manner. In order to meet the highway system’s national needs, rural States must have flexibility to use Federal dollars that serve the national interests. We need to protect the taxpayer and ensure our States can continue to execute their transportation plans. 

Wyoming, like many of our other rural States, is a bridge State. 

It is critical that we maintain our Nation’s bridge States that move 

the flow of commerce across America. So Madam Chairman, I hope 

this committee will hold more hearings on the implementation of 

MAP–21, and as ranking member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee, I look forward to bringing the rural western perspective as we write the next reauthorization bill. 

Thank you, Madam Chairman, Ranking Member Vitter, for your 

leadership in holding the hearings. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, and thank you for your leadership as 

well. 

Now it is your time, so let’s get right to it. We are very, very 

pleased with this panel and we call on Tom Donohue to begin, from 

the Chamber of Commerce, President and CEO. 

13 

STATEMENT OF THOMAS J. DONOHUE, PRESIDENT 

AND CEO, U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 

Mr. DONOHUE. Thank you very much, Chairman Boxer, Ranking 

Member Vitter and distinguished members. We appreciate that so 

many are here. 

As many of you said this morning, reauthorization of MAP–21 

promises to be a difficult fight. But it doesn’t have to be. In fact, 

there is a broad consensus on a number of fundamental principles. 

We all agree that our infrastructure system is a critical national 

asset, that it drive growth, jobs, safety, mobility, trade and enhanced global competitiveness. We all agree that we are running 

out of money to fund the system. We all agree that the Federal 

Government must take a leading role in making sure our infrastructure system contributes to a strong economy. 

We all agree we need a predictable, stable and growing source 

of revenue for today, an immediate funding solution for tomorrow 

and in the long term, we need an expanded and new system. When 

you look at the big picture, the simplest, most straightforward and 

most effective way to generate enough revenue is by increasing 

Federal gasoline and diesel taxes. Remember, it is 19 years or 20 

years since we increased the Federal diesel tax. The gas tax, and 

this is what I was going to say, has not been increased since 1993. 

Cars are more fuel-efficient, trucks are much more fuel-efficient. I 

know something about that, you will remember. People are driving 

less and inflation has eaten into purchasing power. 

As a result, the Highway Trust Fund is simply going bankrupt. 

We are already borrowing billions of dollars from the general fund. 

Next year there will be a $13 billion cash shortfall and by 2020, 

it could be as much as $100 billion. Even here, that is a lot of 

money. 

A moderate increase in the gas tax phased in over time would 

provide the necessary funding, preserve the important user pays 

principle and provided needed stability. How do we do that? First, 

let’s start by having some courage and showing some leadership. 

For once, let’s do what is right, not what it is politically expedient. 

Second, let’s educate the public and your fellow lawmakers. Polls 

show opposition to gas tax and increases are significantly overblown. A San Jose University researcher recently found that 58 

percent of the public would support a gas tax increase if they knew 

where it was going and how it was going to be spent and it was 

going to be applied to building roads and bridges and transit systems. Voters want to know where the money is going and that it 

is not going to be wasted. 

Far too many people are unaware of the important reforms that 

eliminated earmarks and pork barrel spending long associated with 

infrastructure funding. Let me say parenthetically, occasionally it 

helped get a vote. But with that not here, we are going to have 

some really good arguments. 

So let’s also be clear, well, I often thought after the committee 

decides what all of the issues they are going to fund, then the 

members ought to be able to pick one out, you know, to go home. 

But let’s get into that another day. 

Let’s also be clear about the consequences of decreasing these investments. It means higher costs for goods, more congestion, and 

14 

increased accidents as well as reduced mobility and reduced competitiveness. Business is absolutely committed to aggressively pursuing this education effort. 

And third, let’s get busy building political support. On this panel 

you have the combined support of business, labor, construction, 

shippers, regulators, and in addition, truckers. Yesterday I had a 

meeting with the leaders of the American Trucking Association and 

the leaders of the AAA. They would significantly support a modest 

and thoughtful increase in the gasoline tax. Add that to the people 

who are here, this is getting to be a rather supportive group. 

It is interesting to note that last year six States, three with Republican Governors and three with Democratic Governors, enacted 

bills to increase their overall State fuel taxes. The sky didn’t fall 

and their economies have not collapsed. Both Republican and 

Democratic Presidents have approved modest gas tax increases, including Ronald Reagan. So it can be done. Increasing the gas tax 

and fuel tax is the right answer. It is tough, but it is doable. 

Now, let’s keep in mind that public money is only part of this 

equation. We must increase private investments as well. The private sector is prepared to pump as much as $250 billion into public-private partnerships, or P3s, if only certain barriers would be 

removed. We also must continue to aggressively root out waste in 

the system, which members indicated is underway, much of it 

caused by permitting delays and obstacles, as well as to make sure 

funds are spent on genuine priorities. Long term, the Chamber is 

willing to entertain different proposals for new and additional public funding mechanisms. However, currently, we don’t see any way 

to support any proposal that eliminates the Federal role, undermines the user pay principle or unfairly singles out specific industries to foot the bill. 

Very quickly, a couple of quick thoughts in conclusion. We know 

that won’t work. Scaling back or eliminating a dedicated source of 

Federal funding means greater congestion, higher transportation 

costs, more accidents and poorly maintained roads. If we give up 

on the Highway Trust Fund and rely on the general fund, we will 

never be able to execute long-term capital projects. We would have 

to cut other programs and engage in more deficit spending, and we 

would have to debate funding every single year. 

So I believe, Madam Chairman, devolving responsibility to the 

States means we will lose our national system. None of these approaches supports a growing sustainable source of funding. We 

need to pass a long-term authorization and the people at this table 

are ready to help you. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Donohue follows:] 

15 


97584.001
16 


97584.002
17 


97584.003
18 


97584.004
19 


97584.005
20 


97584.006
21 


97584.007
22 


97584.008
23 


97584.009
24 


97584.010
25 


97584.011
26 


97584.012
27 


97584.013
28 


97584.014
29 


97584.015
30 


97584.016
31 


97584.017
32 


97584.018
33 


97584.019
34 


97584.020
35 


97584.021
36 


97584.022
37 


97584.023
38 


97584.024
39 


97584.025
40 


97584.026
41 


97584.027
42 


97584.028
43 


97584.029
44 

Senator BOXER. We greatly appreciate that. And it is my honor 

to introduce Mr. Richard Trumka, President of the AFL–CIO. 

STATEMENT OF RICHARD L. TRUMKA, PRESIDENT, AFL–CIO 

Mr. TRUMKA. Thank you, Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member 

Vitter, for having us appear before your committee today. 

Three years ago, Tom and I appeared before this committee asking for reauthorization of the Surface Transportation Bill. And 

since then, he and I have spent more time than either one of us 

would like to admit trying to get this done. While we are not quite 

ready to schedule vacations together yet, we really are willing to 

come together and anxious to come together to get this important 

issue solved for the good of the Country. 

Because reauthorization of the Surface Transportation Bill has 

been the most important jobs legislation that Congress considers. 

It is a very, very big priority for us. While the economy has improved, job creation remains sluggish. The construction sector alone 

is down 1.6 million jobs from pre-recession levels. So we not only 

need jobs, but good jobs. It is estimated that each billion dollars of 

Federal investment in transportation creates 35,000 well-paying 

jobs, the type of career jobs that can support a family, a child’s 

education, a secure retirement and a middle class life. These investments not only create jobs, but spur economic growth, ensure 

our Country’s long-term economic global competitiveness, and improve the quality of life of our citizens. 

For those in Congress still pushing an austerity agenda when it 

comes to infrastructure, let me just say this. If your house has a 

leaky roof, not fixing it won’t save you any money. Like the leaky 

roof, delaying needed infrastructure investments will only cost us 

more in the long run, not less. 

I recently traveled to China. I was stunned at the speed at which 

our largest competitor is progressing. China has been investing 

heavily in its infrastructure and the results are pretty dramatic. 

During my trip to Shanghai, I visited the Yangshan deepwater 

port, the world’s largest and busiest container shipping port. The 

port, like the high speed trains that took me quickly and efficiently 

between China’s cities, is a key investment in China’s efforts to upgrade its infrastructure. It helps them keep up with the Country’s 

growth of exports. 

To get to the port, I traveled on a six-lane bridge that is 20 miles 

long, connecting Shanghai to the islands where the port is located. 

The bridge was completed in two and a half years, 20 miles of sixlane bridge over the China Sea to an island in two and a half 

years. And it employed literally thousands, thousands of workers. 

Prior to the project, nothing was there but a sleepy fishing village with some islands off in the distance. The first phase of the 

project opened in 2004, and by 2013, China had accomplished its 

goal of having the world’s largest port. You might say the same 

thing about high speed rail. We both agreed that we would do high 

speed rail a few years ago. Right now the U.S. has not one single 

mile of high speed rail. And the Chinese move more people than 

our entire domestic airline industry by high speed rail right now. 

So America can do it. We can do it, and we can do it better. 

45 

Now, I didn’t come here today to rehash all the data regarding 

our Nation’s infrastructure needs. Quite frankly, the facts have 

been reported. They have been studied and they have been discussed to death. The conclusions are always the same: infrastructure investments are vital to job creation, economic growth and 

global competitiveness. What remains to be determined is whether 

that information will be acted on and what kind of Country we will 

leave to our children and our grandchildren. 

The Highway Trust Fund is at a crossroads. Failure to act will 

mean our transportation system will decay further. Construction 

workers will stay on the bench. Supply chain and transit workers 

will lack steady work and our economic and global competitiveness 

will be diminished. 

Now, many funding ideas have been proposed, but few of them 

have been acted on. Other proposals have limited application. That 

leaves the fuel tax or some variation of it as the main source of 

funding. Raising the revenue will not be easy, regardless of where 

it comes from. 

But to be blunt, we can’t afford to bury our heads in the sand. 

A bridge that is deficient today will not be any better tomorrow. 

Congress must come together to enact a robust and a long-term authorization. If business and labor can come before you united on 

this issue, and we are united on this issue, despite our sharp disagreements on a variety of other matters, I think that should tell 

everybody something and tell it very loudly. 

We need to be the America that can, not the America that can’t. 

We are ready to help in a bipartisan way to get that done because 

it is so absolutely essential for the well-being of our Country and 

its economy. 

Thank you very much, and we look forward to your questions. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Trumka follows:] 

46 


97584.030
47 


97584.031
48 


97584.032
49 


97584.033
50 


97584.034
51 


97584.035
52 


97584.036
53 


97584.037
54 


97584.038
55 


97584.039
56 


97584.040
57 


97584.041
58 


97584.042
59 


97584.043
60 

Senator BOXER. Thank you very much, Mr. Trumka. 

Our next speaker, I want to say congratulations, is the new 

President of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. He is also the Secretary of the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. We are very pleased to meet you, Mr. Hancock. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MIKE HANCOCK, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN 

ASSOCIATION OF STATE HIGHWAY AND TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICIALS; SECRETARY, KENTUCKY TRANSPORTATION CABINET 

Mr. HANCOCK. Good morning, Chairman Boxer, Ranking Member 

Vitter and distinguished members of the committee. 

Thank you for the opportunity on behalf of AASHTO and the 

State DOTs to share our views on the importance of robust Federal 

investment in surface transportation, the potential near-term impacts of the impending cash shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund 

and the longer-term impacts associated with uncertainty and instability of the Highway Trust Fund. I will have to say I am very encouraged by the remarks I have heard this morning. 

I would like to share two points with you. First, the threat to the 

States, the construction industry and the overall economy is real. 

It is even closer than originally estimated. We could face serious 

economic disruptions as early as this summer if USDOT delays reimbursements to the States for active projects already underway. 

Second, unless Congress acts to either increase the Highway 

Trust Fund revenues or provides additional general fund support, 

the States will be unable to obligate any new Federal funds in Fiscal Year 2015. In both cases there will be immediate and direct impacts to the States’ economies with lost jobs and permanently shuttered businesses. And there will be substantial additional economic, social and environmental costs associated with canceled or 

delayed projects. 

If Congress does not act, the States, even with local and private 

partners, simply cannot generate sufficient funds to fill the infrastructure funding gap. 

The Federal Highway Program apportions about $40 billion a 

year to the State DOTs for roads and bridges. However, actual Federal dollars are not provided up front, but rather when the work 

is completed and the States submits a request for reimbursement. 

Reimbursements to the States are made daily. On January 15th, 

USDOT Secretary Fox announced that the Highway Trust Fund’s 

highway account is likely to run out of money in August. To prevent insolvency, FHWA may stop reimbursing States on a daily 

basis and begin reimbursing once a week, once every 2 weeks or 

even once a month. A similar slowdown in reimbursements happened in 2008, forcing the States to delay payments to contractors. 

While Congress took care of the issue 5 years ago with the general 

fund transfer, States are concerned about the impact of the same 

situation happening again as early as this summer. 

If a similar scenario happens this year, the contractors, who 

many rely on prompt payments from the State, may be unable to 

pay their employees, subcontractors and suppliers. For some construction businesses and suppliers, which survived the recession 

61 

but are still operating on the slimmest of margins, this could simply be the last straw. 

When AASHTO testified before this committee last September, 

we thought the Highway Trust Fund would stay solvent through 

the end of Fiscal Year 2014. But it now appears that Congress will 

have to act before the August congressional recess to ensure that 

the Highway Trust Fund will have enough money to reimburse the 

States for past commitments. 

As Congress considers ways to address the short-term crisis of 

not being able to pay for projects that are already committed, it 

should also consider a long-term solution that keeps the Highway 

Trust Fund solvent well into the future. Without a long-term solution, States may not receive any additional Federal highway and 

transit funding in Fiscal Year 2015. If new Federal highway funding is not available or Federal funding is not available in 2015, 

much-needed highway and transit projects in virtually every community and every congressional district will either be delayed or 

canceled outright. These are projects that underpin economic development and improve the quality of life. Cutbacks on contract 

lettings will mean missed opportunities to pare down the backlog 

of investment needs, causing a negative domino effect on the construction industry employment, exactly at a time when the industry is beginning to rebound after being one of the hardest hit segments in the recent recession. 

There is ample evidence, including what you have heard today, 

that shows that infrastructure investment is critical for long-term 

economic growth, increased productivity, employment, household 

income, exports and overall quality of life. Congress can address 

the long-term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund by substantially 

reducing spending for surface transportation or by boosting revenues or by some combination of the two. We and others have developed a long list of potential revenue options. 

We believe that at a minimum, we need an approach that will 

allow us to sustain MAP–21 investments levels as adjusted for inflation. We believe it is possible to reach this level without placing 

an unreasonable financial burden on the traveling public. Without 

action, there will be devastating economic impacts from the virtual 

elimination of the Federal surface transportation funding in 2015, 

and there will be further funding reductions in the years beyond. 

Therefore, we believe that the only solution is to find and implement a viable set of revenue solutions that will prevent this summer’s highway account cash shortfall and ensure the long-term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund. 

AASHTO looks forward to working with you to address this critical situation and we very much appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today and look forward to your questions. Thank 

you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hancock follows:] 

62 


97584.044
63 


97584.045
64 


97584.046
65 


97584.047
66 


97584.048
67 


97584.049
68 


97584.050
69 


97584.051
70 


97584.052
71 


97584.053
72 


97584.054
73 


97584.055
74 


97584.056
75 


97584.057
76 


97584.058
77 


97584.059
78 


97584.060
79 


97584.061
80 


97584.062
81 


97584.063
82 


97584.064
83 


97584.065
84 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

Now it is my pleasure to introduce Dr. T. Peter Ruane, President 

and CEO, American Road and Transportation Builders Association 

and a key ally of ours as we worked through the last highway bill. 

STATEMENT OF T. PETER RUANE, PH.D., PRESIDENT AND CEO, 

AMERICAN ROAD AND TRANSPORTATION BUILDERS ASSOCIATION 

Mr. RUANE. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Chairman Boxer, 

Senator Vitter, thank you for inviting the ARTBA again to participate in this hearing. I want to also thank you at this point for our 

leadership on MAP–21 as well as the current WRDA legislation. 

One number alone provides ample evidence of the value of the 

Federal Surface Transportation Program. Today trucks carry 

freight worth more than $11 trillion over the Nation’s roads every 

year. And more than three quarters of that truck travel occurs on 

the roads that comprise the Federal aid system. Without the Federal investment in these roads, we put trucking mobility and productivity and that $11 trillion in annual economic activity at risk. 

We believe one of the Federal program’s biggest problems is that 

government at all levels, all levels, does a poor job of telling the 

American public how their Federal gas and diesel tax dollars are 

invested each year. We believe the public would be impressed and 

widely support this Federal program if they knew the full story. 

I asked our economic team to find out how the public’s Federal 

gas tax dollars were put to use in 2012, a year that did not include 

any stimulus money. Unfortunately, it took a Freedom of Information request and sophisticated computer analysis of literally millions of data points to provide the project information detailed in 

our written testimony. Here are the highlights, and it is high time 

the public starts hearing about them. 

In 2012, the Federal program helped fund 12,546 capital improvement projects, 7,000, and some road, 2,400 bridges, 2,800 road 

safety, all focused on the system that moves most of that $11 trillion in economic activity just mentioned. And the 12,000 does not 

include right-of-way or engineering projects. These are projects in 

every State that can be identified by name, location, and how much 

was invested. 

But all the public knows is that the system is not nearly as safe 

as it could be, they waste precious time in traffic congestion and 

car and truck damages are caused every day due to unacceptably 

high percentage of poor road conditions. And the major reason for 

the system’s problems is that we have a 2014 program that is operating on 1993 value dollars. As you have already heard, in roughly 

months, according to the CBO, the Highway Trust Fund will be unable to support any investment in new projects. And 2012 is a 

guide. That means that more than 12,000 highway, bridge and 

safety capital projects across the Nation on the routes most important to our economy could be lost. ARTBA continues to advocate 

generating new recurring user fee revenue to support highway 

trust fund investments as the most straightforward solution or 

Congress could find additional resources elsewhere in the Federal 

85 

budget to stabilize this trust fund as was done to support MAP– 

21. 

CBO data shows that will require, by the way, on average, $16.3 

billion annually just to preserve existing levels of highway and 

transit investment. By comparison, over a 2-year period, the recent 

bipartisan Budget Act of 2013, the Murray-Ryan budget deal, reallocates resources to increase the non-defense discretionary spending cap by an average, ironically, of some $16 billion a year. Here 

is where the announcer would say, spoiler alert. 

That means that as illustrated in Figure 4 in our testimony, that 

fixing the Highway Trust Fund without generating new revenues 

would require the equivalent of Congress passing and the President 

signing a 2013 level Murray-Ryan budget deal every year, every 

year, just to keep the highway and transit program where it is no. 

That is one painful alternative scenario. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Ruane follows:] 

86 


97584.066
87 


97584.067
88 


97584.068
89 


97584.069
90 


97584.070
91 


97584.071
92 


97584.072
93 


97584.073
94 


97584.074
95 


97584.075
96 


97584.076
97 


97584.077
98 


97584.078
99 


97584.079
100 


97584.080
101 


97584.081
102 


97584.082
103 


97584.083
104 


97584.084
105 


97584.085
106 


97584.086
107 


97584.087
108 


97584.088
109 


97584.089
110 


97584.090
111 


97584.091
112 


97584.092
113 


97584.093
114 


97584.094
115 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. 

And it is my pleasure to welcome Jay Timmons, President and 

CEO of the National Association of Manufacturers. Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF JAY TIMMONS, PRESIDENT AND CEO, 

NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MANUFACTURERS 

Mr. TIMMONS. Thank you, Chairman Boxer, Senator Vitter, other 

members of the committee. 

Infrastructure matters greatly to manufacturers. It matters during every step of the production process, from receiving inputs to 

shipping our products to markets at home and to our customers 

abroad. In addition, manufacturers are vital suppliers to the transit and road-building industry, providing rolling stock, engines, 

concrete, machinery, aggregates, barriers, signs, safety equipment 

and other materials. Every dollar spent, and I know there have 

been a lot of statistics here today, but they all do matter, every dollar spent in construction generates 39.5 cents in manufacturing. 

For manufacturers, infrastructure is indeed a competitiveness 

issue. 

But unfortunately, our Nation’s 20th century infrastructure, and 

some of it is in fact even older, is not meeting the needs of our 21st 

century economy. I hear concerns about the State of our infrastructure from NAM members constantly and consistently, from the 

world’s largest multi-nationals to family businesses up and down 

main streets all across our Country. They all recognize that our 

aging infrastructure is a significant impediment to our Nation’s 

competitiveness and our ability to maintain our mantle of economic 

leadership. 

Last year, the NAM partnered, as the Chair noted, with Building 

America’s Future to survey manufacturers about their perspectives 

on the State of infrastructure in the United States. As the Chairman referenced in her opening statement, some 70 percent told us 

that America’s infrastructure is in fair or poor shape and needs a 

great deal or quite a bit of improvement. And manufacturers recognize the Federal Government’s critical role in funding the Nation’s 

infrastructure as well, 67 percent say that infrastructure is so important that all options to fund it must be on the table. 

Two thirds doubt that it is positioned to respond to the competitive demands of a growing economy. That is important, because 

manufacturers rely on a reliable and efficient infrastructure to 

reach growing markets abroad. But as our survey demonstrates, 

reaching these new markets is not easy for manufacturers in the 

United States. Roads, bridges, ports and more are in dire need of 

repair and modernization. 

On behalf of our more than 12,000 members, the NAM urges 

lawmakers to address these challenges and adopt a multi-year fully 

funded surface transportation bill that offers certainty and support 

for infrastructure projects, that improves safety, facilitates trade 

and creates jobs. Equally as important, we believe Congress must 

bring the Federal Highway Trust Fund to an improved condition 

of solvency and long term sustainability. 

The need to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent extends far 

beyond State departments of transportation and road builders. 

Funding for roads, bridges and transit systems provides great 

116 

value and represents an investment in our economy and our global 

competitiveness. Manufacturers have frankly been frustrated of 

late by policymakers who meet our calls for increased investment 

with growing skepticism. 

As we have seen with previous infrastructure bills, delays and 

multiple extensions are commonplace and send a message that the 

United States is simply not serious about growth and competitiveness. I know it is a tall order in our political environment that is 

so highly charged today, but America’s manufacturers need bipartisan leadership to help fix the problem. Frankly, we are very encouraged by the signals that we are getting from this committee. 

We need to move past the debates about the Federal Government’s role in infrastructure investment. The States alone cannot 

address the deteriorating condition of our roads and our bridges or 

remedy the $101 billion cost associated with traffic congestion. 

Manufacturers are counting on Congress to fulfill its well-established responsibility of facilitating commerce in the United States. 

Chairman Boxer, no pun intended, but we have a long road 

ahead of us. We really appreciate the committee’s attention to 

these important issues. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Timmons follows:] 

117 


97584.095
118 


97584.096
119 


97584.097
120 


97584.098
121 


97584.099
122 


97584.100
123 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. I cannot thank each of you enough. 

I am going to ask unanimous consent to place in the record letters, one from the Associated Equipment Distributors. They urge 

immediate action to ensure the Highway Trust Fund’s long-term 

solvency. And the second is the Economic Importance of Maintaining Federal Investment in our Transportation Infrastructure from 

the International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association. Without objection, I will put those in the record. 

[The referenced material was not received at time of print.] 

Senator BOXER. And we can each have 6 minutes to ask you 

some questions. My first question is really an unusual one, because 

it is just a yes or a no from each of you. But it is not a trick question. 

Will each of you be willing to speak directly with Senators 

Wyden and Hatch, whether it is on the phone or in person, as soon 

as possible? 

Mr. DONOHUE. Yes. 

Mr. TRUMKA. Yes. 

Mr. HANCOCK. Yes. 

Mr. RUANE. Yes, already have. 

Mr. TIMMONS. Yes. 

Senator BOXER. Pete, second round, we get to do it again. I can’t 

tell you how important that is, because they have so much on their 

plate and they want to be helpful. But I am not so sure that they 

have scheduled a hearing, because we have the change in the leadership there. So that would be fantastic. 

And would each of you agree that what Mr. Timmons said is 

right, that we need certainty with a multi-year bill? Would each of 

you agree that we need certainty with a multi-year bill? 

Mr. DONOHUE. Yes. 

Mr. TRUMKA. Absolutely. 

Mr. HANCOCK. Yes. 

Mr. RUANE. Unquestionably. 

Mr. TIMMONS. I agree with myself, yes. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BOXER. Well, around here, sometimes folks don’t. So it 

gets really great. 

So Mr. Trumka, we are all aware that the recent global recession 

ravaged many sectors of the Nation’s economy. I remember being 

with you at a rally in Los Angeles where construction industry 

workers were, I mean, just so hard hit and worried about a future 

for their families. Could you describe for us the economic environment your members currently face to help put in context the consequences of failing to address the Highway Trust Fund’s pending 

insolvency? 

Mr. TRUMKA. Let me start on the macro sense and say, 6 years 

into this so-called recovery, we are still at an unemployment rate 

that is higher than the highest point of the 2001 recession. So 6 

years in, we are still higher than it was in that recession. We have 

1.6 million construction jobs, as noted in my testimony, that are 

gone from pre-recession levels, we haven’t filled them yet. In some 

areas, unemployment still hovers in the 20 percent area. We still 

have people working reduced hours. The rest of that reduced hours 

124 

is a strain on retirement plans and health and safety plans and 

health care plans. 

Our members are struggling and we are losing skilled workers 

because they can’t make a living, there is no planning, no ability 

to plan ahead and have a future. They are still hurting plenty and 

that is why we need this bill, not just to be a patchwork or a shortterm solution, but a long-term solution so that employers can plan, 

so that States can plan, so that we can do long-term projects that 

the Country really absolutely needs and have the assurance that 

the money is going to be there to be able to complete them. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. Thank you for painting us that picture. 

I am going to ask Dr. Ruane here, because from the business 

side, and you represent the builders, could you discuss how the 

transportation industry would be affected if no new projects, over 

12,000 projects, using 2012 as an example, that is how many new 

projects we funded in 2012, if we didn’t have that in Fiscal Year 

2015, put a human face on the businesses that you speak for. 

Mr. RUANE. The impact of that kind of scenario would be devastating. We are already at over 10 percent unemployment in that 

sector right now as we sit here today, down from where it was five 

or 6 years ago, but still double digit unemployment. The metric 

that is used often is 35,000 jobs per billion. We lose that program 

in Fiscal Year 2015, you will literally see hundreds of thousands 

of workers lose their jobs, they will not invest. And by the way, 

that is already happening in the marketplace, where a number of 

States have announced their intention, it was cited in Mike’s testimony, where a couple of States have already publicly said that. 

And so people are not hiring now. They are already pulling back, 

even though the height of the construction season is coming up and 

most of the Country, they are holding back because of the uncertainty of the marketplace right now with what the Congress is 

going to do with reauthorization. And most importantly, the current Highway Trust Fund situation. 

Senator BOXER. That is extremely alarming that already we are 

seeing this. That is why Senator Vitter and I are really working 

hard to move quickly to restore some faith out there, and why it 

is so important for us to work together with the Finance Committee over here. I note, Congressman Shuster wants to move as 

well. 

So I would turn to Mr. Hancock, from Kentucky’s perspective, as 

well as all of the States that you represent in your new position. 

How important is it for State departments of transportation to 

have stable, reliable and predictable funding levels for 5 years or 

more? 

Mr. HANCOCK. Madam Chairman, it is incredibly important to 

the States. The States simply cannot functionally plan in an environment where the target changes day by day in terms of funding. 

As you probably know, I am quite certain you do, it takes years to 

get a project off the ground and actually to construction and being 

built. If funding is a question every step of the way, it takes even 

longer. 

125 

So the States really are having difficulty with adequately planning, knowing when the money is coming, knowing when we will 

have the ability to put the money to work and tracking that. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. So my time has run out, but I have 

to finish with Mr. Donohue. Why is this issue so important to the 

business community that the Chamber would take the position of 

supporting raising user fees for transportation? That is unusual. 

Could you explain why you are driven to do this? 

Mr. DONOHUE. I don’t think it is unusual for the members to the 

Chamber of Commerce to support these user fees. The people who 

run the trucking industry understand, they run 400 billion miles 

or something like that with 3 million big trucks every night. They 

understand if they don’t have the facilities to do that in a safe and 

effective and product way, they are behind. 

The AAA has taken I think a very enlightened position, recognizing that people are driving all over the place. So as we have 

heard today from the panel, the business community provides the 

resources to build the facilities, the roads, the bridges, the ports. 

The business community builds them, the business community 

lives on them. And if you want to look for the single biggest improvement, in my opinion, in U.S. efficiency in recent time, it has 

been what we have been able to do in the supply chain, from raw 

materials to finished products and everywhere in between, not only 

capital goods but also information, energy resources. This is for the 

business community, whether you are in the tech end, you are in 

the service end or you are in the capital goods and manufacturing 

end, if you can move it, you can do it. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you. It is the goods movement that is so 

critical, because we all know what happens when it takes a long 

time. Thank you. 

Senator Vitter. 

Senator VITTER. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you all 

again. As I suggested in my opening statement, we have been hard 

at work for some time discussing a bill to try to move out of this 

committee as soon as possible. The idea would be to deal with those 

issues under our jurisdiction in an aggressive way, in a way that 

helps rebuild trust in the trust fund and then to really help 

incentivize the Finance Committee to do the tougher work on the 

finance side and be our full partner in completing that bill. 

So with that process in mind, let me ask a few questions. Dr. 

Ruane, first of all, thank you and your organization, as opposed to 

FHWA, for producing very good data which you have appended to 

your testimony, about projects in each State impacted by the trust 

fund and Federal aid. One problem is, you all have to spend hours 

and hours and hours producing that data. It seems to me that data 

should be readily available through the program and to make it 

transparent and clear what the trust fund does or doesn’t do. 

Would you agree with that, there are reforms you think can be 

made to make the activity under the trust fund far more transparent? 

Mr. RUANE. I absolutely agree. It is really tragic that one would 

have to use the Freedom of Information Act to get such information. They have that information going back, and I am not here to 

unfairly criticize any government agency. But you would think that 

126 

they would want to get that information out there aggressively and 

tell the story. We make a recommendation in our testimony specifically, you recall the effort that was made by the Administration 

and various agencies in telling the story under the stimulus program. There was routine and regular commentary on what was 

being done, the various projects around the Country. We say that 

should be pro forma, that should be routine. They should be celebrating these investments, these 20,000 plus projects every year 

and telling the public where these resources are going and what 

they are achieving. Most importantly, what they are achieving. 

So one should not have to use a FOIA request to get that information. It ought to be out there. Because it is an incredible story 

of what this is accomplishing in our economy and in our Nation. 

Senator VITTER. I certainly agree and will continue to push that. 

By the way, there is a specific provision in MAP–21, unfortunately 

FHWA hasn’t responded to that, hasn’t done the report yet. So we 

need that greater transparency. 

Mr. Hancock, I am real concerned, as are many of my Republican 

colleagues about the EPA and a new proposed rule about Federal 

jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act. I think this poses a threat 

of dramatically increased permitting requirements and decreased 

flexibility on transportation projects. I am also concerned that the 

rulemaking may even proceed before peer reviewers even review it. 

That is supposed to be a key part of the process. 

Are your members concerned about this? Do you have any 

thoughts about this? 

Mr. HANCOCK. We have not actually seen that 404 permitting 

rulemaking yet. But we are very much concerned about it, because 

we have been told that it affects roadside ditches as sources of runoff area to be controlled or whatever. Most of those ditches were 

built as we built our road system. They are not intermittent 

streams, per se. So yes, we are very, very interested in that and 

looking forward to hearing from Federal Highways. 

Senator VITTER. Mr. Timmons, thank you for your testimony. 

Can you expand on just a bit, and does NAM have an estimate of 

the cost advantage or disadvantage vis-a-vis other nations related 

to infrastructure? What path are we on regarding that? I presume 

it is going to be a cost disadvantage in terms of global competitiveness. 

Mr. TIMMONS. I don’t have a specific number for your, Senator, 

but I can tell you anecdotally that there is certainly a disadvantage 

when some of the other folks here have been talking about what 

our major competitors are doing with regard to infrastructure 

projects. Those projects do allow more goods to make it to market 

much more efficiently. 

There is a general, however, a 20 percent cost disadvantage for 

manufacturers in this Country versus our major trading partners 

around the Country. It is because of several factors, infrastructure 

is not one of them, but that 20 percent disadvantage is after you 

take out the cost of labor, so we are talking taxes and regulation, 

going back to your question on the proposed rule from EPA on waterways, as well as other factors. 

So anything that detracts or adds to that disadvantage obviously 

hurts manufacturing in this Country. 

127 

Senator VITTER. Thank you. A final question for Mr. Hancock. 

AASHTO was one of the first organizations out with your reauthorization priorities. I thank you for that. I assume that means you 

think there is room for Improvement reform, greater transparency 

to build, rebuild trust in the program. Can you expand on that and 

mention a couple of your priorities? 

Mr. HANCOCK. Sure. And we absolutely do believe there is room 

to improve. But I will say to MAP–21, we felt it was a major step 

forward. We were very pleased with the reforms that we saw there. 

There are some tweaks that likely will need to be made. But part 

of the issue right now is we haven’t completely seen the 

rulemakings from Federal Highways regarding those. So we will be 

eagerly awaiting those and will have some comments, I am quite 

sure, that will tweak, not significantly. 

Senator VITTER. We will look forward to those. Thank you, 

Madam Chair. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you so much. I believe Senator Barrasso 

is next, followed by Senator Boozman. 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Mr. Hancock, following up on your previous testimony, and I 

talked a little bit in my opening statement about the roadblocks 

that are out there on construction projects in terms of red tape, 

which makes things more costly, doesn’t really create the kind of 

meaningful jobs that we are trying to create. Could you talk a little 

bit about recommendations you might have to kind of further accelerate project delivery? 

Mr. HANCOCK. There are a number of activities that are underway as we speak. We are working, Federal Highways has an Every 

Day Counts program that we are working very diligently with 

them to see brought forward. Also AASHTO itself, we have SHRP2 

programs, our Strategic Highway Research Programs that involve 

projects that save time and get things done faster. So many, many 

things on the horizon that we see the value in doing this, and I 

promise you we will be sticking to our guns in that regard. 

Senator BARRASSO. Anyone else on the panel want to respond to 

that in terms of actually how we can get the money moving more 

quickly? 

Mr. RUANE. Full implementation of the reforms in MAP–21. I 

think the committee, the Congress made some great changes to the 

legislation as part of that bill. It is just a matter of implementation. They have been underway, but they could be accelerated. 

Senator BARRASSO. Anyone else? 

Mr. Trumka, you talked about in your testimony and highlighted 

a 20-mile, 6-lane bridge that I think in China took only 2 years to 

build, kind of from pen to pavement. The Vice President made a 

statement last week about going to LaGuardia Airport and said, if 

you take somebody there blindfolded at 2 in the morning they are 

going to think they are in a Third World country. I would just ask 

if you could talk a little bit about, it would seem to me in the best 

case scenario to try to a project like you had outlined that you saw 

in China so successfully completed in a swift manner, it might take 

over 10 years to kind of get that whole process done here. 

From your experience and travels, what can we do in the United 

States to really accelerate project delivery? 

128 

Mr. TRUMKA. One thing I think is we can have some long-term 

predictability and planning. So we need a long-term bill so that 

people can actually plan, start the process, have some confidence 

that it is going to follow through. If you are talking about privatepublic partnerships that are out there that offer some real potential, that is not going to happen without the ability to plan and be 

predictable and go forward. 

Also I think it is just us having the will to say that as a Nation, 

we are going to do something. When we decided to go to the moon, 

we got the Nation on a footing. Our infrastructure, according to the 

World Economic Forum, has dropped from seventh in the world to 

fifteenth in just 5 years. And it will continue to drop. The American 

Society of Civil Engineers says we get a D plus, we have a $3.6 trillion deficit to fill to get us back to where we need. The DOT says 

that a third of our roads are now in poor or mediocre condition. We 

need as a Nation to say, we are going to be the most competitive 

when it comes to infrastructure and understand that investment 

today is going to reap tremendous benefits down the road. 

I think us coming together, the Nation coming together like everybody up here has come together to say we need it, and then to 

have the political will to go forward I think is what we need. It is 

just the determination to say we will do it and then get together 

and do it. I applaud the members of this committee, because you 

understand the importance to the Country of infrastructure and us 

maintaining our infrastructure, whether it is a bridge, whether it 

is a road. I urge you to go further and think bolder and start talking about high-speed rail and other things, a grid system that 

doesn’t waste electricity, a delivery system where you don’t have 

leaks and seeps that drain gas and water and oil into the environment. All of those things could create jobs and make us competitive. 

I think the most important thing is for us to just have a vision 

and a will and make a decision to do it. When we decided to go 

to the moon, nothing could stop us. Same thing here. If we decide 

that we will have world class infrastructure to compete in a global 

economy, I have no doubt, Senator, that we can do it, and we can 

do it the best in the world. 

Senator BARRASSO. Mr. Donohue? 

Mr. DONOHUE. When we decided to go to the moon, Senator, we 

had a compelling national interest and we didn’t have all the regulators and lawyers and lawsuits that we have today. To go out and 

build a major project is preceded by permitting and zoning arguments and lawsuits. And by environmental lawsuits. 

By the way, I have no problem with looking critically at the environment. But repetitive lawsuits after lawsuits have been resolved. 

The reason we can’t do things as quickly as others, one of the reasons, is because it takes so long to get a conclusion of all the permits, all the zoning, all the lawsuits. And we are talking years and 

years and years. And we all went to school, we studied, we had 

three parts to our Government, the executive, the legislative, the 

judicial. We never knew that we would live in a time that there 

was one part than all the others put together we never talked 

about, and that is the regulatory and litigation part that is absolutely strapping this Nation’s ability to compete. 

129 

Senator BARRASSO. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

Senator BOXER. Thank you, Senator. And we turn to Senator 

Boozman. 

Senator BOOZMAN. Thank you, Madam Chair. I do appreciated 

you and Senator Vitter having this hearing. I think it is really 

very, very important. We hear a lot about the partisanship that 

goes on in Congress, and yet in this particular area of this committee, when it gets into the environmental issues, there is differences of opinion. But there is no difference, very little difference 

of opinion in regard to our infrastructure, not only here but in the 

House also. 

It is interesting, I look at the panel and it is the same deal. We 

have the Chamber here, we have labor here, we have NAM and the 

road builders. All of you are strange bedfellows coming together as 

we all are, talking about the interests. I have real concern about 

the harsh winter, the fact that jobs are being affected right now because you simply can’t get work done with these very cold sustained temperatures. Pretty soon, it sounds like already, the contracting is an issue. I know that we have had, this is not hypothetical in a sense, we have had this same situation occur in the 

past, and very definitely people quit letting contracts. So again, I 

am really concerned about that. 

The thing about infrastructure is that you create jobs when you 

do it. But the real economic thing comes about after they are built, 

with the increase in land values, all of the economic activity that 

comes about. I would argue that, and it is sad to hear the statistics 

now, but I think one of the reasons that we became the economic 

powerhouse that we have was the vision of the Eisenhower Administration and Congress getting the interState system put into place. 

So I am committed to doing anything I can to get this thing done. 

One thing I would like to ask Mr. Hancock, one of the frustrations we have, not only with this but with other things, our States 

are struggling right now. In an effort to try and push more money 

for infrastructure, there is a tendency at the State level then, and 

this is not true of Arkansas, we actually passed a half cent sales 

tax which again is something that other States need to look at 

doing and actually have defined projects and things and get those 

kinds of things done. 

But there is a real frustration, it seems like as you push more 

money out then the State backs up and they get this money, so 

then they can divert to prisons and schools and things that are 

very, very necessary. But the reality is you don’t go forward. You 

just have more of the Federal Government shouldering the burden. 

Can you comment on that? 

Mr. HANCOCK. I would be more than happy to. It has been our 

experience in Kentucky that whatever Federal money has come, 

the State has stepped up with bond issues and other things and 

made additional moneys available as well. In Kentucky, we have 

actually been able to do a lot of major projects through that whole 

mechanism. 

But the one thing I would say, about 45 percent on average of 

the money that the states have to work with to build projects is 

Federal funding. That 45 percent constitutes more of the larger 

projects that we actually build. And so it is a critical piece of where 

130 

we are. The States are doing a lot, and you have seen that in recent days with a number of States enacting new funding mechanisms and so forth. We applaud the States that have done that. We 

are certainly encouraging everyone to do what they must to find 

the money that is necessary to invest in transportation. But you 

are right, it is a difficult dance with State budgets and so forth. 

We find a lot for our colleagues that are very interested in spending more on transportation. 

Mr. DONOHUE. Senator, you made a great point about the harsh 

winter. When it is over and people can go back to work, it will lead 

to an infrastructure that is more seriously affected and more work 

to do. 

Senator BOOZMAN. You make a great point in the sense that not 

only can they not do the work now, but with this freezing and 

thawing, it is going to be very, very difficult and there is going to 

be a tremendous amount of damage. 

How long doe it take for an average significant road project to 

get done now? Is it nine, 10 years? 

Mr. HANCOCK. We did a recent average of 7 years for a significant project. 

Senator BOOZMAN. You mentioned, Mr. Trumka, the bridge in 

China. The thing that impressed me was the situation that we had 

in Minnesota when the bridge collapsed. That thing was rebuilt in 

a year. And that would have taken easily, in today’s climate, 10 

years or whatever. 

But instead of the agencies having an adversarial, ‘‘gotcha’‘ attitude, people worked together. Labor worked together, it was just 

the attitude of, we can get this done and get reopened. We essentially were able to do something that really was quite extraordinary. 

But I do think, and you all can be a tremendous help in this 

area, we do have to, with the limited resources that we have, not 

to skirt rules, not to get around them, to do it, but just have the 

agencies do things. We have put stuff in bills before and this and 

that, but really just to make the agencies, where they are talking 

together, they are doing it together. We need to have a goal as a 

Nation to cut that time in half or whatever goal we make. 

But that is a very doable thing. With inflation, the cost increase 

and things like that, it is something that would save us a tremendous amount of money. 

So again, thank you all. We appreciate your being here and certainly I am committed, the rest of the committee is committed to 

doing anything we can to help. Thank you. 

Senator BOXER. I just want to say to each and every one of you 

how much I appreciate your testimony today. I know that we are 

singing from the same book except when it comes to environment, 

which is typical and I understand it. But I honestly have to say 

that this transportation bill, in order to get out of here, is not going 

to be one big environmental rider. So let’s be clear. Because we 

have to come together where we agree. 

And just ask the businesses and the citizens of West Virginia if 

they wanted a little more regulation on that chemical that spilled 

which is killing business, it is killing economic development right 

now, according to my colleagues who have talked to me about it. 

131 

So I think what we need to do is find a sweet spot. We need to 

speed up for sure, and we have a lot of reforms, as I understand, 

that Dr. Ruane pointed out, in the last bill. We have to make sure 

they are working. 

Also, we have to understand that a great deal of the slowdown, 

Senator, is funding, too. Because sometimes the funding doesn’t 

come through. That is why TIFIA is so important, and why I am 

so excited about TIFIA. Because the idea of TIFIA came from really 

the Los Angeles mayor at the time, Mayor Villaraigosa, who pointed out that they had this sales tax, but it was going to take them 

30 years to build all the projects. But with TIFIA, we could change 

that to 10, because there is really no risk. The money is coming, 

but the Federal Government can step up front and move that 

money forward. 

I really appreciate all this. Do we have time to do another round? 

Go right ahead, Senator, I will withhold and finish later. Go ahead. 

Senator SESSIONS. Thank you. I had a couple of conflicts, everything happens at once. 

Mr. Donohue, I notice you called for increasing gasoline tax. Is 

it the position of the Chamber of Commerce that we need to be 

raising taxes to increase spending today? 

Mr. DONOHUE. We have not raised the Federal user fee fuel tax 

in almost 20 years. 

Senator SESSIONS. So you want to raise taxes on Alabamians who 

have to commute to work, and probably you would like to spend 

it—— 

Mr. DONOHUE. Senator, whether you raise the tax or you seek 

the funds through some other means of Federal expenditure, the 

citizens of Alabama are going to pay for it. 

Senator SESSIONS. You proposed raising the tax. 

Mr. DONOHUE. Yes, sir, I did. 

Senator SESSIONS. Would it be acceptable to you if we found 

wasteful spending in Washington and reduced that to pay for the 

highways? 

Mr. DONOHUE. If you actually got the money. The longest singsong in Washington in the history of my time here was waste, 

fraud and abuse. And we are going to get rid of it and use the 

money. But the money never shows up. But if you actually got the 

money, took it out of other budgets and put it there, I would applaud you. 

Senator SESSIONS. So you would support that, but that is not 

what you are testifying to in favor of today. Some of my people 

would probably rather increase the corporate tax rather than the 

gas tax. You wouldn’t favor that, would you? 

Mr. DONOHUE. The corporate tax in this Country is far more 

than we pay anywhere else on a competitive basis. I think you 

should ask Billy Canary that runs the expanded and combined 

chambers of commerce in Alabama whether he could get his members to support a user fee to move their goods and their workers. 

Senator SESSIONS. So I guess I understand what you want to say. 

You want to raise, the Chamber of Commerce is testifying that you 

don’t believe it is possible to cut spending and save the highway 

program without raising taxes. I want to get it clear. 

132 

Mr. DONOHUE. Senator, I have played this game before. I think 

it would be very, very hard to do that in the next 7 months, but 

if you can do it, I will vigorously support it. 

Senator SESSIONS. Well, good. I think that is what we should do. 

There are places that we can save money. I just want to know that, 

we would like to reduce the corporate rate. It is hurting America. 

It is hurting Mr. Trumka’s employees. It is hurting economic development and job creation to have virtually the highest corporate tax 

rare in the world. 

Mr. DONOHUE. We certainly agree on that. 

Senator SESSIONS. We could totally support that. I was just teasing you a little bit about your supporting somebody else paying 

taxes, but not you. 

Mr. Trumka, in 2000, when the employment rate was around 4 

percent, the New York Times wrote an editorial opposing amnesty 

for then 6 million illegal workers in the Country and said ‘‘The 

AFL–CIO’s proposal should be rejected. Amnesty would undermine 

the integrity of the Country’s immigration laws and would depress 

the wages of its lowest paid, native born workers.’‘ The New York 

Times. 

Today the unemployment rate is 6.6 percent and the work force 

participation rate is the lowest it has been in 40 years. Wages are 

lower today than they were in 1999. Yet you have endorsed a bill 

that not only grants amnesty to 12 million illegal immigrants but 

also provides green cards to 20 million new legal immigrants. 

Senator BOXER. May I ask that my friend, and he is my friend, 

why are you talking about immigration? This is a hearing about 

the Highway Trust Fund. I have never quite seen this type of an 

attack on various members. I am confused about it. It does not help 

us. 

Senator SESSIONS. It is not an attack on a member. I am raising 

a question. But I didn’t know we were strictly—— 

Senator BOXER. Well, yes, we are. This is not the committee that 

does immigration reform. I could haul out reports that show that 

it is a great boon to our economy. I am not going to get into that. 

I would please ask you, and I think your question to Mr. Donohue 

was fair, it was tough, it was fair. But this is getting off topic. If 

you could just keep your questions to the topic at hand, it would 

mean a lot to this chairman. 

Senator SESSIONS. You are such a fair chairman that I will acquiesce in that and maybe I would submit a letter and Mr. Trumka 

could have a chance to respond. Because I know he has given a lot 

of thought to all the issues. 

Mr. TRUMKA. I would welcome that, Senator. I really would. I 

can tell you how those 6 million people or 12 million people with 

no rights, how it is driving down the wages of every other American out there. Until we fix that system, everybody is going to have 

less income. Less income, less taxes, less economic growth. So I 

look forward to that letter. 

Senator BOXER. I am glad we put this off to another day. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BOXER. Go right ahead. And by the way, the votes are 

starting. 

133 

Senator SESSIONS. Mr. Trumka, I will look at that. This legislation that cleared the Senate that you supported would dramatically 

increase the legal flow and not a significant impact in reducing illegal flow. I think it is beyond what the economy can absorb wisely 

but that is an issue for a different day. 

Thank you for your testimony. We just had the budget report 

yesterday of Mr. Elmendorf. It was sobering. He suggests we could 

have another fiscal crisis because our debt is reaching almost 90 

percent of GDP, gross debt could reach over 100 percent of GDP. 

We can’t just tax our way out of this. We just can’t keep raising 

taxes. So that would knock off the growth that we would like to 

have. 

Madam Chairman, again, you have led effectively on this, you 

and Senator Inhofe and Senator Vitter. I hope that we can come 

up with something that strengthens our infrastructure program in 

a fiscally responsible way. 

Senator BOXER. Senator, I certainly do hope so. And I would say 

this. This committee is going to deal with the reauthorization. 

What we heard from every member, when you aware at your other 

very important duties, is that we need certainty here, because businesses are, they don’t know what the future holds. 

What I hope for is we can give a five, 6 year bill out of here. That 

is our intent. It will not deal with the funding, because that is a 

matter for Senators Wyden and Hatch and their committee. 

But it will lay this out. That is why it is so important that whenever ideas, and I have lots of ideas, one of them is to go after $350 

billion uncollected taxes every year. I am sure others wouldn’t 

agree with it. But there are many, many ways that we can get this 

trust fund going. 

Mr. Donohue makes an important point, it has to be real. It has 

to be real and it has to be certain. That is why the user fund, whatever it is, whether it is the gas tax, or vehicle miles traveled, it is 

not intrusive or it is a user fee at the refinery level, all of that will 

be a dedicated tax going into the fund. And because of our economic situation, we need to have this. Because if you are really 

worried about deficits and debt, which every single one of us is, 

and as I said, I was so happy that I was here when we actually 

voted to balance the budget. I remember saying to my husband, we 

are not going to have any more bounds because the debt is disappearing. I was here, so I know we can handle that problem. 

But the Highway Trust Fund is different. As it was envisioned 

by Republican President, it has a separate fee, it doesn’t cause any 

problems to the deficit. That is very important and I think we 

should keep the user fee concept, because it does give that type of 

certainty. But that decision is going to be made by another committee. And they are very excited about us doing our part. 

And can’t speak for every member. I have sat down with most 

of my colleagues. I have two more to sit down with on the Republican side. I am hopeful we can unite and that we don’t get into 

arguments over environmental riders and all the other things, that 

we can just focus on what has to be done here. And I am excited 

about the challenge. No one thought we could do it last time, we 

proved that wrong. 

134 

I want to say about Senator Sessions that he has been a friend 

to me in this committee. We don’t see eye to eye on a lot of things, 

but we work well together. I respect his knowledge of the deficit 

situation, the debt situation, as a former member of the Budget 

Committee. I know that in that committee, you do see that big picture going down the road. 

There is nothing we will do in this bill that is going to hurt the 

deficit, nothing. It will be a self-sustaining trust fund, which is absolutely critical. 

And with that, I want to thank all of you. Report back to me 

about your conversations. I hope you will. And I will ask Senators 

Hatch and Wyden today when I see them, I will tell them that you 

said you were going to call them. I think we can get this done, but 

only if we stick together. So let’s just find that common ground and 

not get into arguments about other issues. I think that gets us off 

track. 

Thank you very much. We stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:45 a.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

[Additional material submitted for the record follows.] 

135 

Æ 


97584.101