U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

50–180 PDF 2009

S. HRG. 111–31 

NOMINATION OF HON. RAY LAHOOD 

TO BE SECRETARY OF THE 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, 

SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JANUARY 21, 2009 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

( 

(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia, Chairman 

DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii 

JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts 

BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota 

BARBARA BOXER, California 

BILL NELSON, Florida 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

MARK WARNER, Virginia 

MARK BEGICH, Alaska 

KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas, Ranking 

OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, Maine 

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada 

JIM DEMINT, South Carolina 

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi 

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia 

DAVID VITTER, Louisiana 

SAM BROWNBACK, Kansas 

MEL MARTINEZ, Florida 

MIKE JOHANNS, Nebraska 

ELLEN L. DONESKI, Chief of Staff 

JAMES REID, Deputy Chief of Staff 

CHRISTINE D. KURTH, Republican Staff Director and General Counsel 

PAUL NAGLE, Republican Chief Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on January 21, 2009 ......................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Rockefeller ........................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Kerry .................................................................................... 1 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Hutchison ............................................................................ 7 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 9 

Statement of Senator Cantwell .............................................................................. 11 

Statement of Senator Snowe ................................................................................... 12 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 13 

Statement of Senator Lautenberg .......................................................................... 15 

Statement of Senator Wicker .................................................................................. 17 

Statement of Senator Warner ................................................................................. 18 

Statement of Senator Pryor .................................................................................... 19 

Statement of Senator Thune ................................................................................... 20 

Statement of Senator Udall .................................................................................... 21 

Statement of Senator Dorgan ................................................................................. 22 

Statement of Senator DeMint ................................................................................. 23 

Statement of Senator Klobuchar ............................................................................ 24 

Statement of Senator McCaskill ............................................................................. 54 

Statement of Senator Begich .................................................................................. 58 

WITNESSES

Hon. Richard J. Durbin, U.S. Senator from Illinois ............................................. 4 

Hon. Robert H. Michel, Former U.S. Representative, Illinois ............................. 6 

Hon. Ray LaHood, Secretary-Designate, U.S. Department of Transportation ... 26 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 29 

APPENDIX

Response to written questions submitted to Hon. Ray LaHood by: 

Hon. John D. Rockefeller IV ............................................................................ 61 

Hon. Daniel Inouye ........................................................................................... 63 

Hon. John Kerry ............................................................................................... 65 

Hon. Barbara Boxer ......................................................................................... 66 

Hon. Bill Nelson ............................................................................................... 68 

Hon. Maria Cantwell ........................................................................................ 69 

Hon. Frank Lautenberg ................................................................................... 70 

Hon. Tom Udall ................................................................................................ 71 

Hon. Mark Begich ............................................................................................. 73 

Hon. Kay Bailey Hutchison ............................................................................. 73 

Hon. Jim DeMint .............................................................................................. 74 

Hon. John Thune .............................................................................................. 76 

(1) 

NOMINATION OF HON. RAY LAHOOD 

TO BE SECRETARY OF THE 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 21, 2009, 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:05 p.m. in room 

SR–253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Senator John D. 

Rockefeller, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WEST VIRGINIA 

The CHAIRMAN. The meeting will come to—the hearing will come 

to order. I want to start out my chairmanship by yielding to John 

Kerry who has a 30-minute, maybe 30-hour or 30-second announcement he wants to make. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN F. KERRY, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS 

Senator KERRY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the privilege. I’m managing the nomination on the floor so I 

need to leave. 

I just wanted to welcome you as Chairman. We’re delighted that 

you’re going to be taking the helm of this Committee. We know 

your passion for all of the issues in front of the Committee. 

And just personally, as somebody who’s shared this journey with 

you on the Committee, I’m delighted that you’ve taken on the 

gavel. And I look forward to your leadership. It’s good to be here 

with you. 

I want to welcome our new Senators also. It’s great to have all 

them here. And I would ask unanimous consent that my full statement be placed in the record as if read in full. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Kerry follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN KERRY, U.S. SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS

Thank you Mr. Chairman, and welcome Congressman LaHood. In your fourteen 

years serving the constituents of Illinois’ 18th District, you built a record that has 

won you the respect of colleagues across party lines for your commitment to pursuing the best policy solutions regardless of party affiliation. 

At a time when our physical infrastructure is in desperate need of repair, our 

crowded skies are in need of a navigation system fit for 21st century air travel, and 

our collective thinking on transportation policy must account for the increasing effects of global climate changing, I am hopeful that you will bring a breath of fresh 

2 

air to an agency that will be at the center of an infrastructure revolution in this 

country. 

Despite the onslaught of bad financial news, we all have the privilege to live and 

work and travel in the most prosperous nation in the world. But travel by train in 

this country, you’d never know it. 

Meanwhile, traffic congestion continues to worsen in American cities of all sizes, creating a $78 billion drain on the U.S. economy in the form of 4.2 billion lost hours 

and 2.8 billion gallons of wasted fuel. In 2007, domestic flight delays cost the U.S. 

economy $41 billion and consumed about 740 million additional gallons of jet fuel 

according to the Joint Economic Committee. 

As part of the upcoming debate on economic stimulus, we’re preparing to make 

a massive investment in this country’s infrastructure. In my mind, that investment 

has to come with a commitment to the transportation infrastructure that will help 

us become cleaner and more efficient travelers in this next American century. I look 

forward to hearing your thoughts on what that commitment should look like. 

I also look forward to hearing your view on the Administration’s commitment to 

implementing the CAFE standards adopted as part of the Energy Independence and 

Security Act. I originally introduced fuel economy legislation in 2002, and this Committee has been fighting for years to improve the efficiency of our Nation’s passenger fleet. This bill is one of the most important pieces of energy legislation that 

we have passed during my time in the Senate—one which was sorely overdue. 

This legislation is a key element of our efforts to ensure that the advanced cars 

and trucks of the future are built here in America. Unfortunately, the Bush Administration has not yet promulgated a final rule implementing the 2007 fuel economy 

legislation. I hope that you view this as an opportunity to write a standard that will 

support our climate change and energy security goals by moving the domestic auto 

industry as quickly as practicable toward the goal of achieving at least 35 miles per 

gallon by 2020. 

The CHAIRMAN. And so be it. 

Senator KERRY. And I look forward to supporting your nomination Congressman. We’d reached our agreements over lunch yesterday and after the Inauguration, but I really look forward to your 

stewardship there. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Thank you, Senator Kerry. And obviously I want to welcome everyone to the first session. 

Not everybody is here. But it’s two. Nobody expected it would be 

that early. 

And I wanted, with the forbearance of the three distinguished 

people at the witness table, I want to just say a word about the 

Committee. I’m not Chairman. I’m still Chairman of the Intelligence committee, so you can pitch me right out of the room if you 

want. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. But Danny actually isn’t big enough to do that, 

you see. So, I’m OK. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. This is a very exciting thing to me. I’m deeply 

proud to be Chairman of this Committee or to be able to get into 

that position. I’ve been on this Committee for 24 years, and have 

specialized in certain areas. 

I had no idea until I started to do preparation the unbelievable 

scope of what it is that we have to do, everything from putting ten 

extra runways at O’Hare Airport if Dick Durbin wants it. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. I mean, there’s just no end to our capacity of affecting climate change, transportation, telecommunications, the 

FCC. We’ve got control of sports. Unfortunately, it’s only college 

sports, not professional sports, but—— 

[Laughter.] 

3 

The CHAIRMAN. We’ll take what we can get. And I’m very proud 

that Senator Inouye, who I think is going to come today, is now 

doing Appropriations. And I’m very proud that I’ve been able to 

work with him. 

I look forward, I think we all do, to working very, very hard for 

Americans, setting forth a very aggressive agenda on this Committee. I think this Committee over the years has had its ups and 

downs, but we have not been always at our best. And I think our 

challenge now is to be at our best all the time on all subcommittees, all subcommittees. Everything rises in importance to the level 

of anything else, not just what catches the moment or what seems 

to be the most intractable. 

I’m also looking very much forward to working with Kay Bailey 

Hutchison, who will be Ranking, and all members as we move 

things through the Committee. On the Democratic side we’re welcoming Senator Mark Begich, who evidently walks everywhere in 

this city. Walked home from the last ball last night. Was that the 

three o’clock one? 

Senator BEGICH. I don’t know what time it ended, but it was late. 

The CHAIRMAN. It was late. OK. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator BEGICH. But I’m here for you. 

The CHAIRMAN. And Tom Udall. And Mark Warner. All of them 

are distinguished people who are going to be on the Commerce 

Committee when the resolution passes, which could very well before the end of the day I would think. 

We’re not organized, you know. We don’t know who the new Republican members are going to be. And I hope Kay Bailey comes 

and tells us so that we know. But we are not able at this point to 

really have a subcommittee structure fully worked out as to who’s 

going to be on what subcommittee until we know who all the members are going to be. And that makes sense. And it’s frustrating. 

But it’s the way things should work if they have to work that way. 

I’m very excited by the talent on both sides of the aisle here. I 

think when you really look at the scope of the Commerce Committee you see it’s endless. And it’s one of the original committees 

created. And its work is really wherever we want it to go. 

I think we can be a big part of climate change legislation, a big 

part of economic recovery. I look forward to working with members 

on a bipartisan basis, and I expect that we’ll get a lot done. 

I want us to have a very aggressive agenda. That doesn’t mean 

that we meet three times a day, but it means that we meet on a 

regular basis. We’ll try to systemize that so people can put that on 

their calendars, whether that’s going to be a couple times a week, 

whatever. I promise that I’ll share that kind of news with my colleagues very shortly. 

Now we have to begin the business of this day, which is a very 

good day, because we have before us the confirmation hearing of 

Congressman Ray LaHood to be Secretary of Transportation. I’m 

for him anyway, but my wife Sharon said that even if I weren’t I 

would have to be because she’s from Illinois too. And so, that’s 

that. 

[Laughter.] 

4 

So I’d like to congratulate Representative LaHood on his nomination. And if you have any family members here we would be very 

proud to meet them. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Thank you, Senator. Thank you very much for 

holding this hearing. My wife and three of my children are here. 

And I would like to introduce them, if they would stand. 

My wife of 42 years, Kathy. Sitting next to Kathy is my son, 

Sam. Behind Sam is my oldest son, Darren, and his wife, Kristen. 

And my daughter, Amy, and her husband, Kevin are here. Kevin, 

are you here? Stand up. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. LAHOOD. That is the LaHood army. It doesn’t get any better 

than that, Mr. Chairman. So, thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. Now we also have another 

great opportunity because we have former Congressman Bob 

Michel, who I’ve always been a great fan of. I’ll never forget that 

garage story you told me, Congressman Michel. It remains deep in 

my heart and part of my affection and respect for you. 

And then my fellow White Sox fan, Dick Durbin. Well that was 

embarrassing last night. I mean there was only one White Sox fan 

in the entire crew out there in Afghanistan. And I kept thinking 

about you. 

So they are going to introduce Congressman LaHood. And I cannot think of two finer human beings, more experienced people, to 

be able to do that. And so, please do so. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ILLINOIS 

Senator DURBIN. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me 

also acknowledge Senator Hutchison. Glad you’re with us here 

today at the kick-off of this newly-formed Commerce Committee. 

I want to personally thank the Chairman for who now is assuming this responsibility. It was my good fortune to serve on the Intelligence Committee for 4 years where you served as Ranking Member and as Chairman. And I know the fine work you did there. 

Much like the minister who shoots a hole in one on Sunday morning, you couldn’t talk to us about your best work. 

And I just want to say publicly that you have dedicated yourself 

to the assignments you’ve been given whether it’s on the Intelligence Committee or on the Commerce Committee and call on your 

staff to really perform at the highest level. I’m glad to hear it will 

be an active committee. And under your leadership it will be a very 

effective committee. So I congratulate you on that score. 

You know, a lot of us here wax poetic about the good old days 

around Capitol Hill. And for a few members on this committee, including Senator Wicker, who’ve had the good fortune to serve in 

the House of Representatives, that’s where many of us got started. 

And there were great old days. 

And I can recall coming to the Congress and meeting right off 

the bat, not only the Speaker of the House, Tip O’Neill, but one of 

his closest friends, the Republican leader, Bob Michel from my 

State of Illinois. Those were days when we fought like cats and 

dogs on the floor all day and then managed to find some time to 

be together in the evenings and get to know one another on a biVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
5 

partisan basis. And that really made for a much more pleasant and 

productive environment. I think what President Obama had to say 

yesterday and what’s he’s been saying throughout his campaign is 

the hope that we will return to that environment. 

I just want to say that the nominee for Secretary of Transportation is a person who follows in that tradition. Ray LaHood distinguished himself in many ways, first as Chief of Staff to the Minority Republican Leader, Bob Michel and then in his own right as 

Congressman from that same district. He led the effort in the 

House of Representatives during some of the most divisive and contentious times to find civility and decorum. And to try to have bipartisan retreats where members would come together with their 

families and really come to know one another on a personal basis. 

As you come to know Ray you’ll understand why his leadership 

in this area was genuine and personal. It’s been my good fortune 

to know him for many years. Born and bred in the City of Peoria, 

Illinois, he’s been a schoolteacher before he got involved in government work. And I will tell you as a member of the only Congressional delegation, a good bipartisan delegation, I didn’t have a closer friend than Ray LaHood, who was on the opposite side of the 

aisle and represented my hometown of Springfield. 

We worked on so many things together, transportation projects, 

economic development projects. I trusted him completely. His word 

was good. And I knew that we could work together in a positive 

and productive way and show some results at the end of the day. 

We also co-chair the Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission 

which will celebrate the 200th anniversary of Abraham Lincoln’s 

birth in February of this year. So we’ve worked together in a lot 

of different capacities. 

I know that President Obama started off in forming his Cabinet 

wanted to make sure that it was bipartisan and to show that there 

were leading Republicans who could serve in his Cabinet and do so 

effectively. I’ll be honest with you. I went to him and I said I think 

Ray LaHood is that person. I hope you’ll consider him. And he said 

he would. 

I know that Rahm Emmanuel as the President’s Chief of Staff 

knows Ray as closely as I do, as well as I do. And he felt the same 

way. And this opportunity came along and it was a great one. 

Because Ray LaHood has shown his understanding of transportation issues as a Member of Congress and has worked for these 

issues during the time that he served. We have this traditional rivalry that many of you have in your states between downstate and 

Chicago. And some politicians make a career out of poking the 

wounds between those two areas and trying to keep everybody 

fighting with one another. 

Now Ray and I come from the downstate side of that equation. 

Neither of us has ever tried to capitalize on that geographical distinction. If we had an important meeting of the Illinois delegation 

about a major mass transit issue in the City of Chicago, Ray 

LaHood of Peoria would be there because of his genuine interest 

in our state and its transportation. And whether it was highways 

for downstate, whether it was mass transit for the City of Chicago, 

the development of one of the nation’s most important airports in 

O’Hare or looking forward to the vision of how we can use smart 

6 

transportation modes to reduce the use of energy and to try to protect our environment, Ray LaHood has been a leader in that regard. 

Now if he is graced with the approval of the Senate and I hope 

that he will be, to be our next Secretary of Transportation, he will 

have an awesome, immediate responsibility. This new Recovery 

and Reinvestment bill focuses a lot on our nation’s bridges, highways, the infrastructure, the airports, realizing that’s critical to 

economic growth. I can’t think of a better person to be given that 

assignment. And that’s why I come here today to completely support his nomination. 

A former DOT official was recently quoted as saying, ‘‘the most 

important part of the DOT Secretary’s job is knowing how to work 

with other people.’’ Well I can tell you, Mr. Chairman, Ray LaHood 

has the most important part of that job covered if he becomes our 

next Secretary of Transportation. I’m pleased and proud as a fellow 

Illinoisan to wholeheartedly recommend him and encourage the 

confirmation of my friend, Ray LaHood. Thank you very much. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Durbin. Yes, sir. 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROBERT H. MICHEL, 

FORMER U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, ILLINOIS 

Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I 

appreciate the opportunity to piggyback on the great introduction 

of our Senator Dick Durbin. I’ve known the LaHood family for over 

25 years. And I know that when Ray grew up it was in the climate 

of work ethic and certainly being frugal about how you spent your 

money. 

Before his election to the Congress to succeed me as my Chief of 

Staff, he was for 10 years in that position just prior to his being 

elected to the Congress. It was my last 10 years out of 14 years 

as leader on the minority side of the aisle in the House. And during 

that time our relationship became much more than employee/employer relationship. Over that period of time we became the best 

of friends. I think, quite frankly, both families would say that we 

were family with one another. 

He’s a very quick study on the issues of the day. Always careful 

in his decision-making process. And has a special gift for dealing 

fairly with his contemporaries. I tell you he’s guided with a wonderful, moral compass. He knows right from wrong. He’s an honest, 

forthright individual. I could trust him, as Senator Durbin said, 

without any reservation whatsoever. 

And as a Congressman he was no ideologue, a conservative Republican, always a gentleman and respectful of his contemporaries 

and willing to work for a consensus. His special efforts to improve 

the relationship in the House which is at times—I’d enjoyed the 

wonderful days earlier on. And then it became worse and worse 

and the rancorous exchanges; it was just rather nauseating at 

times. 

Ray had the good experience of having experienced it really kind 

of under both conditions. And when he came then to the Congress 

he wanted to do whatever he could to let’s get back to the days 

when we could talk with one another and counsel with one another. 

And as Dick Durbin has said, he did a marvelous job trying to orVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00010 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
7 

ganize, I think, three or four of those retreats with so many whatever Republicans wanted to come, whatever number of Democrats 

wanted. 

And as a matter of fact it led to Tom Foley and I, the then 

Speaker, former Speaker of the House, to visit and counsel with 

some of those freshman members to try and encourage them to 

take advantage of that opportunity to get to know one another. And 

do away with these acrimonious exchanges. Well, after a while it 

dissipated and but I always have to give Ray the credit for trying 

to make the most of it. 

And then finally, Mr. Chairman, and I appreciate your conceding 

to my asking for just a minute or two to buttress Dick Durbin’s introduction. I have to applaud the President for seeing the qualities 

in Ray LaHood that will serve his Administration well. I think 

there’s no question but that every member of this committee when 

all is said and done, will be mighty proud of his service as the Secretary of Transportation. And I’m sure Ray will always keep in 

mind too, that he has an obligation, certainly to please the President who is the benefactor in this case. And thank you, Mr. Chairman and the members of the Committee for the opportunity to 

speak on behalf of my dear friend and compatriot, Ray LaHood. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Congressman. Thank you very, very 

much. 

Mr. MICHEL. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Let me just say before I call on Kay 

Bailey Hutchison, the Ranking Member to make any comments 

that she may want to make, that we had to postpone this hearing. 

And it’s one of those infuriating things called paperwork. 

People have to answer so many questions now. And so the word 

was well they hadn’t finished the paperwork, so that’s why we had 

to cancel the meeting and then people said it was the FBI that does 

the paperwork so we removed the word FBI because otherwise everybody would think something was going on, Ray. We didn’t want 

that because, you know, the Ranking Member and I read your FBI 

report and it’s just sparkling clean and I wanted to say that. 

Before we actually proceed, my opening statement will come before my opening questions. And I’d now like to say that I’m very 

honored to have as the Ranking Member Kay Bailey Hutchison. 

We’ve served on this committee together for years. We’ve done 

aviation together successfully for a number of years. It’s a very 

strong working relationship. She’s an extraordinarily talented person, as everybody knows. And I would like to call on you, Senator 

Hutchison for whatever comments you might want to make. 

STATEMENT OF HON. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS 

Senator HUTCHISON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Since this is our 

first real hearing as Chairman and Ranking Member I appreciate 

your remarks and do look forward to having this relationship continue. We’ve done some great work in aviation. We had and agreed 

to FAA reauthorization through our committee last year. 

I look forward to working on that again this year. And I hope 

that our committee will be very active. And I look forward to working with you. 

8 

I also wanted to welcome the new members on our side of the 

committee. Johnny Isakson, Sam Brownback, Mel Martinez, Mike 

Johanns, our new members that will be joining our committee this 

year. 

Congressman LaHood, we welcome you. And certainly you have 

had two outstanding endorsements already. And many of us who’ve 

worked with you do agree with your integrity and the ability to 

come together and do things in a bipartisan way. And I think your 

appointment shows that we are going to have input that will be 

very important in this Administration. 

There are three areas that I am concerned with, that I think are 

a priority. Certainly this year the Highway Trust Fund, the Highway Reauthorization will be before us. And it is my hope that we 

can timely pass a Highway Authorization bill. 

I say that with almost tongue in cheek because it usually takes 

us three or four years to pass that five-year bill. And then we pass 

it and a year later, we have to do it again. But it is important that 

we work together and you will be a key leader here. 

One of my great concerns is the Highway Trust Fund. I think it 

does not meet today’s test of relevance. Certainly the highway system, the Federal system has been built out. We have the skeleton. 

And I think today, unlike when President Eisenhower started the 

system, every state has its own priorities and its own capability to 

fund. So I think the old donor/donee concept really needs to be 

looked at carefully. We would always have to have some small percentage of the gasoline taxes for the maintenance of the highway 

system. I think we would all agree on that. 

But I do think now that states have such great needs that especially growing states like mine, that are also donor states, need 

some relief from the huge amount that we send to Washington and 

never get back. We’re now looking at more toll roads, more taxes 

to fund our highways when we’re sending billions to Washington 

and going to other states. So I hope that we can start looking at 

a concept where states would be able to have their own money, 

their own priorities in the Highway Trust Fund with some smaller 

amount that would be kept for maintenance. That is something 

that the Secretary of Transportation has suggested in the last 6 

months or so. And I think it’s something that is very, very important for us to start discussing. 

Second, FAA Reauthorization, which as we have noted, this committee passed in a very bipartisan way because it is so important. 

And our bill passed through the Senate and was generally supported. It did not get through conference so we still don’t have one. 

And in March the FAA extension runs out. 

We know that NextGen for our air traffic control system is essential for us to be able to use our air space in the most efficient way, 

in the most safe way and also our ground space. And because our 

NextGen has not been able to go forward in a comprehensive way, 

we do still have many delays, especially in the New York airspace 

which then affects the whole country. 

So I hope that it will be one of your major priorities that we pass 

an FAA Reauthorization bill and that we get it signed by the President and that we really focus on our air traffic control system becoming more efficient and certainly with safety as a priority. I 

9 

think we can do that. And we will certainly need the help of this 

Administration. 

Third, is Amtrak and high-speed rail. I believe that this Administration that has just taken the oath of office yesterday will be more 

favorable to Amtrak. And one of the things that Senator Lautenberg and I have done on this committee is made a pact that Amtrak is Amtrak, that our national system is important for our country and for the future. And I support the Northeast Corridor and 

he and others that are in the Northeast support the national system. 

But the national system has been a stepchild. And if we are 

going to continue to have very bad service, it’s going to exacerbate 

the problem with the funding. So I hope that you will look at Amtrak and high-speed rail as a priority in this Administration. Because I think if we’re going to have a transportation system that 

serves all the people of our country, it’s going to mean we have 

aviation, we have high-speed rail and Amtrak from which states 

can form compacts and add to the efficiencies as well as of course, 

our highway system. 

And I think with that kind of priority focus we can do so much 

better. And I look forward to working with you to that end. Thank 

you. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Hutchison follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, U.S. SENATOR FROM TEXAS

Thank you Senator Rockefeller, it is always a pleasure to work with you and I 

look forward to a prosperous session in our new roles. Senator Rockefeller and I 

have worked together for a number of years, most recently as respective Chair and 

Ranking Member of the Aviation Subcommittee. We have always worked in a bipartisan manner and I look forward to the challenges ahead of us. 

Many of the Committee’s most difficult challenges will also test today’s nominee. 

I am pleased that this Committee is moving expeditiously on the nomination of the 

Honorable Raymond LaHood for the position of Secretary of Transportation. I think 

this is very appropriate since the range of problems confronting the next Secretary 

is amongst the most difficult that any new Secretary has faced in quite some time. 

As Rep. LaHood is keenly aware, we are all looking for ways to revive our economy and many have suggested infrastructure and other transportation related 

projects can play a long term role in moving our country forward. 

It is important our next Transportation Secretary provides the stable leadership 

and strong voice needed to ensure transportation is a priority within the new Administration. 

I expect Rep. LaHood will need to hit the ground running. While I reserve final 

judgment and although the specific details of a stimulus package are not yet clear, 

transportation infrastructure programs are likely to receive an increase in funding. 

If enacted, the quick and efficient delivery of those funds to high priority projects 

will be challenging, but it is very important they are spent appropriately and efficiently. 

One prerequisite and commitment I would like from Rep. LaHood, is to create 

some short-term stability in our transportation programs. Many States have good 

ready-to-go highway projects that will improve surface infrastructure and bolster 

the economy; not just through the addition of construction jobs, but also through the 

improved movement of goods and people. 

Unfortunately, the existing highway program expires at the end of September, 

however. So Congress and the new Administration will have to work very hard on 

a reauthorization. This will be very difficult because of the current fiscal state of 

the Highway Trust Fund and also because the current formula’s disparate treatment between the states. But we must reauthorize the program and stop passing 

short-term extensions that send out dribbles of money to the states, preventing 

states ability to plan and undertake large transportation projects. Many projects 

could grind to a halt if we don’t act. 

10 

We have already seen this scenario play out with the FAA reauthorization bill, 

creating a dire situation with the airport grants program. We all know that our 

aviation system is facing significant capacity constraints. The problem is that the 

current extension for the program and the taxes that support the aviation trust 

fund expire at the end of March. The airports have only received half a year’s funding. 

I hope that Rep. LaHood, if confirmed, would support a full Fiscal Year extension 

of the current FAA Reauthorization bill, through September 30, 2009. This Committee will work hard to pass a new FAA Reauthorization bill, but we will need the 

Secretary’s support and coordination to do so in a timely manner. 

As Secretary, you will also need to keep a close managerial eye on the FAA’s air 

traffic control modernization program, known as NextGen. The funding, implementation, and transition management of NextGen needs to be a priority for the Department. We are currently operating outdated equipment with ever increasing congestion issues in the air and on the ground. These congestion issues are causing problems throughout the aviation system, particularly in the New York airspace. A nearterm focus is necessary on our national air transportation system if we expect to 

meet the future travel demands and eliminate gridlock in our skies and at our airports. 

I also look forward to hearing your views on Amtrak and high speed rail. I believe 

this is an area we have neglected too long. The Amtrak reauthorization that has 

just been signed into law is an important step, but now we need strong leadership 

at the Department to ensure that we have a national passenger rail system that 

works. 

I look forward to your testimony. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Hutchison. 

What I’m going to do now and I’m still working it over in my 

mind if I want to make this a regular practice. I think sometimes 

if every single member gives an opening statement, when you have 

people who have flown in from all kinds of places to testify, and 

if you have a full committee, which I hope we’re going to have because it’s going to be an exciting committee and people are going 

to want to be here no matter what the subcommittee or in some 

cases the full committee meeting might be about, that opening 

statements take time. 

The other side of that is that members have other meetings. And 

I have to recognize that, and that they have things they want to 

say. 

So today we’re going to have opening statements from each member. I should say incidentally that our three new members, one of 

whom has already defected—— 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Are to be treated today as members of the Senate and because we don’t have our actual ratios worked out yet. So 

just members of the Senate, I mean you’re just going to have to live 

with that, hopefully just for one day. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Is that OK? Alright. 

And also I’d like to say that from now on I want to call on people 

according to the order in which they arrived at the Committee. 

This is not going to be, like most everything in the Senate, based 

on seniority. I think having people speak other than on the basis 

in which they arrived. If they arrived early, they should speak earlier. 

And I just happen to believe in that. But today we’ll also use the 

seniority system for that. We’ll start with Senator Cantwell, then 

we’ll go to Senator Snowe and then back and forth. 

11 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t have a 

very long opening statement. But I am concerned that I may not 

be here for the question-and-answer part. So I’ll just outline my 

statement if I could, and hope that perhaps that I will be able to 

get back and ask you some questions. 

But obviously I want to congratulate you on your nomination and 

for your hard work in the Congress. You may know that Washington State recently has been very hard hit by a lot of flooding. 

In fact Secretary, your predecessor, Secretary Peters traveled to 

Washington State to look at and assess the flood damage along I– 

5 and also brought with her some $2 million in emergency relief 

funds which we very much appreciated. 

I want to say that we’ll be looking forward to working with you 

on what may be as much as $125 million in damage to flood areas 

in our state. And that brings up an even larger question. Just—I’m 

trying to make this as short as possible, but the previous flood 

damage that we had a year ago—every day that I–5 is closed it 

costs our economy $10 to $12 million. 

It’s a freeway stretch that typically carries about 10,000 trucks 

a day, so that and our mountain passes being shut down is where 

you get the $125 million in those kinds of activities. So in addition 

to looking at that question there is a very good, specific point, and 

I look forward to hearing your comments about what you’re going 

to do about funding of mega-projects. 

Mega-projects always get a lot of attention in assessing the issue. 

But trying to take our transportation funding mechanisms and 

breaking them down into a mechanism that will actually get those 

projects funded and not delayed for us in the State of Washington. 

We have three different mega-projects that are of importance to 

us: the Columbia River crossing, the Alaska Way Viaduct and the 

SR 520 Bridge. Two of those are in jurisdiction of Seattle and the 

Mayor and some of the council members are here in D.C. talking 

about the major plan that they are about to unveil for both of those 

projects. So I apologize if I’m off meeting with them to hear those 

details instead of being back here. 

And last I would just like to say, Mr. Chairman that it’s very important to me the oversight that our committee has in looking at 

your agency and the role you play as Secretary of Transportation 

in helping us in the implementation of CAFE, the fuel efficiency 

standards. I think that this is something that is very important. 

The last Administration I would say, dropped the ball on their ability to fully implement those regulations in a way that would have 

helped us and helped American consumers. And so I’ll look forward 

to your comment on that particular issue. 

So, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for allowing me to make this 

statement. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Cantwell. Senator Snowe? 

12 

STATEMENT OF HON. OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MAINE 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and congratulations 

on your chairmanship. It’s great to have this committee and to 

have your leadership, thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Well we’ve done a lot of work together. 

Senator SNOWE. We have. And we will on this committee. 

The CHAIRMAN. That’s right. 

Senator SNOWE. And I just want to congratulate you, Congressman LaHood. And I want to personally welcome, it’s a privilege to 

see Congressman Bob Michel. I served with Bob in the House of 

Representatives for many of the years in which he was the Minority Leader. Out of my 16 years it was probably the better part of 

a decade. 

And so I’m very pleased to see him here today. And it’s reminiscent of the, you know, the many outstanding accomplishments that 

he achieved during his tenure, his long-standing service to this 

country. And I just want to say that it’s great to see you here, Bob. 

And also reminiscent of, you know, the working together and the 

bipartisanship that always, was a hallmark of your leadership. 

And I certainly can testify, Mr. Chairman, to the relationship 

that existed with Congressman LaHood and Congressman Bob 

Michel. It certainly was that. And Congressman LaHood you have 

certainly got an outstanding record of public service, not only in 

the House of Representatives, but of course in your service to Bob 

Michel as well. And you’ve always had a reputation for fairness 

and pragmatism. And so I’m just very pleased that you have been 

nominated to this capacity. 

As we discussed 2 weeks ago there are a number of issues that 

obviously you’re going to have to address as Secretary of Transportation. And most notably as Senator Hutchison mentioned it’s going 

to be infrastructure and transportation policy. The two cornerstones of our transportation policy of course is the Surface Transportation Act as well as the reauthorization of the Federal Aviation 

Administration, the FAA which is long overdue as you all know. It 

expired about 18 months ago, in fact. 

But we’re seeing a number of issues that are plaguing the system 

that we will have to address as congestion continues both on our 

highways and in the air. Prices continue to rise. States are cutting 

back because of their own budgetary shortfalls. Those that are not 

able to supplement their transportation infrastructure, transportation programs and so all the more reliant on those Federal dollars. 

And we’ll have to re-evaluate the Highway Trust Fund and the 

way in which we fund the Trust Fund. That is certainly deficient. 

One of the first bailouts we had last year in fact was the Highway 

Trust Fund when they had a shortfall of more than $8 billion. 

It is expected that we could have a shortfall of $79 billion by 

2015. And as members of the Senate Finance committee, we heard 

testimony from the Government Accountability Office this last July 

saying that the current system is simply unsustainable. Just road 

maintenance alone over the next 6 years will cost $350 billion and 

we have one in five bridges that are woefully deficient and functionally obsolete. 

13 

So as obviously revenues are declining to the Highway Trust 

Fund, as vehicles become more fuel-efficient which is critically important. We’ll have to see how we will be able to fund the Highway 

Trust Fund with alternative revenues or alternative sources. But 

we’ll have to be creative. And we’ll have to prioritize our investments without question. 

The overall state of the aviation industry is a great concern to 

many of us and certainly to Senator Boxer and myself. We introduced a Passenger Bill of Rights which is simply, you need a national standard according to the courts. When states have taken, 

you know, their grievances to the court is that they need a Federal 

standard. And we’ve seen the fact that the industry has failed to 

unilaterally and voluntarily adopt a customer service standard. 

And that’s why we believe we should have a Passenger Bill of 

Rights. 

And finally CAFE standards as Senator Cantwell indicated. That 

will be one of your first, hopefully, responsibility to issue a regulation for the model year 2011. Regrettably it wasn’t done in this 

past Administration. But it’s critically important if we’re going to 

stay on track for creating more fuel-efficient vehicles. Senator Feinstein and I led the effort for the CAFE standards. We want to stay 

on track and do more and so hopefully that that will be one of your 

first actions as Secretary of Transportation. 

Finally, Essential Air Service for rural communities. I know that 

you’ve been a strong advocate when you served as well on the 

Transportation Committee in the House of Representatives. I truly 

hope that you will look at legislation that Senator Bingaman and 

I have introduced to provide more flexibility. 

We have seen, you know, more than 1,000 communities across 

this country in half the states, we have lost, aviation service. And 

that is truly the life blood of their economy, certainly that is true 

in our state. And we have to do—we really do have to develop a 

policy of some kind that’s going to provide the incentives and the 

support to our communities so that they can continue to have aviation services. It’s so important for economic development. 

So again I want to thank you. And I am pleased to see you here 

today, and most importantly, notably, the position that you will assume. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Snowe follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF OLYMPIA J. SNOWE, U.S. SENATOR FROM MAINE

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, Congressman LaHood, I would like to congratulate you on your nomination. Given your productive, bipartisan record as a legislator during your fourteen years in the House of Representatives, I am very 

pleased that President Obama selected such a strong and accomplished nominee 

with a reputation for fairness and pragmatism. After more than thirty years of distinguished public service, I am certain you were looking forward to a leisurely retirement. Instead, you will be facing enormous challenges on a variety of fronts as 

you begin your tenure as the Secretary of Transportation. 

Once again, Congress and the Department will seek to complete the long-overdue 

reauthorization of the Federal Aviation Administration, and looming on the horizon 

is the increasingly contentious Surface Transportation Bill, or Highway Bill, due to 

expire this October. These two cornerstones of our national transportation policy are 

operating, to one degree or another, on principles that are increasingly irrelevant 

in our current economy. The means by which we fund Federal infrastructure need 

to be carefully reexamined, while our air traffic control system continues to operate 

under an outdated, analog system that reduces fuel efficiency and does little to reVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
14 

duce congestion. This is not just the deterioration of our infrastructure that is at 

stake. The lifeblood of our economy, the ability to move goods and people efficiently 

from place to place, is in jeopardy. 

One of Congress’ first bailouts last year was not the troubled financial services industry, but the Highway Trust Fund, to the tune of $8 billion; or the number by 

which our obligations outpaced revenues flowing into the Fund. Forecasts now predict the Federal Highway Trust Fund will be insolvent for years, and faces everincreasing deficits, as much as $79 billion in 2015. As you are well aware, having 

been a member of the House Committee on Transportation during the crafting of 

the TEA–21 legislation, such a shortfall would place our Nation’s roads and 

bridges—already in bad shape—at greater risk. In 2004, the Department published 

a study on road maintenance indicating that $350 billion over 6 years was necessary 

simply to maintain our nation’s infrastructure. That was 5 years ago. I can only 

speculate the number has grown since that time, not to mention the fact that such 

an estimate does not account for any improvements, which would clearly be necessary given our increasing population and the growing distances commuters are 

traveling from municipalities, ensuring that Federal priorities are funded with revenues distributed out of the Highway Trust Fund. 

One of your first duties as Secretary of Transportation will be to issue regulations 

on the Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act, which I authored along with Senators Feinstein, Inouye, Cantwell, Kerry, Dorgan, and Lautenberg. It was over a year ago 

when the President signed this landmark legislation—the first increase in fuel economy since 1975, yet no regulations have been issued. As you know, Federal statute 

requires that for the 2011 model year regulations be issued by April 1 of this year 

in order to give automakers adequate time to meet the new requirements. If the Department of Transportation fails to meet this deadline, yet another year will be 

squandered in reducing carbon emissions, cutting oil imports, and saving Americans 

money at the pump. It is my expectation that aggressive and timely regulations will 

be issued that reflect the maximum feasible levels and incorporate all of the benefits 

of improved fuel economy. I look forward to hearing your comments on the implementation of this critical law and it is my expectation that the Department of 

Transportation will address this issue expeditiously—another year delay would be 

unacceptable. 

On a related topic that not only addresses fuel efficiency, but also safety and economic fairness, my home state of Maine has long sought an exemption from the Federal weight limit for motor carriers. Instead of large trucks traveling on Interstates 

that were designed to accommodate heavier vehicles, we have trucks weighing as 

much as 100,000 pounds idling at stop lights and stop signs in small towns and villages, increasing emissions and wasting diesel fuel. These trucks threaten pedestrians, bicyclists, and other individuals who otherwise would remain out of danger 

were these large trucks permitted to operate on the Interstates. Why is this a question of economic fairness? Maine’s neighbors, Massachusetts and New Hampshire, 

each possess waivers for trucks in excess of 100,000 pounds—while our neighbor to 

the north, Canada, permits well over 100,000 pounds on their Federal roadways. 

Coupled with the paucity of rail infrastructure in much of Maine, our state is the 

last choice in New England through which to transport freight. In the meantime, 

pedestrians are being endangered—and in some cases, killed—by larger motor carriers moving through residential areas. I do not believe we can consider the 80,000 

pound Federal limit a standard any longer, when more than half of the fifty states 

possess some sort of an exemption from this so-called ‘standard’. I find it unacceptable that Maine cannot be considered for such a statewide exemption, and will continue to work toward greater safety and economic fairness for my home state. 

Aviation remains another key component of this Committee’s jurisdiction that 

must be addressed. Now approaching eighteen months past the expiration of the 

FAA authorization, our aviation industry is facing difficult challenges that are resulting in consolidation, bankruptcy, and reductions in service—particularly to 

smaller communities. Capacity in 2008 was reduced by nearly 10 percent; fuel prices 

shattered previous records and placed many legacy carriers on dangerous footing. 

As jet fuel prices have declined, the global economic recession deepened, resulting 

in fewer passengers and a continuing reduction in revenues. What has the industry’s response been to these economic challenges? Instead of making flying more attractive to consumers, many airlines are quietly squeezing more hard-earned dollars 

out of passengers by heaping hidden costs onto basic customer services, such as reserving flights by phone. I believe such policies, which differ from airline to airline 

but, for the most part, are practiced by almost all of the commercial carriers, are 

short-sighted and only serve to encourage fewer passengers. 

Many of the airlines seem to believe that their patrons are a captive audience— 

passengers must simply accept whatever hardship the airlines choose to impose 

15 

upon them. To some extent, sadly, they are correct. It is my hope that we can transform that attitude. Congressman LaHood, it is my hope that we can work outlying 

suburbs and rural areas in order to go to work, school, or enjoy recreational opportunities. 

While the burgeoning raft of surcharges and fees continues to outrage myself and 

my constituents, the failure to move the Passenger Bill of Rights legislation introduced by Senator Boxer and I is even more troubling because enhanced safety is 

at stake. Stranding passengers on aircraft for hours at a time, in some extreme 

cases for up to 14 hours, is unconscionable. Those passengers have no real recourse. 

Long legal battles to recoup the price of a ticket are not a wise investment, particularly against an airline with legions of attorneys. In fact, due to our inaction, states 

began implementing their own Passenger Rights legislation. Last year, New York 

State enacted such a law. However, a Federal Appeals Court ruled it was unconstitutional, claiming that any such consumer rights required a ‘‘Federal standard.’’ 

That is a clarion call for Congress, and the Department, to act. 

Why must the Federal Government act? These problems continue to plague passengers; despite the system-wide reduction in the number of planes in the skies, 

over a thousand aircraft were stranded on tarmacs for over 3 hours in 2008—and 

that doesn’t even include figures for November and December. Additionally, statistics show record levels of delays; according to numbers released on January 7, 

delays are hovering at nearly an hour on average. While airlines are seeking the 

benefit of the doubt, Congress gave them the opportunity to create voluntary programs in 1998. As evidenced by continuing complaints from stranded passengers, 

that effort has not been effective. In fact, the DOT Inspector General, Calvin Scovel, 

in his report to this Committee indicated the airlines’ 1998 Customer Service Initiative fell well short of its promises, considering it ‘‘a failure.’’ 

Lastly, an issue that is of great significance to many of my constituents and, judging by your record on the issue, your former district as well, is rural aviation service. Provided primarily through the Essential Air Service program, many of these 

communities were promised by Congress that, when we deregulated the airlines in 

1978, they would remain part of the new infrastructure system that would result 

from this unleashing of the commercial air carriers. Yet every year supporters of 

the program must fight for funding, funding that is typically well below the authorized levels. Last Congress, Senator Bingaman and I introduced a bill that would revise the EAS program, make it more responsive to the needs of the individual communities that participate in the program, ensure funding levels to improve planning 

by those communities, and provide greater stability for both the carriers and those 

same communities that rely on air service as an economic development tool. It is 

my hope that after years of neglect, this program will again come to represent the 

promise we made to those rural communities thirty years ago. 

In short, I believe we must have an efficient, redundant transportation system, 

and that means a comprehensive, broad-based network of passenger rail, aviation, 

roads and bridges, and maritime transport. I look forward to hearing your proposals 

to allocate the resources to continue this Nation’s multi-faceted approach to insuring 

our ability to move goods and people around the country and the world. 

Mr. LaHood, I thank you for your continued exemplary service to our country, 

your willingness to work across the aisle, and for your integrity. I look forward to 

working with you as we enter a transformative time in American transportation policy. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Snowe. Senator Lautenberg? 

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK R. LAUTENBERG, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW JERSEY 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Congratulations to 

you for taking on this important assignment. I have worked with 

you for many years on the Commerce Committee and know that 

you have a major interest in all of the issues in front of us. And 

I look forward to your guidance and leadership here. 

It’s interesting to note that Ray LaHood is here from the State 

of Illinois and he’s had wonderful escorts to the table, Senator Dick 

Durbin, who we all know very well and are extremely proud of, and 

someone with whom I’ve had contact over the years and that’s Bob 

Michel. And we’re glad to see Bob Michel here. We always listen 

16 

to him carefully even though there is occasional policy disagreement. But so, Ray you’ve come from a state with a lot of distinction. 

Going back some years, I don’t remember the fellow’s name who 

was President from Illinois, but after Lincoln we had Everett Dirksen and we had Paul Simon. We’ve had other wonderful people 

from the State of Illinois. They’ve always made large contributions 

to the well-being of our country. And we believe that you will also 

do that. 

In many ways Transportation Secretary is one of the most important jobs in the country. And you’re going to be part of an Administration that has its focus on economic recovery. The President has 

announced his intention to get things moving. 

One way to do that in my view is to make investments in infrastructure, particularly transportation, because people are ready to 

go to work. The jobs are crying out for fulfillment. And we look forward to having your agreement. 

We count on the Transportation Secretary to keep our trains, 

buses and cars moving, but now we’ll be counting on the Secretary 

to help get our economy moving at the same pace that we hope our 

railroads will be moving. Congress and President Obama are working on an economic recovery package that would invest in our 

trains, mass transit, roads, bridges. The investment would create 

470,000 jobs at a time when, as Senator Inouye mentioned in an 

earlier meeting we had today, there are recent reports of 500,000 

jobs lost in a month and that pace could accelerate, maybe even to 

650,000 jobs in a month. 

And so here’s one way to put people to work and things that will 

contribute handsomely to the well-being of the country. And we 

hope that those investments will come. Hope that you’ll be able to 

support and plead for those investments. 

Transportation is also critical to our environment: our energy 

independence, to use less oil, emit fewer greenhouse gases, and we 

need more Americans to use trains and mass transit. Many are already making that choice. Nearly 29 million people took Amtrak 

last year, a major record. And just think of the number of cars that 

takes off the road. It’s the sixth year in a row with record ridership. 

In addition, nearly three billion trips were taken on buses, subways and other transit options in the third quarter last year, a 6- 

percent increase over the same quarter in 2007 and the largest 

such increase in 25 years. In New Jersey, transit is more than 

merely a way to get around. It’s our life blood. It helps businesses 

grow. It improves quality of life across the board. 

And we need to start looking at transit on a Federal level. The 

same way we see it in urban centers across this country. Just 

building more roads will not solve our transportation problems. We 

can no longer leave passengers stranded on the tarmac or waiting 

in long lines at the airport. Travelers and commuters deserve more 

options like rail and transit to connect our communities, cities and 

travel hubs such as the airports. 

For this reason, Mr. LaHood, we need a strong and innovative 

Transportation Secretary. And I believe that with the wonderful 

recommendations that you bring with you, that you’re the person 

17 

to do the job. I was pleased to meet with you last weekend about 

these challenges and others important to New Jersey and the Nation. 

First, we talked about the need to fully fund Amtrak and expand 

our passenger rail systems. Last year Congress and President Bush 

recognized this need and passed the bipartisan, my bill, Amtrak 

bill. This committee played a major role in that vision. And now 

we need to provide the funding to see that vision through. 

We also talked about the critical need for an additional rail tunnel under the Hudson River. It’s a national asset. And in addition 

to creating more than 50,000 jobs, construction jobs, this new tunnel will handle double the number of passengers and trains going 

back across the Hudson River from New Jersey to New York. But 

in the Northeast Corridor, which is the busiest rail corridor in the 

country, these improvements will not happen without strong leadership in the Executive Branch. I look forward to working with 

you, Ray LaHood on these key issues as we continue the confirmation process. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Lautenberg. Senator 

Wicker? 

STATEMENT OF HON. ROGER WICKER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSISSIPPI 

Senator WICKER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I too am delighted and excited that my classmate and former colleague, Ray 

LaHood is going to be our next Secretary of Transportation. 

We came to elected office together in the House of Representatives as a result of the 1994 elections. We were both staffers for 

distinguished members of the House before that. And I can tell you 

that, in my opinion, Ray LaHood has the knowledge, experience, 

knowhow and temperament to be a fine member of the Cabinet and 

an excellent Secretary. 

It’s already been mentioned that in the early days of our time in 

the House of Representatives Ray LaHood served as Co-Chairman 

of the House bipartisan retreat. And this really was quite an undertaking. In an effort to get not only rank-and-file membership, 

but the leadership of House Republicans and House Democrats together in a way that would promote unity and working together as 

Americans and a little relief from the partisan rancor that sometimes we hear about. 

It’s also a fact that for many years Ray LaHood has taken a leadership position in the House prayer breakfasts. And Mr. Chairman 

this is an ecumenical group which meets every Thursday morning 

for prayer in a bipartisan, non-partisan way in the House of Representatives. So it should be no surprise based on that that our 

new Democrat President has chosen this Republican to be a part 

of his team. 

Ray, in your opening statement, you mentioned fundamental pillars of openness and fairness. And I think certainly you’ll be able 

to bring that to the Department. Also, it’s a fact. He’s no pushover, 

Mr. Chairman. Ray LaHood has a very low tolerance for nonsense. 

And I think that will also serve him well in this position. 

I want to mention by way of opening statement and maybe I’ll 

get a chance to ask a question about it later on. If not, certainly 

18 

one for the record. But it’s been pointed out by Senator Lautenberg 

and others that a good deal of the economic stimulus is going to 

be directed toward transportation infrastructure. I see a proposal here for $43.1 billion, 5 percent of the total in- cluding some $30 billion in highway infrastructure investment. In 

that regard I want to caution my colleagues and the Secretary 

about something that we call in Mississippi, the ‘‘Katrina effect’’ of 

sending a lot of infrastructure spending at one time. Post Katrina 

in Mississippi we saw a huge increase in contracting costs related 

to the recovery. 

We spent money on roads, bridges, fire stations, and city halls 

in addition to debris removal. And the extent that we spent money 

for those challenges was unparalleled. In the period following this, 

state officials and contractors often mentioned the ‘‘Katrina effect’’ 

on cost. They were referencing increases in cost across all trades 

related to the large influx of Federal funds and subsequent demand 

on materials, man power and other resources necessary to undertake the projects. 

So I would just say to our Secretary-to-be and to my colleagues, 

we need to be mindful of this issue as Congress considers billions 

of dollars in transportation spending. I love to see highways built. 

I want to see what we can do to increase the number of bridges 

and roads built. 

But if all of these shovel-ready projects are bid and contracted 

in a very short period of time, we could create a similar situation 

that we had with the ‘‘Katrina effect’’ in Mississippi and on the 

Gulf Coast states. While the funds will flow, higher costs due to abnormally high demand on transportation construction industry 

could result in fewer projects undertaken because of increased cost. 

It will be up to us working with you, Mr. Secretary-designate to arrive at a figure that our system can absorb without spiking the cost 

of this very needed infrastructure. 

And with that I yield back to the Chairman. And once again say 

how delighted I am that my colleague and brother is going to be 

assuming this leadership role. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Wicker and now, Senator 

Warner? 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK WARNER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA 

Senator WARNER. Well thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me first of 

all say how excited I am to be on this committee with your leadership and the leadership of Ranking Member Hutchison. I’m looking 

forward to working with all of you. 

I have to say at the outset that as many in the room know, I, 

a few years ago, concluded a term of Governor of Virginia and 

there was no issue more vexing than transportation. There are a 

lot of things I can probably point to that we accomplished, but solving Northern Virginia’s transportation woes unfortunately was not 

one of them. 

Since the Chairman has given me opportunity to speak, let me 

just raise three issues very quickly that I hope either now or at 

some other point we can discuss. I recall as Governor how challenging it was at times to deal with the Department of TransporVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00022 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
19 

tation at the Federal level because so many agencies within your 

control over the last year plus have co-chaired a bipartisan task 

force on infrastructure. And as we hopefully move toward a 21st 

century infrastructure program to more multi-modal projects, I 

wonder if you—I know this is very early in your thinking process, 

but have you given any thought to the 11 separate agencies you 

have within the Department and how the boxes are aligned? And 

whether there needs to be any realignment of those functions to 

make sure as we think about a project like Dulles rail or others 

that use aviation, mass transit and highway combined that you’ve 

got those funding flows and goals all aligned on a multi-modal 

basis, number one? 

Second, and again this would more relate to surface transportation and acting on something Senator Wicker said, I really wonder if we’re going to take a fresh look at metrics. You know, some 

of the old standards like VMT and others have driven some of 

these formulas when truly at this point mobility, safety, climate 

change, and a host of these other issues are going to have to be 

somehow factored into the metrics by which we evaluate projects. 

And I’d love to have your comments on that. 

And finally, on perhaps a more parochial basis, in Virginia we 

have been very aggressive on the usage of public/private partnerships. And we have actually some wins in that category and again 

for the folks in the region we will soon see some relief on the Virginia side of the beltway with the addition of the hot lanes. I’d love 

to have your thoughts on public/private partnerships. And while 

I’m generally supportive, one of the things I think we always have 

to watch out for as we look at public/private partnerships is making sure that the private sector actually has some skin in the 

game, some risk capital, and it’s not just the public sector putting 

up the dough and the private sector reaping the benefits at the 

back end of the project. So if at some point you could comment on 

that as well. 

But Mr. Chairman, thank you for letting me, as a member of the 

Senate, have a chance to make a couple comments. And again, I 

look forward to working with you on this and very other important 

matters on this committee. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you Senator Warner. And now I have to 

regain my senses here and call on Senator Pryor. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK PRYOR, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ARKANSAS 

Senator PRYOR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And congratulations 

to you for being Chairman of this committee. And I really look forward to working with you on this committee. And I think we can 

have a great next couple of years here. 

Let me thank Congressman LaHood for putting your name forward for this very important post. And some of my colleagues here 

have identified just a few of the areas that you’re going to have to 

deal with in your time at the Department of Transportation. Someone mentioned rail, mass transit, FAA, highway bill, ports, Amtrak. I don’t think anyone has mentioned pipelines, but you really 

have a very full plate. 

20 

And the fact that you come so highly recommended from both 

Senator Wicker and my friend, Congressman Bozeman from Arkansas really speaks volumes. And the fact that you want to do this 

in a very bipartisan way, I think that’s exactly where the American 

people are. And I think you’ll have a lot of folks on this committee 

that really want to help you succeed in doing that. 

So Mr. Chairman, thank you. And I look forward to everyone’s 

statements and questions. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Pryor. And so 

now, Senator Thune? 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN THUNE, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH DAKOTA 

Senator THUNE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank 

you for holding the hearing and thank Congressman LaHood for 

his willingness to serve in this capacity. I can echo what evidently 

was stated by my former colleague from the House, now colleague 

in the Senate, Senator Wicker, about Congressman LaHood. 

He is a quality appointment, someone who I had the great privilege of working with when I was a member of the House on the 

T and I Committee. And his former boss, Leader Michel is a legend 

in the House as well. It’s nice to see you here today. 

But I do want to just as we look to the challenges that are facing 

America’s infrastructure, say that in a state where we have lots of 

real estate and vast distances and not a lot of people, that planes, 

trains and automobiles are pretty important in South Dakota. And 

so transportation issues are critical to my state. And as my colleague from Arkansas mentioned we’ve got a number of big issues 

that are going to be coming down the pike, not the least of which 

is the next highway bill. 

And as the next Secretary of Transportation you will have a lot 

to say about how that bill is shaped and put together. I think the 

cash-flow problems we’re facing in the trust fund are really critical. 

And I want to make sure as we go through the process that we 

don’t de- emphasize highway investment in rural states. 

I think that when it comes to highways that Federal investment 

in states like South Dakota and others, that may be in the middle 

of the country, enables those goods to move from one part of the 

country to the other. And whether it’s Seattle to New York or Chicago or wherever, people in businesses in those parts of the country 

benefit from the investments that are made in the Midwest. And 

areas of the country that don’t have the population base just like 

the other areas of the country benefit as well. 

So and I had mentioned this to you in our individual discussion, 

but Senator Wyden and I have a proposal that we’ve been building 

support for called the Build America Bonds Act which would help 

out all states and not just large states with multibillion dollar infrastructure projects. And I hope that you all give it consideration 

as an innovative option for financing transportation projects as we 

move forward. 

So again, delighted to welcome my former colleague here today, 

Mr. Chairman. And the President couldn’t have made a better pick 

for this job. And I look forward to working with him and with the 

21 

members of this committee as we take on many of these big transportation challenges. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you Senator. And now, Senator Udall? 

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much, Chairman Rockefeller. 

And thank you for allowing us to participate today. And I also 

thank the Ranking Member. I’m honored to be on this committee. 

I’m going to, I think, enjoy it very much just by the beginning 

we’ve had here today. 

And I want to say to Ray LaHood, my former colleague in the 

House of Representatives. I think this is an excellent nomination 

by Barack Obama. I remember the years working with you, Ray, 

in the House on a variety of issues, whether it was renewable electricity or many other issues where you reached across the aisle. 

But one of the things that impressed me the most, in addition 

to what Roger Wicker said in terms of you heading up those bipartisan retreats that we had, trying to bring both sides together, was 

that of my 10 years in the House, eight of them the Republicans 

were in the majority, and when the Republicans are in the majority 

the Speaker has the chair and you were in the Speaker’s chair 

many times. And as House members know usually when you get 

to a very difficult vote, a tough vote, you want somebody in the 

chair who’s fair, who’s firm. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator UDALL. Well, this is—I’m going to keep talking, Ray anyway. This is a—I don’t know what kind of signal we’re being sent, 

but anyways. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator UDALL. But as the Chair you were known as someone 

who was fair, someone who allowed openness and the ability to 

speak, but wouldn’t put up with any nonsense, and you would use 

the gavel when it was appropriate. I think there was a tremendous 

amount of respect for you the way you assumed the role as Speaker 

Pro Tem. So I wanted my colleagues to know that. 

A couple of things that I hope you’ll talk about as we get into 

the questioning that I’d just like to raise briefly. 

One is as we move forward on transportation you obviously have 

a very significant agency. You’ve got 60,000 people, billions of dollars. When we move forward in transportation we’re going to be 

trying to be more efficient, trying to do things in a way where we’re 

greener and have fewer greenhouse gases. 

And it seems to me, as you look at your Department, as we 

spend every dollar, we’re going to need to analyze what impact 

we’re having on the environment, on the air, on greenhouse gas 

emissions. Are we doing it the most effectively we can? So that’s 

one area I hope you’ll speak to as we get into the debate here. 

And when we talk about efficiency one of the interesting things 

that’s been done in my State of New Mexico, like many of the 

Western States, we’re big, we have many highways. Governor Richardson has proposed a new commuter rail which now runs almost 

100 miles, called the Rail Runner from Belen, New Mexico up to 

Santa Fe. 

22 

And so I think when we talk about efficiency we’re going to have 

to be analyzing whether we invest more in rail or do we invest 

more in roads? Do we invest more in waterways or do we invest 

more in roads? And I hope that your early analysis is to find out 

if you have the capabilities to analyze what’s the best way to do 

that? 

So with that I want to welcome you. And I am sure that you are 

going to get a resounding vote whenever we get an opportunity to 

do that because you have such an incredible career. And one of the 

final things, you come from the seat of Everett Dirksen. So I think 

that says something about seats generating bipartisanship. 

I mean when he was over here in the Senate he worked with 

LBJ and the two of them forged a great bipartisan coalition to 

move our country forward. So that’s a great tradition, Abraham 

Lincoln, Everett Dirksen and Ray LaHood. So thank you very 

much, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Udall. Senator Dorgan? 

STATEMENT OF HON. BYRON L. DORGAN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA 

Senator DORGAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Congressman LaHood and Secretary-Designate LaHood, thank you for 

being here. I’m not going to be able to stay for questions. I regret 

that. But by now you are aware that we’ve called you over here to 

talk to you. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator DORGAN. At some length, as a matter of fact. I’m going 

to be mercifully brief. But I want to say two things. 

I’m very interested in the Essential Air Services. You and I have 

had a long conversation in my office about these issues. I’m very 

interested in Amtrak and I’m very interested in the training of air 

traffic controllers and how we’re using our university facilities 

across the country to do that. 

I want to especially mention to you that the Transportation Department recently headed by the departed Secretary, I think, was 

very arrogant in the way they dealt with a very important issue. 

And that is the issue of allowing long-haul Mexican trucks into this 

country. They indicated it was necessary because of NAFTA. That 

was not the case at all. It just wasn’t the case. 

The Inspector General of the Department of Transportation said 

that in Mexico there is no centralization of drivers’ records that 

someone could determine. There are no vehicle inspection reports, 

no centralized records. There are no accident reports, no centralized records. 

There is no way that we are ready to have long haul Mexican 

trucks moving across the byways of this country. This Administration did a pilot project. This Congress, just over a year ago, passed 

legislation prohibiting it. The Secretary of Transportation indicated 

she didn’t care very much what this Congress thought. They were 

going to continue the pilot project anyway. 

Just to show you the absurdity of this. It is required that a Mexican long-haul truck driver be fluent in English in order to be able 

to drive on the roads of this country. And they determine fluent in 

English as a situation where if you held up a road sign such as a 

23 

stop sign or a yield sign, if that driver can answer what that sign 

is, in Spanish, they’re declared to be fluent in English. So much for 

careful concern about safety on the American roadways. 

I would fully expect within the first 2 months or so, Mr. Congressman, that the new President and the new Secretary of Transportation will revoke that pilot project. The Congress has requested 

them to do so, passed legislation, and I fully expect to see action 

from the new Secretary of Transportation that complies with the 

law. 

You and I have had a long conversation about that. I recognize 

at least part of that decision will be made in the White House. But 

I appreciate the fact that I think you were on the side of those of 

us when you were in the House of Representatives, on the side of 

those of us who attempted to pass legislation to shut that pilot 

project down. 

So I mention that because it has to do with the safety on American roadways. It has to do with the misinterpretation of NAFTA. 

And I think a pretty ham-handed approach by the Treasury, by the 

Transportation Secretary, I should say, in the way it was handled. 

Finally let me just say I am very pleased by your nomination. I 

told you that I have great respect for you. And for those who are 

in the front row supporting you, including Bob Michel. 

I thank you for being willing to serve this new Administration. 

And I think all of us on this committee are excited about your 

stewardship. And I believe you will be confirmed and I look forward to working with you very much. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Dorgan. Senator DeMint to 

be followed by Senator Klobuchar. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JIM DEMINT, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM SOUTH CAROLINA 

Senator DEMINT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ray, again, thank 

you for being willing to do this. I appreciate you coming by my office and our conversation I think stimulated a lot of my thinking 

and as we talked about the need for our Transportation Department to have bigger vision, longer-term ideas than just year-to-year 

projects. 

As you and I know when the Department was formed it was essentially to build an interstate highway system which is pretty 

much complete at this point. There’s still certainly a role for Federal roads, but as you know the Department of Transportation has 

got increasingly involved with state and local roads and regulations 

and funding. And I’m afraid at the expense of that bigger vision 

that it was started with. 

You and I talked a little bit about the possibilities of devolving 

some of the Federal role for highways and then looking at a 

grander vision. Perhaps of a passenger rail system that could take 

some of the pressure off of our aviation system and our highways. 

And I would look forward to working with you on those things. 

Unfortunately because of our financial situation as a country it’s 

unrealistic to think we can continue to add without looking at ways 

we might—can subtract. Certainly our Nation can give no less attention to our roads and our infrastructure. But there probably is 

a greater role the states can play as we look at different ways to 

24 

fund funding long term as gasoline becomes less and less the 

source of energy for transportation. 

So I’d love to hear more of your thoughts about maybe a new 

paradigm for the transportation system. Because we don’t need the 

Federal Government now to deal with secondary roads and bridges. 

We certainly need to challenge the states to do a better job with 

that. 

But, and the other thing I’d just like you to be thinking about, 

if I have a chance to ask a question, I will. As you know there has 

been much disagreement about earmarks or projects that we pick 

as Congressmen and Senators and send over to the Transportation 

Department. And I heard a number of Congressmen and Senators 

say we should not turn that over to the unelected bureaucrats of 

which you’re getting ready to become one. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator DEMINT. And from previous Secretaries and not just the 

most recent, but I’ve heard of what kind of dysfunction it creates 

when you have hundreds of folks on this side sending multiple 

projects, thousands of projects to your side. And it makes it increasingly difficult to implement a coherent Federal plan. I’d love 

to hear your comments later on that because President Obama has 

made it clear he would like to eliminate all or part of the earmarks. And so that’s something certainly I’d like to hear your philosophy on. 

So with that Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator DeMint. Senator Klobuchar? 

STATEMENT OF HON. AMY KLOBUCHAR, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and 

again, congratulations on your new position. And I want to tell you 

one of your first acts of leadership was to allow this room to be 

used by the Fergus Falls, Minnesota marching band on Monday. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. And in perfect formation as your staff will 

tell you, they filled up this entire room and did Yankee Doodle 

Dandy. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. And so I believe that’s in honor of your 

Chairmanship. 

Thank you so much, Representative LaHood for being here. I enjoyed our meeting. We care a lot about transportation in my state. 

I think you mentioned you were there for the Republican Convention this summer. And saw firsthand some of the work we’re 

doing including that quick repair we did of the I–35W bridge. Certainly that brought home to me the importance of transportation 

funding when we have something like a quarter of America’s 

600,000 bridges that have aged so much that their physical condition or ability to withstand current traffic levels is simply inadequate. 

I said the day that the bridge fell down that a bridge just 

shouldn’t fall down in the middle of America, not a six-lane highway, not a bridge that is just six blocks from my home where 13 

people died in this tragedy. I think we discussed the fact that fixVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
25 

ing these bridges and roads and other infrastructure rail won’t be 

easy. But I would say that will be my leading concern as Senator 

Hutchison so eloquently discussed at the beginning of her opening 

statement. 

Second, the FAA expects the number of passengers who fly in 

U.S. commercial carriers to exceed an astounding one billion passengers by 2015, up from 740 million passengers in 2006. We need 

to be prepared. I appreciate the Chairman’s leadership on this 

issue and the work that this committee has done. 

Clearly modernizing our air traffic control system should be a 

key priority. I’d say our new President is pretty good with technology, still wanting to hold on to his BlackBerry, and I’m very 

hopeful that he will see this as a priority as well. 

We also need to ensure that the FAA is employing a well trained 

group of air traffic controllers. Today’s air traffic controllers, as you 

know, are retiring in record numbers. And those who remain are 

overworked. In the coming years we need to hire and retain a sufficient number of air traffic controllers, and train them to do the important work that we demand of them. 

Finally to look at our transportation options and the need to 

have more mass transit clearly part of this will be railroads. I 

missed Senator Lautenberg’s opening, but I’m sure he stressed the 

importance of Amtrak. 

One other issue I wanted to mention is the captive shipper issue. 

In my state, like Senator Thune’s state and others, we have a number of small businesses and large businesses that rely on our railroads. Railroad competition has all but disappeared. 

There were 63 Class I railroads operating in the United States 

three decades ago. Today only seven remain with four of them controlling over 90 percent of the rail freight. That would be fine if the 

rates were acceptable. What we see unfair rates for captive shippers that are at the end of the line, the way it’s priced. And it’s 

very difficult under the current system for them to challenge these 

rates in any way. So that’s something that I’d like to pursue. Senator Dorgan and I and others have a bill that we’re pushing. 

There’s also another bill in the Judiciary committee. And I’ll hope 

you’ll look at that. 

In his 1963 memoir President Eisenhower said of the interstate 

highway system, ‘‘More than any single action by the government 

since the end of the war, this one would change the face of America. It’s impact on the American economy, the jobs it would produce 

in manufacturing and construction. The rural areas it would open 

up was beyond calculation.’’ 

He was right then. And I’m hopeful as we look at this economic 

recovery package and the work that we need to do in the Transportation bill that he will be right today. It’s our responsibility to work 

in a bipartisan manner on this issue. Certainly your nomination as 

a Republican Congressman by this President to this position is a 

symbol of that. 

So thank you very much. And we look forward to working with 

you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar. I just wanted to 

reiterate for a few of you who came in after I made my opening 

26 

remarks. We’re going to have two new procedures in this committee. 

One is that at the beginning of any hearing, where there are witnesses, I and Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison will have opening 

statements. But I think it is not a good use of our time to have 

every single member make an opening statement. Why do I say 

that? Because I think it encourages people to suddenly find other 

meetings they have to go to or people look at who’s going to be 

speaking ahead of them or get some idea of that and they decide 

they just don’t—— 

I want this to be a committee which is immediate, where people 

feel that if they show up on time there’s a reward for that. That 

we hold conversation to substance, not that any opening statements are lacking in substance, but that can all come out during 

the point of questioning. And as you’ve heard today a lot of opening 

statements have gotten to some of the questions that, Congressman, you will be asked. 

The other—so I hope that you will accept that. And the second 

is that I think that what we need to do here is to have an order 

of arrival in terms of speaking. I think it’s fair. 

Some committees use seniority. And I just don’t think that 

makes a whole lot of sense. I think when somebody gets here before 

somebody else then that person ought to be able to ask a question 

when it comes time for questioning before somebody else. And so 

that will be the order of the day if that meets with the approval 

of my distinguished Ranking Member. 

Senator HUTCHISON. I do agree. And I do think people will have 

a chance to question and we’ll get to the questions, Senator, not to 

mention the witnesses now and in the future would have a chance 

to talk. 

The CHAIRMAN. Alright. It’s Congressman LaHood, isn’t it? 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. We—yes. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. And what’s the position again? 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. With great respect, sir, we welcome your testimony. 

STATEMENT OF HON. RAY LAHOOD, SECRETARY-DESIGNATE, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Mr. LAHOOD. Well, Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. I know 

that you’re all very busy here today. There are a lot of things going 

on. 

I want to personally thank Senator Durbin, my senior Senator, 

who I have great respect for and he’s mentioned the great working 

relationship that he and I have had in so many different areas and 

also my mentor and former boss, Bob Michel for the introductions. 

And Mr. Chairman all of the members have a copy of my statement. And because of the busy schedule you all have, if you want 

to just put my statement in the record. I’d be happy to respond to 

your questions now so that everybody that’s here and has to go to 

another meeting would have a chance to ask the questions that 

they would like. 

27 

The CHAIRMAN. No, no Congressman. You’ve got to encourage 

good behavior here. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. So we need your opening statement. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member 

Hutchison, Members of the Committee, it’s an honor for me to appear before you as President Obama’s candidate for the United 

States Secretary of Transportation. Today I will tell you a little bit 

about myself, communicate my vision for leading the Department 

if I’m confirmed and most importantly hear about the issues you 

feel are important. Before doing this however, I want to emphasize 

two principles I will bring to everything I do at the Department, 

if confirmed. 

First is openness. That means an open door to you, to your Senate colleagues, to my former colleagues in the House and to all 

Americans who depend on and care about our transportation system. This was a basic principle of President Obama’s campaign. 

And it will be a watchword for me at USDOT if confirmed. No one 

person or agency has all the knowledge, insight or perspective 

needed so I will hear what people have to say before decisions are 

made. 

The second principle I’ve lived by all of my public service career 

is fairness. If I’m confirmed I will have the unusual perspective of 

being a Republican in a Democratic Administration. This gives me 

a real appreciation of the value of listening to all sides when disputes arise and projects are reviewed. I hope you take my selection 

as a signal of the President’s commitments to focusing on policy, 

rather than partisanship. 

There are no Republican or Democratic transportation issues. 

There are national issues that affect us all. While my primary mission, if confirmed, will be to bring President Obama’s priorities to 

the Department and see them effectively implemented. I will do so 

with a commitment to fairness across regional lines and across 

party lines. And I will do so in consultation with Congress, Governors and local officials. 

Now, a little about myself. For 14 years, I’ve had the honor of 

representing my hometown of Peoria, Illinois, and the 20 counties 

of the 18th District of Illinois in the U.S. House of Representatives. 

This District was previously represented by among others, Abraham Lincoln, Everett Dirksen and Bob Michel. I served on the 

Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for 6 years and the 

Appropriations Committee for 8 years. I also served in the Illinois 

House of Representatives. 

In one form or another I have worked for government and public 

service for 30 years. As I said before my primary goal, if confirmed 

will be effective implementation of President Obama’s priorities. As 

I see it this means a strong focus in at least four areas. 

First, safety. On the roads, on the rails, in the air and on the 

water. This has been and must continue to be the central focus of 

USDOT. 

This goal must guide everything done by both the leadership of 

the Department and its workforce who will be our partners in everything we do. I know the Committee established this goal when 

it created the Department and is dedicated to the success of the 

28 

safety mission. If confirmed, you can rely on me for the same dedication. 

Second, is the economy. I do not need to tell anyone here about 

the severe economic challenges we face. 2.6 million jobs lost in 2008 

and unfortunately more to come in 2009. 

The President and his economic team have spoken about the 

need for quick action and the economic recovery plan responds directly to that need. Transportation is a big part of that plan. And 

one of my first tasks, if confirmed, will be to manage the open and 

effective use of those funds. 

But job creation cannot be the only goal for these investments. 

As we attend to our immediate challenges we must keep watch on 

longer-term results. The most compelling reason for infrastructure 

investment is the lasting economic and social benefit it brings over 

decades and even generations. 

Much of our economic strength is built on the wise infrastructure 

investments made by our predecessors. And so at a minimum we 

cannot let the assets we inherit fall apart. I am committed to investments that will help bring the country’s transportation assets 

up to a state of excellent repair. 

Even as we repair what we have we also must shape the economy of the coming decades by building new infrastructure. We need 

to leave something of value to those who come after us. This work 

must be done with an eye toward our competitive position in the 

world by investing in things like better freight movement. 

But it must also recognize the third major policy focus, our transportation system and the development it enables must be sustainable. We must acknowledge the new reality of climate change. This 

has implications in all areas, the inner city, rail and mass transit 

funding in the economic recovery plan are a part of the equation, 

but only a part. Sustainability must permeate all we do from highways and transit to aviation and ports. President Obama is committed to this principle and so am I. 

Fourth is a strong focus on people and communities where they 

live and work. This can take many forms. In aviation it means a 

commitment to the passengers. An aviation system focused on safety, convenience and confidence of the traveling public is a successful one. 

For surface transportation it implies a commitment to the principles that some refer to as livability. That is investing in ways 

that respect the unique character of each community. The era of 

one-size-fits-all projects must give way to one where preserving 

unique community characteristics, be they rural or urban, is a primary goal rather than an afterthought. And I intend to make livable communities a big part of what we’re going to do, hopefully 

under reauthorization and in some other areas. 

These four areas: safety, the economy, sustainability and livability will be major priorities for me if I’m confirmed. But whatever our goals may be we will not achieve them unless policy and 

investments are driven by outcomes. A key challenge for those who 

craft the Nation’s transportation programs, that is, all of us here 

today, will be to link decision-making to performance at all levels. 

This will require a new commitment to measure performance, as 

was called for in the recent report of the National Surface TransVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
29 

portation Policy and Revenue Commission and to adjust our course 

where progress is too slow. Performance measurement is key to assuring that new money is invested wisely and the public has 

enough confidence in our work to support continued investment. 

To conclude, Mr. Chairman, thank you again. I want to work 

with this committee going forward. And I will respond to your 

questions. Thank you, sir. 

[The prepared statement and biographical information of Mr. 

LaHood follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. RAY LAHOOD, SECRETARY-DESIGNATE, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Chairman Rockefeller, Ranking Member Hutchison, Members of the Committee, 

it is an honor for me to appear before you today as President Obama’s designee for 

U.S. Secretary of Transportation. Today I hope I can tell you a little about myself, 

communicate to you my vision for leading the Department, if I am confirmed, and 

hear about the issues you see facing America’s transportation system. 

Before getting to these specifics, however, I would like to emphasize two overarching principles I will bring to everything I do at the Department if I am confirmed. 

The first is openness. That means an open door to you and your Senate colleagues, to my former colleagues in the House, and to all Americans who depend 

on and care about our transportation system. This was a basic principle of President 

Obama’s campaign, and it will be a watchword for me at USDOT, if I have the 

honor to lead the Department. I know that no one person or agency can have all 

the knowledge, insight or perspective needed, and so I will want to hear what people 

have to say before policy is set or decisions are made. 

The second is a principle I have tried to live by all through my career—fairness. 

If I am confirmed, I will have the somewhat unusual perspective of being a Republican in a Democratic administration. This will give me a heightened appreciation 

of the need to listen to all sides when disputes arise and projects are reviewed. I 

hope you will take my selection as a signal of the President’s commitment to focusing his energies on policy rather than partisanship. I think we all recognize that 

there are no Republican or Democratic transportation issues; these are national 

issues that affect us all. 

While my primary mission if I am confirmed will be to bring President Obama’s 

priorities to the Department and see them effectively implemented, I will do so always with a commitment to fairness, across regional lines, across party lines, and 

between people who come to the issues with different perspectives. 

Now a little about myself. For the last 14 years I have had the honor of representing my home town of Peoria and the 20 counties of the 18th District of Illinois 

in the U.S. House of Representatives—a community previously represented by, 

among others, Abraham Lincoln and Everett Dirksen. I served on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee for 6 years and on the Appropriations Committee after that. Before being elected to Congress, I worked for the previous representative for the 18th District, Republican Leader Bob Michel, who I’m sure many 

of you know. I also served in the Illinois House of Representatives. In one form or 

another I have worked in government for more than 30 years. 

As I said before, my primary goal at the Department, if confirmed, will be effective implementation of President Obama’s national priorities for transportation. In 

doing this I will work closely with Congress and the Nation’s Governors and local 

elected officials. As I see it, this will require a strong focus in at least four areas. 

First is the economy. I do not need to tell anyone here about the severe economic 

challenges we face—more than a million jobs lost in 2008 and unfortunately more 

to come in 2009. The President and the members of his economic team have spoken 

extensively about the need for quick action, and the economic recovery and renewal 

plan currently under discussion responds directly to this need. Transportation infrastructure is a substantial part of that plan, and one of my first and most important 

tasks, if confirmed, will be to manage the effective use of those funds. 

But job creation cannot be the only goal for these investments. As we attend to 

our immediate challenges, we must keep watch on longer term results. The most 

compelling reason for infrastructure investment is the lasting economic and social 

benefit it brings over decades and even generations. Indeed, much of our economic 

success in recent decades has been built on the wise infrastructure investments 

30 

made by our predecessors. And so at a minimum, we cannot let the assets we inherited fall apart. Accordingly, I am committed to supporting investments that will help 

bring the country’s transportation assets up to a state of good repair. 

Even as we repair what we have, we must begin shaping the economy of the coming decades by building new infrastructure. We need to leave something of value 

to those who come after us. This work must be done with an eye toward our competitive position in the world, by investing in things like better freight movement. 

But it must also recognize a second major policy focus: our transportation system 

and the development it enables must be sustainable. We must acknowledge the new 

reality of climate change. This has implications for all areas; investments in intercity rail and mass transit, as called for in the economic recovery and reinvestment 

plan, are part of the equation, but only part. Sustainability must be a principle reflected in all our infrastructure investments, from highways and transit to aviation 

and ports. President Obama is committed to this principle and so am I. 

Third is a strong focus on people and the communities where they live and work. 

This can take many forms. In aviation, it means a commitment to the end user of 

our aviation system: the passenger. An aviation system that focuses on the safety, 

convenience and confidence of the traveling public will be a successful system. 

In our surface transportation programs, it implies a commitment to the principles 

that some refer to as livability; that is, investing in a way that recognizes the 

unique character of each community. The era of one-size-fits-all transportation 

projects must give way to one where preserving and enhancing unique community 

characteristics, be they rural or urban, is a primary mission of our work rather than 

an afterthought. 

And finally, I am mindful that safety—on the road, on the rails, in the air, and 

on the water—has always been and must continue to be the central focus of the Department of Transportation. This goal must guide everything done by both the leadership of the Department and its work force, who will be our partners in everything 

we do. I know the Committee established this goal when it worked to create the 

Department and has been dedicated to the success of the safety mission throughout 

its history. If confirmed, you can rely on me for the same dedication. 

These four areas—economic health, sustainability, a focus on people and communities, and safety—will be major priorities for me if I am confirmed because I believe a transportation system that meets these goals is vital to our long term national interest. The tools the Congress has given to the Department vary—from 

grants, to regulation, to research and technology, to informing the public on issues. 

In every case, I will seek to use those tools to pursue these goals. 

But whatever our goals may be, we will not achieve them unless our policy and 

investment decisions are driven by outcomes. A key challenge for those who craft 

and manage the Nation’s transportation programs—that is, all of us here today— 

will be to link decision-making to performance at all levels. This will require a new 

commitment to measuring performance in real time, as was called for in the recent 

report of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Commission, and 

to adjusting our course where progress is not rapid enough. The practice of performance measurement will be key to assuring both that new money is invested wisely 

and that the public has the confidence to continue supporting continued investments. 

To conclude Mr. Chairman, thank you again for scheduling this hearing. I would 

like to reiterate my desire to work with this committee as policy and funding matters are debated, and I will be happy to respond to any questions you and the Members of the Committee may have. 

A. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION

1. Name (Include any former names or nicknames used): 

Raymond ‘‘Ray’’ LaHood. 

2. Position to which nominated: Secretary of Transportation. 

3. Date of Nomination: January 20, 2009. 

4. Address (List current place of residence and office addresses): 

Residence: Information not released to the public. 

5. Date and Place of Birth: December 6, 1945; Peoria, Illinois. 

6. Provide the name, position, and place of employment for your spouse (if married) and the names and ages of your children (including stepchildren and children 

by a previous marriage). 

Wife: Kathy LaHood, Director of Finance, Goodwill Industries; and Consultant, 

Council of American Overseas Research Centers. 

31 

Children: Darin LaHood, 40; Amy LaHood, 38; Sam LaHood, 34; Sara LaHood, 

31. 

7. List all college and graduate degrees. Provide year and school attended. 

Canton Junior College, 1963–65 (Spoon River College). 

Bachelor of Science in Education, 1971, Bradley University. 

8. List all post-undergraduate employment, and highlight all management-level 

jobs held and any non-managerial jobs that relate to the position for which you are 

nominated. 

St. Joseph School, Teacher. 

Holy Family School, Teacher. 

Oak Grove West School, Social Studies Teacher. 

Rock Island Youth Services Bureau, Executive Director, 1972–74. 

Bi-State Metropolitan Commission, Chief Planner, 1974–77. 

Congressman Tom Railsback, District Administrative Assistant, 1977–1982. 

Illinois House of Representatives, State Representative, 1982. 

Congressman Robert Michel, Chief of Staff and District Administrative Assistant, 1983–1994. 

Member of Congress, 18th District of Illinois, 1995–2008. 

9. Attach a copy of your resume. See Attachment A. 

10. List any advisory, consultative, honorary, or other part-time service or positions with Federal, State, or local governments, other than those listed above, within the last 5 years. 

Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission, Co-Chair, 2000–1/3/2009. 

11. List all positions held as an officer, director, trustee, partner, proprietor, 

agent, representative, or consultant of any corporation, company, firm, partnership, 

or other business, enterprise, educational, or other institution within the last 5 

years. 

Board of Trustees, Bradley University, 1999–2006. 

Board of Trustees, Gallaudet University, 1997–1/3/2009. 

Co-Chair, International Maronite Foundation. 

Trustee, Arab American Fellowship, 2008–present. 

Honorary Chairman, Arab American National Museum, 2005–present. 

12. Please list each membership you have had during the past 10 years or currently hold with any civic, social, charitable, educational, political, professional, fraternal, benevolent or religious organization, private club or other membership organization. Include dates of membership and an positions you have held with any organization. Please note whether any such club or organization restricts membership 

on the basis of sex, race, color, religion, national origin, age, or handicap. 

Creve Coeur Club, Peoria, Illinois, 1998–present. 

Rotary International, Peoria, Illinois, 1985–present. 

Knights of Columbus, Peoria, Illinois, 1985–present. 

Capitol Hill Club, Washington, D.C., 1990–present. 

Cathedral of St. Mary of the Immaculate Conception, Peoria, Illinois, 2004– 

present. 

Chicago Executive Forum, Chicago, Illinois, 2003–2006. 

None of these restrict membership. 

13. Have you ever been a candidate for and/or held a public office (elected, nonelected, or appointed)? If so, indicate whether any campaign has an outstanding 

debt, the amount, and whether you are personally liable for that debt: Yes. There 

are no outstanding campaign debts. 

14. Itemize all political contributions to any individual, campaign organization, 

political party, political action committee, or similar entity of $500 or more for the 

past 10 years. Also list all offices you have held with, and services rendered to, a 

state or national political party or election committee during the same period. 

See Attachment B. 

15. List all scholarships, fellowships, honorary degrees, honorary society memberships, military medals, and any other special recognition for outstanding service or 

achievements. 

32 

Honorary Doctorate in Political Science, 2000, Lincoln College. 

Honorary Doctorate in Public Service, 2002, Eureka College. 

Honorary Doctorate in Humane Letters, 2004, Tri-State University. 

Honorary Doctorate in Public Service, 2006, MacMurray College. 

Honorary Doctorate in Humane Letters, 2008, Milliken University. 

Ellis Island Medal of Honor. 

Frank Bellrose Illinois River Valley Conservation Award, 2001, Illinois Chapter 

of The Nature Conservancy. 

Charles B. Shuman Distinguished Service Award, 2005, Illinois Farm Bureau. 

Ray A. Neumann Tri-County Citizen of the Year, 2001, Downtown Kiwanis 

Club of Peoria. 

Spirit of Enterprise Award, the Chamber of Commerce. 

Friend of Agriculture, the Farm Bureau. 

Guardian of Small Business award, National Federation of Independent Business. 

Guardian of Medicare Award, United Seniors Association. 

Manufacturing Legislative Excellence Award, National Association of Manufacturers. 

16. Please list each book, article, column, or publication you have authored, individually or with others. Also list any speeches that you have given on topics relevant to the position for which you have been nominated. Do not attach copies of 

these publications unless otherwise instructed. 

This list includes speeches, columns and articles on topics relevant to the position. 

‘‘40th Anniversary of the Interstate Highway System,’’ Speech to the Tri-County 

Regional Planning Commission, June 29, 1996. 

‘‘Congress Scrutinizing Airline Safety,’’ Daily Times, July 26, 1996. 

‘‘Article on Regional Airport,’’ Illinois Business Journal, May 2001. 

‘‘A Sixth Central Illinois Airport Would Waste Tax Dollars,’’ The Pantagraph 

and Peoria Journal Star, May 13, 2001. 

‘‘Next Congress to Tackle Transportation,’’ InterBusiness Issues, December 2002 

‘‘Capitol View,’’ The Pantagraph, February 2003. 

‘‘Route 336 A Priority,’’ 336 Coalition Newsletter, Fall 2003. 

‘‘New Session Brings Both New and Old Issues,’’ InterBusiness Issues, January 

2005. 

‘‘Transportation Bill Vital to Illinois Economy,’’ InterBusiness Issues, April 

2005. 

‘‘Route 29 Expansion Will Create Jobs and Stimulate Economy,’’ Peoria Journal 

Star. 

‘‘River Issues are Critical to Upper Midwest,’’ InterBusiness Issues, July 2005. 

‘‘River Issues are Critical to Mississippi River Valley’s Future,’’ UMIMRA, Summer 2005. 

‘‘Senate Must Act on Vital Water Resources Bill,’’ InterBusiness Issues, March 

2006. 

17. Please identify each instance in which you have testified orally or in writing 

before Congress in a governmental or non-governmental capacity and specify the 

date and subject matter of each testimony. 

This list includes testimony on topics relevant to the position. 

Remarks to the House Transportation and Infrastructure Aviation Subcommittee, February 14 and 15, 1995. 

Statement before the House Transportation and Infrastructure Aviation Subcommittee during Hearings on the Airport Improvement Program, March 13, 

1996. 

Statement on Introduction of a Bill to Eliminate the FAA’s Liaison and Familiarization Training Program, September 9, 1998. 

Statement before the House, ‘‘Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,’’ July 29, 1998. 

Statement before the House, ‘‘Department of Transportation and Related Agencies Act,’’ July 24, 1995. 

33 

Statement before the House, ‘‘Air Service Negotiations Between United States 

and Japan,’’ September 17, 1997. 

Statement before the House, ‘‘Building Efficient Surface Transportation and Equity Act of 1998,’’ April 1, 1998. 

Statement before the House, ‘‘Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy For Users,’’ 

April 1, 2004. 

Statement before the House, ‘‘Transportation, Treasury, and Independent Agencies Appropriations Act, 2004,’’ September 4, 2003. 

Served as Speaker pro tempore of the House, ‘‘Department of Transportation 

and Related Agencies Act, 1997,’’ June 26, 1996. 

Served as Speaker pro tempore of the House, ‘‘Aviation Security Act,’’ November 

6, 2001. 

Served as Speaker pro tempore of the House, ‘‘Small Airport Safety, Security, 

and Air Service Improvement Act of 2002,’’ June 20, 2002. 

Served as Speaker pro tempore of the House, ‘‘Small Airport Safety, Security, 

and Air Service Improvement Act of 2002,’’ June 20, 2002. 

Served as Speaker pro tempore of the House, ‘‘Providing for Further Consideration of H.R. 3550, Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users,’’ April 1, 

2004. 

18. Given the current mission, major programs, and major operational objectives 

of the department/agency to which you have been nominated, what in your background or employment experience do you believe affirmatively qualifies you for appointment to the position for which you have been nominated, and why do you wish 

to serve in that position? 

I have been involved in the legislative process throughout much of my life, first 

as a staff member and then for many years as an elected official. I have seen how 

government programs can meet national objectives and improve the economy an 

quality of life at both the national and the local level. At the same time, I have 

learned through my interactions with constituents how these programs can fall 

short of their objectives when they become overly bureaucratic, or lose sight of the 

stakeholders that they are intended to serve. I also know from experience that Federal programs must collaborate with and support state and local agencies in order 

to be effective. 

During my time on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and then on 

the Appropriations Committee, I gained a thorough understanding of the Department of Transportation’s programs and agencies. I also have served both on the Intelligence Committee and on the Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee, 

where I became familiar with potential terrorist threats facing the transportation 

system, and the countermeasures needed to ensure efficient transportation while enhancing security. 

I look forward to the challenge of leading the Department of Transportation at 

a time when it will play a fundamental role in supporting national objectives. Building and improving our Nation’s transportation infrastructure has always been 

among my highest priorities, and over the next few years, the Department will be 

challenged to meet this objective to an unprecedented degree. 

19.What do you believe are your responsibilities, if confirmed, to ensure that the 

department/agency has proper, management and accounting controls, and what experience do you have in managing a large organization? 

Management and accounting controls are critical to the success of any large organization, public or private, and I am committed to using my leadership in the Department of Transportation to assure that such controls are in place. It is my understanding that the Department, over the past decade or more, has been a leader in 

the use of performance management to set strategic objectives and measure 

progress toward meeting objectives. The Department’s financial systems also enable 

it to obtain a clean and timely audit opinion on its annual financial statements. I 

expect to continue and expand these activities with the strong support of the Department’s Inspector General, its Chief Financial Office and all of the members of 

the Agency’s leadership team. These officials will clearly understand my high expectations for management performance, and will receive my full support for continued 

progress of the Department of Transportation as a recognized model for governmental management. 

While my personal experience does not include direct responsibilities for management in large organizations, my service in the Congress, particularly on the House 

Appropriations Committee, has given me the perspective to understand the importance of sound management and accountability in the use of public funds. I want 

34 

the Department of Transportation to be seen as an agency that effectively serves 

the will of the public, and does so in a way that ensures transparency to those citizens who wish to understand its internal workings. 

20. What do you believe to be the top three challenges facing the department/ 

agency, and why? 

I believe that the major challenges facing the Department of Transportation relate 

to its support of key national objectives. As I think about the department’s future, 

I want its programs and activities to contribute to solutions in areas critical to the 

Nation’s future. 

In the area of the economy, efficient and safe infrastructure is a fundamental requirement for recovery and growth. As a nation, we need to invest in our highways, 

bridges, ports, air and rail systems to strengthen user safety, bolster our long-term 

competitiveness and ensure that our economy achieves its growth potential. 

Through the Department of Transportation’s programs, sound and well managed investments will move us in the right direction. An aviation system that works effectively is critical to the safe movement of people and goods in the conduct of our economic affairs. I believe we must support that system through the modernization of 

air traffic control and by working cooperatively with front line air traffic controllers 

and maintainers to restore morale and improve working conditions within the Federal Aviation Administration. We need also to get on with the development of a rail 

system that supports a growing economy with high-speed passenger rail and a 

strengthened domestic freight rail system. Leadership in the Department of Transportation is needed to set the objectives in these are gain support for the resources 

needed and provide benchmarks to gauge progress. 

In the area of energy, the transportation system must play a central role in conservation and sound development of energy resources. Department of Transportation programs play a major role here as well. The fuel economy of nation’s automobile fleet must continue to improve, and I look forward to working within the Administration and with the auto industry to achieve this goal. Beyond this, it is time 

to move to a new generation of vehicles with dramatic improvement in energy use. 

Investing in advanced vehicle technology and development of supportive policies for 

such vehicles, including their safety and the support infrastructure will be an important contribution to the national goals. So will the Department’s support of efficient transportation modes—effective public transportation in our cities and an 

intercity passenger rail system that revitalizes Amtrak as the foundation for highspeed rail connections among our regions. Making these initiatives happen is a key 

challenge, involving both resources and hands-on management and the revitalization of the Department’s research and development skills. 

Environment is another area where the Department contributes to national goals 

and where I see a key set of challenges. Making global warming a top priority as 

well as dealing with other environmental concerns will require a new level of attention for our transportation systems as well as a new mindset for the Department’s 

leadership. Increased energy efficiency in our vehicles and our passenger and freight 

transportation systems will significantly alleviate the problem of greenhouse gases. 

But for the long term, we also need to encourage more livable and sustainable communities, using the resources of Departmental programs to new ends. For too long, 

our patterns of urban development have been organized around the principle of 

cheap gasoline. As we invest wisely in the repair and development of our infrastructure, we must devote significantly more attention t investments that will make it 

easier for us to walk, bicycle and access other transportation alternatives. Among 

the key challenges here is the development of close working relationships with other 

Cabinet agencies whose goals and programs overlap with those of the Department 

of Transportation. 

B. POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

1. Describe all financial arrangements, deferred compensation agreements and 

other continuing dealings with business associates, clients, or customers. Please include information related to retirement accounts: None. 

2. Do you have any commitments or agreements, formal or informal, to maintain 

employment, affiliation, or practice with any business, association or other organization during your appointment? If so, please explain: No. 

3. Indicate any investments, obligations, liabilities, or other relationships which 

could involve potential conflicts of interest in the position to which you have been 

nominated. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and the Department of Transportation’s designated agency ethics official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest 

35 

will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have 

entered into with the Department’s designated agency ethics official. 

4. Describe any business relationship, dealing, or financial transaction which you 

have had during the last 10 years, whether for yourself, on behalf of a client, or 

acting as an agent, that could in any way constitute or result in a possible conflict 

of interest in the position to which you have been nominated: None. 

5. Describe any activity during the past 10 years in which you have been engaged 

for the purpose of directly or indirectly influencing the passage, defeat, or modification of any legislation or affecting the administration and execution of law or public 

policy. 

I have been a Member of Congress and have worked on many legislative initiatives over the course of my fourteen year tenure, including introduction, sponsorship 

and passage of numerous bills. 

6. Explain how you will resolve any potential conflict of interest, including any 

that may be disclosed by your responses to the above items. 

In connection with the nomination process, I have consulted with the Office of 

Government Ethics and the Department of Transportation’s designated agency ethic 

official to identify potential conflicts of interest. Any potential conflicts of interest 

will be resolved in accordance with the terms of an ethics agreement that I have 

entered into with the Department’s designated agency ethics official. 

C. LEGAL MATTERS

I. Have you ever been disciplined or cited for a breach of ethics by, or been the 

subject of a complaint to any court, administrative agency, professional association, 

disciplinary committee, or other professional group? If so, please explain: No. 

2. Have you ever been investigated, arrested, charged, or held by any Federal, 

State, or other law enforcement authority of any Federal, State, county, or municipal entity, other than for a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain: No. 

3. Have you or any business of which you are or were an officer ever been involved as a party in an administrative agency proceeding or civil litigation? If so, 

please explain: No. 

4. Have you ever been convicted (including pleas of guilty or nolo contendere) of 

any criminal violation other than a minor traffic offense? If so, please explain: No. 

5. Have you ever been accused, formally or informally, of sexual harassment or 

discrimination on the basis of sex, race, religion, or any other basis? If so, please 

explain: No. 

6. Please advise the Committee of any additional information, favorable or unfavorable, which you feel should be disclosed in connection with your nomination: 

None. 

D. RELATIONSHIP WITH COMMITTEE

1. Will you ensure that your department/agency complies with deadlines for information set by Congressional committees? Yes. 

2. Will you ensure that your department/agency does whatever it can to protect 

Congressional witnesses and whistle blowers from reprisal for their testimony and 

disclosures? Yes. 

3. Will you cooperate in providing the Committee with requested witnesses including technical experts and career employees, with firsthand knowledge of matters of 

interest to the Committee? Yes. 

4. Are you willing to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of 

the Congress on such occasions as you may be reasonably requested to do so? Yes. 

ATTACHMENT A 

Congressman Ray LaHood (R-Peoria) 

Eighteenth District of Illinois 

Congressman Ray LaHood is serving his seventh and final term representing the 

18th District of Illinois. First elected in 1994, Ray was re-elected to Congress on November 7, 2006, with over 67 percent of the vote. 

Ray is a former schoolteacher, a long-time community leader, and has extensive 

legislative experience, all of which combine to give him a unique perspective on his 

job as a Congressman. 

The district Ray represents includes the hometowns of several significant American leaders, such as Abraham Lincoln, Everett Dirksen, and Bob Michel. In fact, 

36 

the 20 counties of the 18th District contain the same 11 counties Lincoln represented as a Congressman. 

Ray serves on the House Appropriations Committee, the panel that oversees Federal discretionary spending. 

Appropriations Committee Subcommittee Assignments: 

• Select Intelligence Oversight Panel, Ranking Member. 

• Subcommittee on Agricultural, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies. 

• Subcommittee on Legislative Branch. 

Since his first election, agriculture has been one of Ray’s top priorities. With some 

of the finest farmland in the world, the 18th Congressional District has a tremendous farming heritage. Ray has been a leader in the promotion of ethanol and has 

supported policies which are allowing unprecedented expansion of ethanol production in Illinois. The Illinois Farm Bureau recognized Ray’s leadership on agriculture 

issues y awarding him their highest honor in 2005, the Charles B. Shuman Distinguished Service Award. 

Ray has taken great pride in the 18th District’s ties to Abraham Lincoln, and he 

has been an advocate for advancing the legacy of the 16th President. Ray authored 

the law establishing the Abraham Lincoln Bicentennial Commission to lay the 

groundwork for celebrating Lincoln’s 200th birthday in 2009. He has also led efforts 

to establish the highly-successful Abraham Lincoln Presidential Library and Museum in Springfield. 

Ray is viewed as a leading proponent for preserving the Illinois River. He led efforts to secure Illinois’ inclusion in the Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program, a unique and highly successful environmental program for the Illinois River, 

which has allowed over 100,000 acres to be put into conservation easements. He has 

supported efforts to enhance the Chautauqua National Wildlife Refuge in Mason 

County, expand the Emiquon National Wildlife Refuge in Fulton County, and create 

the Hennepin-Hopper Lakes backwater restoration project. In recognition of his efforts for the river, Ray was awarded the Frank Bellrose Illinois River Valley Conservation Award in 2001 from the Illinois Chapter of The Nature Conservancy. 

Ray has led efforts to enhance Illinois’ infrastructure. He has worked to secure 

funds to improve local highways, such as the reconstruction of Interstate 74 in Peoria, the expansion of U.S. Route 67, and completion of Route 336. Ray has been a 

proponent for improving local airports through securing new construction and expansion, while also working with officials to increase air service. 

Over the years, Ray has been lauded by many for his leadership on the local, 

state, and national levels. He is widely viewed as someone who has a deep respect 

for the institution of Congress and who works across party lines to achieve policy 

goals. 

He has led efforts to establish a higher level of civility, decorum, and bipartisanship in the House of Representatives. 

His knowledge of Congress and his fair-handed demeanor have enabled him to be 

called upon many times to chair the House of Representatives during proceedings 

on contentious issues including the impeachment debate in 1998. 

Locally, Ray has led efforts to work with officials in a collaborative manner to address various issues facing the communities of the 18th District. He regularly convenes bipartisan meetings with the area’s state representatives and senators and 

often meets with local mayors and other elected officials. Ray’s greatest collaborative 

achievements include the establishment of a Federal health clinic in Peoria, the creation of the Peoria/NEXT business incubator, and moving forward with the-construction of the Peoria Riverfront Museum. 

Among Ray’s highest priorities is helping focal communities with various efforts 

to attract industry and increase employment opportunities. Ray has particularly emphasized rural development through assisting economic efforts and infrastructure 

improvements in the many rural communities he represents. 

Ray LaHood was born December 6, 1945, and is a native of Peoria. He is the 

grandson of an immigrant from Lebanon and the son of a restaurant manager. Ray 

worked his way through school attending Spalding Institute high school, Canton 

Junior College, and Bradley University. He earned a B.S. degree in Education and 

Sociology from Bradley in 1971. In 2000, Ray received an honorary doctorate in Political Science from Lincoln College. In 2002, Ray received an honorary doctorate in 

Public Service from Eureka College. In 2004, Ray received an honorary doctorate 

in Humane Letters from Tri-State University; and in 2006 Ray received an honorary 

doctorate in Public Service from MacMurray College. 

37 

A teacher by training, Ray started his career teaching junior high school students 

in Catholic and public schools. He then moved to Rock Island where he served as 

the Chief Planner for the Bi-State Metropolitan Commission, Director of the Rock 

Island Youth Services Bureau, and as District Administrative Assistant for Congressman Tom Railsback. 

After serving in the Illinois State House of Representatives in 1982, Ray worked 

for U.S. House Republican Leader Robert Michel as District Administrative Assistant and, for 4 years, as Chief of Staff. He succeeded Mr. Michel upon his retirement 

in January 1995. 

Ray was named the 2001 Ray A. Neumann Tri-County Citizen of the Year by the 

Downtown Kiwanis Club of Peoria. In 1999, Ray received Peoria Notre Dame High 

School’s Distinguished Alumnus award. 

Other awards Ray has received include: the Ellis Island Medal of Honor; the 

Chamber of Commerce’s Spirit of Enterprise award; the Farm Bureau’s Friend of 

Agriculture award; the Guardian of Small Business ward from the National Federal 

of Independent Business; the Guardian of Medicare Award from the United Seniors 

Association; the Tax Fighter Award from the National Tax-Limitation Committee; 

and the Manufacturing Legislative Excellence Award from the National Association 

of Manufacturers. 

Ray is married to Kathy and they have four children: Darin (wife: Kristen), Amy 

(husband: Kevin) Sam, and Sara (husband: Brian). They also have seven grandchildren (Ella, McKay, Henry, Luke, Oliver, Theodore, Brogan). Ray and Kathy are 

Roman Catholic and are members of Peoria’s Cathedral of St. Mary of the Immaculate Conception. 

ATTACHMENT B

Friends of Ray LaHood, 2000 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

10–May–97 Baker For Congress 500 

11–Aug–97 Baker For Congress 237.79 

16–Oct–98 Baker For Congress 254.38 

22–Feb–00 Baker For Congress 1,000 Primary 

01–Jun–00 Baker For Congress 1,000 General 

17–Oct–00 Ewing for Congress 500 General 

17–Oct–00 Ferguson for Congress 500 General 

16–Oct–00 Fletcher for Congress 1,000 General 

16–Oct–00 Friends of Clay Shaw 1,000 General 

20–Sep–06 Friends of Clay Shaw 1,000 General 

16–Oct–00 Friends of Nethercutt 1,000 General 

16–Sep–98 Friends Of John Hostetler 500 

16–Oct–00 Friends Of John Hostetler 1,000 General 

20–Sep–06 Friends Of John Hostetler 1,000 General 

17–Oct–00 Friends of Phill 500 General 

16–Oct–00 Friends of Don Sherwood 1,000 General 

12–Jun–00 Friends of Tim Johnson 1,000 General 

03–Apr–00 George W. Bush for President 1,000 General 

17–Oct–00 Graves for Congress 500 General 

16–Oct–00 Hayes for Congress 1,000 General 

31–Oct–07 Hayes for Congress 1,000 Primary 2008 

20–Jun–00 Illinois Republican Party 500 General 

24–Oct–02 Illinois Republican Party 15,500 General 

12–May–04 Illinois Republican Party 100 General 

20–Feb–08 Illinois Republican Party 2,000 General 2008 

08–May–08 Illinois Republican Party 75 General 2008 

17–Apr–08 Illinois Republican Party 50 General 2008 

27–Jun–08 Illinois Republican Party 600 General 2008 

24–Oct–00 Jay Dickey for Congress 1,000 General 

17–Oct–00 John Koster for Congress 500 General 

17–Oct–00 Johnson for Congress 2000 500 General 

17–Oct–00 Keller for Congress 500 General 

17–Oct–00 Kline for Congress 500 General 

16–Oct–00 Kuykendall Cong. Committee 1,000 General 

38 

Friends of Ray LaHood, 2000—Continued 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

05–Jun–00 Lazio 2000 1,000 General 

12–Jun–00 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 

02–Nov–06 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 2006 

16–Sep–04 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 

20–Sep–06 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 

30–Aug–07 Mark Kirk for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

15–Sep–08 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 2008 

17–Oct–00 McDonald for Congress 500 General 

27–Mar–00 National Republican Club of Capitol Hill 74.88 Primary 

30–Mar–00 National Republican Club of Capitol Hill 1,571.82 Primary 

01–Jun–00 National Republican Club of Capitol Hill 458.49 General 

26–Nov–01 National Republican Club of Capitol Hill 941.82 Primary 

02–May–02 National Republican Club of Capitol Hill 1,425.60 General 

16–Oct–00 Northup for Congress 1,000 General 

27–Mar–02 Northup for Congress 1,000 General 

17–Oct–00 Pence for Congress 500 General 

13–Feb–97 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 320 

18–Feb–97 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 80 

23–Jun–97 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 120 

04–Sep–97 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 240 

23–Feb–98 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 100 

20–Oct–98 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 600.15 

05–Nov–98 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 208.64 

24–Nov–98 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 240 

04–Feb–99 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 

08–Feb–99 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 320 Primary 

27–Jul–99 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 

27–Jan–00 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 650 Primary 

07–Feb–00 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 

31–Jul–00 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 300 General 

18–Oct–00 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 500 General 

08–Feb–01 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 

09–Feb–01 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 400 Primary 

21–Feb–01 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 400 Primary 

07–Aug–01 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 

10–Feb–02 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 400 Primary 

23–Jul–02 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 100 General 

20–Feb–03 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 1,000 Primary 

24–Feb–04 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 400 Primary 

26–Feb–04 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 600 Primary 

07–Apr–04 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 3,500 General 

16–Sep–04 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 250 General 

24–Feb–05 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 400 Primary 2006 

01–Mar–06 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 1,000 Primary 2006 

01–Jul–06 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 800 General 

25–Jul–06 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 141 General 

14–Feb–07 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 1,000 Primary 2008 

20–Sep–07 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 3,500 Primary 2008 

29–Nov–07 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 1,000 Primary 2008 

17–Oct–00 Rehberg for Congress 500 General 

16–Oct–00 Re-elect Brian Bilbray to Congress 1,000 General 

16–Oct–00 Rogan Campaign Committee 1,000 General 

20–Oct–00 Sessions for Congress 1,000 General 

12–Mar–04 Sessions for Congress 1,000 Primary 

17–Oct–00 Shelly Moore Capito for Congress 500 General 

17–Oct–00 Smith for Congress 500 General 

24–Oct–00 Tiberi for Congress 500 General 

16–Oct–00 Tom Tancredo for Congress 1,000 General 

39 

Friends of Ray LaHood, 2002 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

07–Aug–02 Activator Federal Fund 1,679.95 General 

02–Oct–02 Activator Federal Fund 2,129.73 General 

30–Oct–02 Bob Ehrlich for Maryland 1,000 General 

25–Jul–01 Buyer for Congress 1,000 Primary 

02–Nov–01 Chambliss for Senate 1,000 Primary 

09–May–02 Citizens for Jim Ryan 1,000 General 

29–Jul–02 Citizens for Jim Ryan 1,000 General 

21–Mar–02 Citizens for Jon Porter 1,000 General 

23–Oct–02 Citizens for Justice Garman 1,000 General 

23–Oct–02 Committee to Elect Jon Turner 1,000 General 

24–Oct–02 Illinois Republican Party 15,500 General 

21–Feb–02 Latham for Congress 1,000 Primary 

25–Feb–02 Lindsay Graham for Senate 1,000 Primary 

19–Dec–00 Bill McCollom 1,000 Primary 

26–Nov–01 National Republican Club of Capitol Hill 941.82 Primary 

02–May–02 National Republican Club of Capitol Hill 1,425.60 General 

04–Oct–02 National Republican Congressional Comm 78,000 General 

07–Nov–02 National Republican Congressional Comm 709.68 Primary 

16–Oct–00 Northup for Congress 1,000 General 

27–Mar–02 Northup for Congress 1,000 General 

29–Jan–01 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 500 Primary 

21–Jun–01 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 

11–Feb–02 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 700 Primary 

11–Dec–01 Sununu for Senate 1,000 Primary 

01–Nov–02 Taff for Congress 1,000 General 

20–Dec–01 Volunteers for Shimkus 1,000 Primary 

Friends of Ray LaHood, 2004 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

05–May–04 Andrea Lane Zinga for Congress 250 General 

30–Jul–04 Andrea Lane Zinga for Congress 750 General 

20–Nov–03 Bill Shuster for Congress 1,000 Primary 

25–Jun–03 Bush Cheney ’04, Inc. 1,000 Primary 

28–Apr–03 CNA Citizens for Good Government 1,000 Primary 

14–Oct–04 Citizens for Judge Holdridge 1,000 General 

02–Sep–04 Citizens for Karmeier 500 General 

11–Dec–03 Citizens for Schock 1,000 Primary 

20–Sep–04 Citizens for Schock 5,000 General 

18–Nov–04 Citizens for Schock 500 Primary 

17–Jun–04 Crane for Congress 1,000 General 

10–May–04 Cubin for Congress 1,000 General 

12–Mar–04 David Vitter for U.S. Senate 1,000 Primary 

11–Mar–04 Diedrich for Congress 1,000 Primary 

11–Feb–03 Friends of Gwen Klingler 500 Primary 

17–Jun–04 Friends of Jack Quinn 1,000 General 

20–Mar–03 Friends of John Boehner 1,000 Primary 

11–Mar–04 Friends of Mike Ferguson 1,000 Primary 

20–Oct–04 Friends of Paul Palazzolo 500 General 

25–Jun–03 Friends of Tim Johnson 1,000 Primary 

10–May–04 Friends of Tim Johnson 1,000 General 

01–Oct–03 George Nethercutt for U.S. Senate 2,000 Primary 

16–Sep–04 George Nethercutt for U.S. Senate 1,000 General 

23–Sep–04 Georgians for Isakson 1,000 General 

02–Jul–04 Greg Dority for Congress 1,000 General 

16–Sep–04 Hastert for Congress 1,000 General 

16–Sep–04 Hyde for Congress 1,000 General 

11–Feb–03 Illinois Corn Growers Assn. PAC 2,000 Primary 

40 

Friends of Ray LaHood, 2004—Continued 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

23–Sep–04 Jerry Weller for Congress 1,000 General 

11–Feb–04 Jim Hansen for Governor 1,000 Primary 

16–Sep–04 Judy Biggert for Congress 1,000 General 

11–Feb–04 Kerr for Congress 1,000 Primary 

08–Apr–03 Knox County Republican Party 500 Primary 

17–Apr–03 Macon County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 

22–Jul–04 Macon County Republican Central Comm 2,000 General 

16–Sep–04 Manzullo for Congress 1,000 General 

20–Sep–06 Manzullo for Congress 1,000 General 

12–Jun–00 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 

16–Sep–04 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 

08–Jan–04 Mitch Daniels for Governor Campaign Comm 1,000 Primary 

24–Feb–03 Musgrave for Congress Committee 1,000 Primary 

01–Jul–03 Musgrave for Congress Committee 1,000 Primary 

12–Nov–02 National Assn. of Postal Unions PAC 1,000 Primary 

07–Nov–02 National Republican Congressional Comm 709.68 Primary 

22–May–03 National Republican Congressional Comm 3,389.50 Primary 

26–Nov–03 National Republican Congressional Comm 1,252.56 Primary 

12–Aug–04 National Republican Congressional Comm 83,500 General 

30–Aug–06 National Republican Congressional Comm 100,000 General 

23–Sep–04 Nussle for Congress 1,000 General 

20–Feb–03 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 1,000 Primary 

24–Feb–04 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 400 Primary 

26–Feb–04 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 600 Primary 

07–Apr–04 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 3,500 General 

16–Sep–04 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 250 General 

15–Mar–04 Petroleum Marketers PAC 1,000 Primary 

23–Jan–03 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 500 Primary 

30–Jan–03 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 

02–Feb–04 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 600 Primary 

12–Mar–04 Sessions for Congress 1,000 Primary 

15–Oct–03 The Richard Burr Committee 2,000 Primary 

16–Sep–04 The Richard Burr Committee 1,000 General 

01–Sep–04 Tom Ernst for Senate 1,000 General 

16–Sep–04 Volunteers for Shimkus 1,000 General 

Friends of Ray LaHood, 2006 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

21–Sep–06 Bass Victory Committee 1,000 General 2006 

19–Jan–06 Brian Bilbray for Congress 2,000 Primary 2006 

30–Oct–06 Brian Bilbray for Congress 1,000 General 2006 

21–Sep–06 Cathy McMorris For Congress 1,000 General 2006 

21–Sep–06 Chocola For Congress 1,000 General 2006 

22–Mar–06 Cubin for Congress 1,000 General 2006 

30–Oct–06 Cubin for Congress 1,000 General 2006 

14–Sep–05 David McSweeney for Congress 2,000 Primary 2006 

03–Apr–06 David McSweeney for Congress 2,000 General 

22–Mar–06 Friends of Ernest Istook 500 General 2006 

22–Mar–06 J.D. Hayworth for Congress 1,000 General 2006 

02–Nov–06 J.D. Hayworth for Congress 1,000 General 2006 

08–Feb–06 Jim Gerlach for Congress 1,000 Primary 2006 

21–Sep–06 Jim Gerlach for Congress 1,000 General 

02–Nov–06 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 2006 

20–Sep–06 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 

30–Aug–07 Mark Kirk for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

02–Sep–05 National Republican Congressional Comm 25,000 Primary 2006 

30–Aug–06 National Republican Congressional Comm 100,000 General 

41 

Friends of Ray LaHood, 2006—Continued 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

24–Feb–05 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 400 Primary 2006 

01–Mar–06 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 1,000 Primary 2006 

01–Jul–06 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 800 General 

25–Jul–06 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 141 General 

03–Feb–05 Ray LaHood for Illinois 50,000 Primary 2006 

08–Mar–06 Roskam Illinois Victory Committee 1,000 Primary 2006 

13–Jan–05 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 600 Primary 2006 

26–Jan–06 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 600 Primary 2006 

08–Feb–06 Schwarz for Congress 1,000 Primary 2006 

03–Oct–05 Van Hilleary for Senate 1,000 Primary 2006 

30–Nov–05 Wine Institute PAC 1,000 Primary 2006 

07–Dec–05 Zinga for Congress 1,000 Primary 2006 

03–Apr–06 Zinga for Congress 2,000 General 2006 

Friends of Ray LaHood, 2008 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

07–Feb–07 Adams County Republican Central Comm 375 Primary 2008 

07–Mar–07 Brown County Republican CC 100 Primary 2008 

02–Mar–07 Capitol GA–10 Congressional Victory Comm 2,000 Primary 2008 

02–Nov–07 Cindy Ardis Jenkins for State Rep. 1,000 Primary 2008 

29–Nov–07 Citizens for Ardis 250 Primary 2008 

24–May–07 Citizens for Chris Reif 100 Primary 2008 

12–Sep–07 Citizens for Leitch 250 Primary 2008 

15–Sep–08 Citizens for McCoy 150 General 2008 

26–Mar–07 Citizens for Unes 400 Primary 2008 

15–Jun–07 Committee to Elect David Cappiello 2,000 Primary 2008 

20–Sep–07 Committee to Elect McHugh 2,000 Primary 2008 

15–Jun–07 Dan Burton for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

05–Feb–07 David McSweeney for Congress 1,000 Primary 2008 

31–Oct–07 Dennis Conover for Tazewell Cty Coroner 100 Primary 2008 

20–Sep–07 Duncan D. Hunter for Congress 1,000 Primary 2008 

31–Oct–07 Fed. of IL Young Republicans 250 Primary 2008 

12–Feb–07 The Freedom Project 5,000 Primary 2008 

28–Jan–08 The Freedom Project 5,000 Primary 2008 

20–Jun–08 Friends for Joan Krupa 5,000 General 2008 

07–Jan–08 Friends of Sally & Carla 250 Primary 2008 

30–Aug–07 Friends of Tim Johnson 2,000 Primary 2008 

15–Sep–08 Friends of Tim Johnson 1,000 General 2008 

10–Oct–07 Friends of Zach Wamp 2,000 Primary 2008 

14–Jan–08 Gary Joseph for Woodford County Board 150 Primary 2008 

20–Sep–07 Gilchrest for Congress 1,000 Primary 2008 

31–Oct–07 Hayes for Congress 1,000 Primary 2008 

20–Feb–08 Illinois Republican Party 2,000 General 2008 

08–May–08 Illinois Republican Party 75 General 2008 

17–Apr–08 Illinois Republican Party 50 General 2008 

27–Jun–08 Illinois Republican Party 600 General 2008 

21–Sep–07 Jim McConoughey for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

20–Mar–07 John McCain 2008 2,000 Primary 2008 

20–Feb–08 John McCain 2008 2,000 General 2008 

12–Sep–07 John Morris for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

01–May–08 John Stephen for Congress 500 General 2008 

20–Feb–08 Johnna Ingersoll Coroner 250 General 2008 

30–Aug–07 Judy Biggert for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

15–Sep–08 Judy Biggert for Congress 1,000 General 2008 

12–Dec–07 Knollenberg for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

15–Sep–08 Lincoln Diaz-Balart for Congress 500 General 2008 

07–Feb–07 Logan County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 2008 

42 

Friends of Ray LaHood, 2008—Continued 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

28–Jan–08 Logan County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 2008 

20–Jun–08 Macon County Republican Central Comm 625 General 2008 

30–Aug–07 Manzullo for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

15–Sep–08 Manzullo for Congress 1,000 General 2008 

05–Nov–08 Manzullo for Congress 1,000 Primary 2010 

15–Sep–08 Mario Diaz-Balart for Congress 500 General 2008 

02–Nov–06 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 2006 

30–Aug–07 Mark Kirk for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

15–Sep–08 Mark Kirk for Congress 1,000 General 2008 

14–Feb–07 Marshall County Republicans 100 Primary 2008 

16–Feb–07 Mary Bono Mack Committee 2,000 Primary 2008 

14–Feb–08 Mary Bono Mack Committee 2,000 General 2008 

14–Mar–07 Mason County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 2008 

07–Nov–07 Menard County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 2008 

20–Feb–08 Menard County Republican Central Comm 500 General 2008 

31–Oct–07 Mike Stroh for State’s Attorney 500 Primary 2008 

30–Aug–07 Minn-Dak Farmers Cooperative PAC 1,000 Primary 2008 

30–Apr–07 Mitch Daniels for Governor Campaign Comm 1,000 Primary 2008 

25–Apr–07 Morgan County Republican Central Comm 150 Primary 2008 

01–May–08 Morgan County Republican Central Comm 150 General 2008 

11–Jan–07 National Republican Congressional Comm 25,000 Primary 2008 

09–Mar–07 National Republican Congressional Comm 30,000 Primary 2008 

08–Sep–07 National Republican Congressional Comm 50,000 Primary 2008 

29–Nov–07 OH–5 Congressional Victory Committee 2,000 Primary 2008 

01–Oct–07 Oberweis for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

01–Oct–07 Ogonowski for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

12–Aug–07 People with Hart 2,000 Primary 2008 

12–Jul–07 People’s Party of Peoria Heights 250 Primary 2008 

07–Feb–07 Peoria Co. Republican Women’s Club 125 Primary 2008 

06–Aug–07 Peoria Co. Republican Women’s Club 100 Primary 2008 

28–Feb–08 Peoria Co. Republican Women’s Club 125 General 2008 

14–Feb–07 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 1,000 Primary 2008 

20–Sep–07 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 3,500 Primary 2008 

29–Nov–07 Peoria County Republican Central Comm 1,000 Primary 2008 

26–Sep–07 Pete King for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

30–May–07 Pike County Republican Committee 100 Primary 2008 

14–Feb–07 Putnam County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 2008 

19–Nov–07 Republican Main Street PAC 5,000 Primary 2008 

30–Aug–07 Roskam for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

15–Sep–08 Roskam for Congress 1,000 General 2008 

24–Jan–07 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 1,000 Primary 2008 

20–Sep–07 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 2,500 Primary 2008 

14–Jan–08 Sangamon County Republican Central Comm 1,100 Primary 2008 

31–Oct–07 Sangamon Cty Board Repub Election Comm 500 Primary 2008 

25–Oct–07 Schock for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

12–Feb–07 Sweeney for Congress, Debt Retirement 2,000 Primary 2008 

12–Nov–07 Team Sununu 2,000 Primary 2008 

30–Aug–07 Volunteers for Shimkus 2,000 Primary 2008 

15–Sep–08 Volunteers for Shimkus 1,000 General 2008 

30–Aug–07 Walsh for Congress 2,000 Primary 2008 

14–Feb–07 Woodford County Republican Central Comm 275 Primary 2008 

15–Aug–07 Woodford County Republican Central Comm 100 Primary 2008 

Abraham Lincoln Leadership PAC 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

22–Mar–06 Brian Bilbray for Congress 1,000 General 

15–Jul–05 Citizens for Frank Watson 1,000 Primary 

43 

Abraham Lincoln Leadership PAC—Continued 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

02–Oct–06 Fitzpatrick for Congress 1,000 General 

04–May–06 Friends of Ernest Istook 500 General 

15–Jul–05 Friends of Peter Roskam 1,000 Primary 

02–Oct–06 McSweeney for Congress 2006 1,000 General 

17–Aug–05 Otter for Idaho 1,000 Primary 

02–Oct–06 Roskam for Congress 1,000 General 

02–Oct–06 Whalen for Congress 1,000 General 

02–Oct–06 Zinga for Congress 1,000 General 

04–Oct–02 Bass for Congress 1,000 General 

04–Oct–02 Bentley for Congress 500 General 

15–Oct–02 Bob Beauprez for Congress 500 General 

19–Oct–04 Bob Beauprez for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–02 Cass Ballenger for Congress 500 General 

06–Sep–02 Chris Chocola for Congress 500 General 

15–Oct–02 Cole for Congress 500 General 

30–Oct–02 Friends of Clyde Holloway 500 Primary 

06–Sep–02 Friends of Connie Morella 1,000 General 

19–Oct–02 Friends of Marilyn F O’Grady 500 General 

27–Sep–02 Friends of Sheri Boehlert 500 General 

15–Oct–02 Ganske for Senate 500 General 

06–Sep–02 Gekas for Congress 1,000 General 

06–Sep–02 Hayes for Congress 1,000 General 

06–Sep–02 Heather Wilson for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–04 Heather Wilson for Congress 1,000 General 

04–Oct–02 Jeb Bradley for Congress Committee 500 General 

15–Oct–02 Jim Gerlach for Congress 500 General 

13–Oct–04 Jim Gerlach for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–02 Jo Bonner for Congress 1,000 General 

15–Oct–02 John Thune for South Dakota 1,000 General 

27–Sep–02 Kennedy 2002 500 General 

01–Aug–02 Knollenberg for Congress Committee 500 General 

15–Oct–02 McCotter Congressional Committee 500 General 

19–Oct–02 Musgrave for Congress 500 General 

19–Oct–04 Musgrave for Congress 1,000 General 

25–Jun–02 Nussle for Congress 1,000 Primary 

19–Oct–02 Nussle for Congress 1,000 General 

14–Mar–02 Pat Toomey for Congress 1,000 Primary 

15–Oct–02 Pearce for Congress 500 General 

06–Sep–02 Pickering for Congress 1,000 General 

15–Oct–02 Raye for Congress 500 General 

06–Sep–02 Re-elect Nancy Johnson to Congress Comm 1,000 General 

15–Oct–02 Renzi for Congress 500 General 

15–Oct–02 Richard Pombo for Congress 1,000 General 

06–Sep–02 Shelly Moore Capito for Congress 1,000 General 

06–Sep–02 Simmons for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Sep–02 Taff for Congress 1,000 General 

22–Oct–02 Texans for Henry Bonilla 1,000 General 

15–Oct–02 Thousands of South Dakotans 500 General 

06–Sep–02 Tom Feeney for Congress 500 General 

27-Sep–02 Volunteers for Shimkus 1,000 General 

20–Sep–04 Andrea Lane Zinga for Congress 1,000 General 

13–Oct–04 Andrea Lane Zinga for Congress 1,000 General 

15–Oct–02 Bob Beauprez for Congress 500 General 

19–Oct–04 Bob Beauprez for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Jun–04 Crane for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–04 Crane for Congress 1,000 General 

06–May–04 Curt Bromm for Congress 1,000 Primary 

21–Oct–03 Fletcher for Governor 1,000 Primary 

29–Jul–04 Friends of Sherwood Boehlert 1,000 General 

06–Sep–02 Heather Wilson for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–04 Heather Wilson for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–04 Illinois Republican Party 10,000 General 

44 

Abraham Lincoln Leadership PAC—Continued 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

14–Jan–08 Illinois Republican Party 4,300 Primary 

15–Oct–02 Jim Gerlach for Congress 500 General 

13–Oct–04 Jim Gerlach for Congress 1,000 General 

20–Nov–02 Lee Fletcher for Congress 1,000 General 

13–Oct–04 Mark Kennedy for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–02 Musgrave for Congress 500 General 

19–Oct–04 Musgrave for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–04 Nancy Naples for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–04 Rick Renzi for Congress 1,000 General 

19–Oct–04 Rob Simmons for Congress 1,000 General 

Ray LaHood for Illinois 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

01–Sep–06 Citizens for McCoy 500 General 

21–Sep–06 Citizens for McCoy 500 General 

30–Aug–07 Citizens for McCoy 500 Primary 

30–Aug–07 Citizens for McCoy 500 Primary 

25–Aug–08 Citizens for McCoy 500 General 

15–Sep–08 Citizens for McCoy 500 General 

15–May–06 Citizens for McGlynn 500 General 

26–Oct–06 Citizens for Myers 500 General 

08–Jun–06 Citizens for Peraica 500 General 

03–Aug–06 Citizens for Peraica 500 General 

04–May–06 Citizens for Radogno 500 General 

15–Aug–06 Citizens for Radogno 500 General 

06–Oct–05 Citizens for Schock 500 Primary 

12–Dec–05 Citizens for Schock 500 Primary 

01–Mar–06 Citizens for Schock 500 Primary 

22–Sep–06 Citizens for Schock 500 General 

12–Oct–06 Citizens for Schock 500 General 

26–Oct–06 Citizens for Schock 500 General 

10–Jul–06 Citizens to Elect Jil Tracy 500 General 

15–Aug–06 Citizens to Elect Jil Tracy 500 General 

22–Sep–06 Citizens to Elect Jil Tracy 500 General 

15–Jun–06 Citizens to Elect Joe Birkett 500 General 

28–Nov–05 Committee to Elect Steve Haring 500 Primary 

06–Mar–06 Daryl Dagit for State Representative 500 Primary 

21–Sep–06 Daryl Dagit for State Representative 500 General 

26–Oct–06 Daryl Dagit for State Representative 500 General 

23–Feb–05 Douglas County RCC 600 Primary 

13–Apr–05 Douglas County RCC 1,000 Primary 

01–Apr–05 Douglas County RCC 1,000 Primary 

01–Jul–06 Ernie Russell for State Senate 1,000 Primary 

22–Mar–06 Friends for Jeff Richey 1,000 General 

22–Sep–06 Friends for Jeff Richey 1,000 General 

26–Oct–06 Friends for Jeff Richey 1,000 General 

03–Oct–05 Friends for Poe 1,000 Primary 

27–Oct–05 Friends for Richard Brauer 1,000 Primary 

30–May–06 Friends for Richard Brauer 1,000 General 

11–Jan–07 Friends of George Jacob 1,000 Primary 

13–Oct–05 Friends of Jack Quinn 1,000 Primary 

14–Jul–06 Friends of Jack Quinn 1,000 General 

11–Oct–06 Friends of Judge Bordner 1,000 General 

21–Jan–07 Friends of Ryan Spain 1,000 Primary 

11–Apr–07 Friends of Ryan Spain 1,000 Primary 

16–Nov–05 Friends of Stu Umholtz 1,000 Primary 

03–Apr–06 Friends of Stu Umholtz 1,000 General 

45 

Ray LaHood for Illinois—Continued 

Contributions to individuals, campaign organizations, political parties, political action committees, or similar entities 

Date Name Amount 

(in $) Period 

15–Aug–06 Friends of Stu Umholtz 1,000 General 

12–Jan–06 GIPAC, Illinois Nurserymen’s Association 1,000 Primary 

13–Mar–06 Citizens for Gambill 1,000 Primary 

04–May–06 Gary Dahl for State Senate 1,000 General 

21–Sep–05 Gibbons for Governor 1,000 Primary 

12–Aug–07 Illinois Republican Party 1,000 Primary 

15–Aug–06 Illinois Republican Party 1,000 General 

15–Sep–05 Iowans for Nussle 1,000 Primary 

28–Sep–05 Jim Durkin Campaign Committee 1,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Knox County RCC 1,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Logan County RCC 1,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Macon County RCC 1,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Marshall County RCC 1,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Mason County RCC 1,000 Primary 

17–Mar–05 Menard County RCC 1,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Menard County RCC 1,000 Primary 

02–Nov–06 Menard County RCC 1,000 General 

16–Nov–05 Mitzelfelt for County Clerk 1,000 Primary 

04–May–06 Mitzelfelt for County Clerk 1,000 General 

15–Aug–06 Mitzelfelt for County Clerk 1,000 General 

01–Sep–06 Mitzelfelt for County Clerk 1,000 General 

02–Nov–06 Mitzelfelt for County Clerk 2,000 General 

19–Oct–05 Morgan County RCC 2,000 Primary 

16–Aug–06 Otter for Idaho 2,000 General 

15–Aug–06 People for Pankau 2,000 General 

06–Oct–05 Peoria County RCC 2,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Peoria County RCC 2,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Pike County RCC 2,000 Primary 

02–Oct–06 Pike County RCC 2,000 General 

19–Oct–05 Putnam County RCC 2,500 Primary 

28–Sep–05 Rutherford Campaign Committee 2,500 Primary 

16–Nov–05 Rutherford Campaign Committee 2,500 Primary 

15–Aug–06 Rutherford Campaign Committee 3,000 General 

16–Oct–06 Rutherford Campaign Committee 4,000 General 

10–Jul–06 Sangamon County Republican Election Comm 4,000 General 

19–Oct–05 Sangamon County RCC 4,500 Primary 

27–Jul–06 Sangamon County RCC 5,000 General 

02–Oct–06 Sangamon County RCC 5,000 General 

16–Feb–05 Schuyler County RCC 5,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Schuyler County RCC 5,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Scott County RCC 5,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Stark County RCC 5,000 Primary 

01–Sep–06 Stark County RCC 5,000 General 

19–Oct–05 Tazewell County RCC 5,000 Primary 

01–Sep–05 Todd Smith—County Board 10,000 Primary 

17–Jul–06 Todd Smith—County Board 10,000 General 

15–Sep–05 Tom Osborne for Governor 10,000 Primary 

30–Mar–05 Will County RCC 10,000 Primary 

15–Sep–05 Will County RCC 10,000 Primary 

19–Oct–05 Woodford County RCC 10,000 Primary 

14–Jul–06 Woodford County RCC 25,000 General 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. There are so many questions to answer. And maybe I will just start with what has already 

been discussed by the distinguished Ranking Member and others. 

And that is the whole question of our air traffic control system, 

funding for the FAA, getting a reauthorization bill out in time. 

I have always been stunned. I have a new trick which I use 

which actually works, and that is I say that Mongolia has a more 

46 

modern air traffic control system than we do. It happens that they 

don’t have any at all right now, but they’re building one and it’s 

digitalized and it runs on GPS. 

We have our old system which we blithely accept. As we accept 

enormous delays knowing perfectly well that if you could reconfigure runways at O’Hare, which has been done to some extent, if 

you had an air traffic control system that was digitalized under 

GPS, you’d probably have a one-third efficiency pick up in the 

skies. 

Well, to do that it costs money. And in order to build the new 

air traffic control system it obviously requires new money. Also, 

you have to maintain the old one as you’re building the new one. 

So that’s a double hit. 

Traditionally the FAA has been underfunded. And traditionally 

many of our programs, which we’ll be discussing over the coming 

months, have been underfunded. But I’m just interested in your attitude, Representative LaHood as to this question of NextGen and 

efficiency in our skies. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Mr. Chairman, my top priorities is to find the most 

talented FAA Administrator that we can find, and then recommend 

that person to President Obama so he can recommend that person 

to the Senate for confirmation. The FAA administrator is one of the 

most important positions in the Department, and we’ve talked a lot 

about that position during my transition. 

We need someone who can help resolve some of these disputes 

that have taken place between the controllers and the agency. That 

has to be a priority. We have to have people in these TRACONs. 

We have to have FAA employees that like going to work every day 

because they have very important jobs. All of us that fly as often 

as we do want to make sure that people who are controlling aircraft are satisfied with their work. 

So I’m trying to find somebody, who is willing to come into the 

job, work with the controllers to resolve the dispute and get that 

issue off the table so that it does not become something that we 

or the President is going to have to deal with. That is a top priority. 

The next priority in the FAA is obviously NextGen. 

The CHAIRMAN. Can I interrupt for one second? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Yes, sir. 

The CHAIRMAN. One of the problems, and you brought it up very 

distinctly, is how we fund the new air traffic control system. We 

have a system now wherein, so called legacy airlines—and there 

used to be so many just like trains, and now there are many 

fewer—are bearing 92 percent of the cost of running our analog air 

traffic control system. 

Whereas the great majority of airplanes, and I don’t include crop 

dusters or King Airs or anything in that category, but private jets, 

things of this sort have to be treated the same way by an air traffic 

controller, same attention, and they’re paying for about 8 percent 

of the cost. That doesn’t strike me as entirely fair. 

Do you have thoughts on this? 

Mr. LAHOOD. I do, Mr. Chairman. My thought is that when we 

look at NextGen, we need to look at a bigger picture of how we get 

47 

to where we want to be. But then we need to set a very realistic 

benchmark. 

Based on what I’ve been able to learn from the experts, we need 

to look at how we get the next five to 8 years out in terms of really 

getting to NextGen with the idea that it’s going to take much 

longer than that. So that everybody in the industry, everybody that 

uses the equipment, everybody that’s involved in this, realizes that 

we have an attainable short-term goal that fits into the longer-term 

goal of getting to the implementation of NextGen. But this idea of 

having some kind of pie in the sky idea for getting to NextGen 

without an avenue to do it, and I think the avenue is in the next 

5 to 8 years, the industry, the controllers, everybody knows this is 

where we’re going. This is the road map. 

Then the overall goal is to complete that. That’s my idea on it. 

I know this NextGen-technology is not inexpensive, but we have to 

do it. There has to be a commitment from the Congress, from the 

FAA, and from all the stakeholders, to get this done. The flying 

public deserves it. 

The CHAIRMAN. I thank you, sir. And I’ll just close for yielding 

to Senator Hutchison that we had a number of these meetings 

where we asked the legacy airlines, the general aviation community, and the various unions involved to get together and figure out 

what would be a fair way to fund a modern air traffic control system and yet have it reflect in some way, the usage of that system. 

And we got nowhere, as you know. 

So I just put that on your plate with some feeling and call on 

Senator Hutchison. 

Senator HUTCHISON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Representative 

LaHood, do you support the full national Amtrak system? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Well, the bill that Congress passed last year is a 

very good bill and I fully intend on working with Congress to implement it. I think it’s the way forward to get us a comprehensive 

Amtrak system in this country. I’m not an independent operator 

anymore because I didn’t get elected to anything last November 

but, during my 14 years in Congress, I’ve been a strong supporter 

of Amtrak. It’s the life blood for many, many communities around 

the country. And I will work with all of you to implement the Amtrak bill. I think it’s a good bill. 

Senator HUTCHISON. Thank you. Toll roads. Recently I think we 

have focused really too strongly, in my opinion, on privately-financed toll roads to solve the problems of urban congestion. 

And in many instances this has taken on, I think, abdication of 

private property rights. I am very concerned about our Federal 

Government giving incentives to promote these and in some instances allowing tolls over every lane of a Federal highway that the 

taxpayers have already built. What is your position on tolling Federal highways that have already been paid for by the taxpayers for 

as many as 10 and 12 miles every lane? 

I think it is breaking our contract with the people that we would 

have a Federal highway system that would promote commerce because they are freeways. And I would like to see what your position 

is. And what this Administration will do in regard to these massive 

toll roads. 

48 

Mr. LAHOOD. One of our big challenges, Senator, is to find ways 

to plus up the Highway Trust Fund. All of us who were around 

here last year know that we had to provide $8 billion to plus it up. 

We’re going to reauthorize the surface transportation bill this year. 

And there’s not going to be enough money to do all the things that 

we all want to do. 

So, I think we do have to think outside of the box, and part of 

thinking outside of the box is the idea that, in building new lanes, 

adding lanes on, or building additional roadways, we would have 

tolling pay for part of that. Now, taking a part of the existing interstate highway, that people are already using and putting tolls on 

that, I personally do not think that is a good idea. Obviously, it’s 

something that people will talk about. But it’s not something that 

I personally think is a good idea. 

But I do think the idea if you want to add an additional lane to 

a road and you want to toll it. If you want to build a bridge, which 

costs an enormous amount of money, I think people ought to think 

about tolls on the bridge as a way to pay for it and as a way to 

maintain it. But the idea of taking an interstate road and putting 

a toll booth on it, I think is not a good idea, Senator. 

Senator HUTCHISON. Well thank you. That’s the answer. I have 

said that I agree. We should be able to toll a lane to build another 

lane. But that doesn’t close the free lanes that are there. And 

you’re keeping the same number of free lanes. 

And I also think with local input and approval tolling a bridge 

is fine. I think the key though is that we don’t have a policy in this 

country of breaking the phase with the taxpayers who have built 

a Federal highway system and it has taken, what, 60 years to do 

it. And then we stop the freeway and all of a sudden toll. 

It’s just the wrong public policy. So I think you have said you 

agree with that. And I certainly agree with you on the distinction 

between closing a lane with tolls and adding another lane. 

Last question. Slot auctions. This Department of Transportation 

has gone out with requests for proposed rulemaking to auction 

slots that have been already paid for by different airlines, particularly in the New York area, LaGuardia and then reselling them 

without the consent of the airline that has already purchased them. 

What is your position on that? And are you looking at stopping 

those auctions or going forward with them? I’d like to have your 

input. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Senator, I think that, if the idea is to relieve congestion at a place like LaGuardia, and one way to do it is to eliminate slots, I think it kind of defeats the purpose then to go back 

and say that you’re going to auction those off. Personally, again, I 

don’t like that idea. I think it defeats what you’re trying to do. If 

you’re really trying to cut down congestion then eliminate the slots. 

But the idea of then going back and re-auctioning them doesn’t 

make any sense to me. 

Senator HUTCHISON. Thank you. I agree with you. And I appreciate that answer. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Hutchison. Senator Lautenberg? 

49 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Again, Representative LaHood, soon to be, well I won’t preempt the Committee, but 

so far you’re doing pretty good. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Last year you voted as a House member 

for my $13 billion Amtrak bill which would greatly expand rail 

service throughout our country. Ray, can we count on you to fight 

to get us the full funding to meet this law, to meet the increased 

demand for rail travel that we’re seeing? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Senator Lautenberg, as a 14 year member of the 

House, I’ve been a strong supporter of Amtrak. It’s the life blood 

of so many communities around America. I will do all that I can 

to be helpful to you, and to the Congress to find the funding to implement what I think is a very good bill that we all voted for last 

year. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. I just wanted to remind you. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Anyway approximately $5 billion from the 

Federal New Starts program are expected to be needed for transit 

projects around the country in the coming year. But the FTA, Federal Transit Administration, only has less than $1 billion as a ceiling to commit to these projects. As Secretary would you support increasing this authority so that these projects, including a new rail 

tunnel under the Hudson River—and I want to point out to those 

who hear this that this is not a commuter tunnel. Commuters use 

it. 

This is a national priority. It attaches the financial center of the 

world with the rest of the country with ease and reliability. And 

we’ve got to make sure that we continue to expand that need. 

I remind everybody that on 9/11, when few things were operating 

to enable people to get from place to place, it was Amtrak that 

brought people up from Washington so that they could see what 

was happening and act accordingly. So as Secretary can we count 

on you to support increasing this authority so that these projects, 

including the new rail tunnel under the Hudson River can move 

without delay? 

It’s going to provide immediately 6,000 jobs which is a mission 

that this wonderful President of ours has chosen to do and that is 

to build employment. So can we count on you? 

Mr. LAHOOD. You can count on me, Senator. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. The current FAA tried to redesign the air 

routes over our region, New York, New Jersey. These changes have 

created problems including some confusion between pilots and controllers and many instances of planes going the wrong way after 

takeoff. I’d like your commitment to look at this problem and try 

to halt the use of these new routes until the potentially dangerous 

situation is resolved. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Senator, you have my commitment to look at it and 

to instruct the FAA to do all they can to meet with you, your staff 

and other people in the region to try and figure out a solution to 

the problem. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. OK, safety you said was a principal factor. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Absolutely. 

50 

Senator LAUTENBERG. In your view. Now I don’t know whether 

this question was asked, Mr. Chairman, while I was out, but the 

air traffic controllers have been without a collective bargaining contract since 2005. We’re going to count on you. Tell me if you will 

work with the air traffic controllers, other FAA unions, to get a collective bargaining agreement on pay and working conditions in 

place. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Senator, I think two of the most important things 

that the FAA Administrator needs to do is to resolve the dispute 

and get it off the table for President Obama and for all of us and 

get it behind us. I think it’s very important. I think it’s very doable. 

I really do, based on everything I’ve heard. 

Then of course, the second most important part of that job is to 

get to NextGen. We’re going to be committed to getting an agreement that people feel they can live with. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Well one of the things that I sense, and I 

hope that I’m correct in my analysis, is that you’re going to be an 

active Secretary of Transportation. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Yes, sir. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. And that’s what we want. We don’t like 

spectators doing these jobs. We don’t like second guessers doing 

these jobs. We like leadership. 

I commend you. And I look forward to your continuing to move 

through the process. Thanks, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Senator Lautenberg. Senator Klobuchar? 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

When we met last week, Representative LaHood, we talked about 

our transportation needs. We talked about thinking outside the box 

when it came to financing and as Rahm Emanuel, I know you 

wanted me to quote him in your confirmation hearing here, has 

said, ‘‘We shouldn’t waste a good crisis.’’ 

Can you give me some out-of-the-box ideas or things that are on 

your mind, for instance for replenishing the Highway Trust Fund, 

how we’re going to do that? That would be a start. 

Mr. LAHOOD. First of all, I think what Senator Warner said 

about public-private partnerships is thinking outside the box. Tolling of new highway lanes is a different way of thinking about it. 

I think of tolling bridges if people need a new bridge. 

We need to think about the kinds of opportunities that would 

help us pay for the infrastructure needs that we all know are very, 

very important. And we can perhaps use the Highway Trust Fund 

to maintain some of the highways that we’ve built. But if we’re 

going to think innovatively in the reauthorization, then those are 

some of the ways that we need to think about these things, differently than just the gasoline tax. 

We know that Amtrak ridership is still way up even though gasoline prices have come down. We know, in places like Chicago, that 

people are still using a lot of mass transit even though gasoline 

prices have come down. And we know that people are still going 

to drive, but the resources to pay for it through the Highway Trust 

Fund is a dinosaur, if you’ll excuse the expression. 

51 

It was developed when Eisenhower and the Congress came up 

with the idea of developing an interstate system. We’ve come far 

afield of that now. And so I’m willing to listen to all these ideas. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. OK. 

Mr. LAHOOD. We need to really be creative about this, and I 

think we can be. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Very good. Thank you. 

The bridge Bailey and I discussed. I don’t need you to comment 

exactly on it, but the issue is that not enough money has been focused in the states on maintaining bridges because it’s always fun 

to build new bridges and have a ribbon cutting and things like 

that. And both Congressman Oberstar and I have been concerned 

about the fact that not enough of the bridge repair, bridge maintenance money goes into bridge maintenance. Do you want to comment on that? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Well, you obviously pointed that out very well to 

me. I’m certainly willing to look at it and work with you to figure 

out ways to make sure that we maintain not only the bridges, but 

also the interstate system, which is a very comprehensive system; 

it is one of the best in the world, if not the best. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Right. Another topic, a little different. I’m 

a strong proponent of high-speed Internet in the economic recovery 

package that we’re considering right now and there are obvious 

issues of people in rural areas not having access. But I understand 

that laying fiber is an expensive undertaking. 

And so it seems to me when we embark on increased spending 

on highway projects, we would also be wise to consider ways to couple road construction and maintenance projects with the laying of 

fiber. In other words why dig up roads twice in this difficult economic time when you can kill two birds with one stone. Do you see 

any kind of potential for partnership in this area in the near term 

in the Economic Recovery package, but more likely with the Highway bill as we look at transit funding and how we can couple this 

with incentives to lay the fiber at the same time? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Again, as we consider reauthorization, we have to 

think outside the box and in ways that we haven’t thought about 

these issues. I’ve been a strong supporter because I come from a 

state like Illinois, where it is very rural once you get south of Interstate 80. Broadband is very important. 

As we build roads into rural parts of states like Illinois, Minnesota, or Virginia, we need to figure out ways to make sure that 

people have access to the world. I think that’s what we really ought 

to be thinking about in the reauthorization. 

Senator KLOBUCHAR. Thank you very much. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Klobuchar. Senator Snowe? 

Senator SNOWE. Thank you. Returning to the question on the 

CAFE standards because that clearly is going to be one of the 

major issues that you’ll be confronting. As you know that the previous Administration did not issue the ruling for the model year 

2011. Have you had a chance to evaluate this issue? 

And I say this because I know that there will be concerns raised 

well you know this maybe not the appropriate time given where 

the state of the auto industry. But that’s just precisely what got 

52 

the auto industry in trouble. Financially were not prepared. You 

know, they weren’t on the vanguard of change in innovation technologically to respond to the marketplace when, you know, prices 

of gasoline skyrocketed and didn’t have the available models for hybrid technology to any great extent to fuel efficient vehicles. 

So we received cost-benefit ratios from the National Highway 

Transportation Safety Administration yesterday both the light 

truck and automobiles and clearly an indication that the benefits 

outweigh the cost through the model year 2015. And I certainly 

would like to share this information as something that you all be 

able to receive. But would like to get your input in terms of how 

you view this issue and how you’re prepared to address it as the 

next Secretary of Transportation. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Senator Snowe, when I was in the House I probably voted maybe eight or ten times on amendments to raise the 

CAFE standards. I think it is one way for us to really overcome 

some of the pollution that exists around the country. However, 

what is more important than my own votes, is that President 

Obama, as you know, is very strong in this area and has spoken 

out on it on a number of occasions. They’re not going to have to 

push me very hard from the White House to do this, but I assume 

that I’ll be hearing from them very soon. 

We’re going to meet the standard. And we should. It has to be 

a part of the overall plan here to eliminate pollution, the greening 

of America and get the American car manufacturers in the game 

here, with the reality that they need to be producing American cars 

and that get much better mileage. 

Senator SNOWE. Well, I appreciate that because it is true. I mean 

when you weigh the benefits to the cost whether it’s the, you know, 

climate change effect or reducing gasoline consumption or carbon 

dioxide emissions collectively truly do provide tremendous benefits 

and outweigh the cost. And I appreciate that because the schedule 

for issuing the deadlines has to be by April 1. 

Mr. LAHOOD. That’s correct. 

Senator SNOWE. As you well know and I just hope that that will 

be the case. Frankly continuing to defer doesn’t help the industry. 

They need to have certainty in addition to the fact that we have 

to be on the cutting edge of change and be prepared for the future 

given the state of energy today. 

And putting themselves at risk, as we found when the consumers 

were not in a position to be able to purchase vehicles that were fuel 

efficient. And they weren’t prepared to sell them. So it’s in our national interest, frankly, the final analysis. 

And I think that these statistics certainly underscore the value 

of the CAFE standards and how we must meet to achieve them and 

meet the deadline that’s created in the law. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Senator Snowe, I’m going to do everything I can to 

try and meet the deadline. 

Senator SNOWE. I appreciate that very much. Incidentally on Essential Air Service again, it’s a critical issue as I mentioned earlier. 

And I hope that you would take a look at this legislation that Senator Bingaman and I have introduced particularly providing some 

flexibility in the contracts between the Essential Air Service comVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00056 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
53 

munities, the small communities and the airlines to extend those 

contracts from two to four years. 

Again I think it’s much more cost efficient. It certainly is for the 

communities that have certainty and stability and to be able to negotiate cost-efficient contracts. And it’s certainly something that is 

truly necessary if we’re going to do anything to rebuild rural communities across this country. 

And frankly they’ve been shortchanged in the promises of deregulation in 1978. They were supposed to be part of a national 

plan, a national infrastructure system and they truly have been 

left behind. So I hope that you will evaluate that as well. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Senator Snowe, I know that Chairman Rockefeller 

is keenly interested in this. Again, during 14 years I served in the 

House, so many of my district’s small communities were lacking in 

air service, and we worked very hard to get Essential Air Service 

in these communities. 

It’s important. It can be an economic engine for these communities and it’s an opportunity, really for people in these communities to have service. I will work very hard with you and others 

who want to make this happen. 

Senator SNOWE. I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Thank 

you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Snowe. Before I make—just 

make a suggestion. I’d just like to say that I think our posture as 

a committee should not be to figure out, ‘‘gee we’re not going to 

have the money to pay for this.’’ 

I think our, you know, because of whatever size the stimulus 

package or our national debt is going to be, I think our posture 

ought to be that we need to do everything that we need to do to 

fulfill the mandate of this committee and protect the safety and 

prosperity of the American people. And that’s the way I intend to 

look at it so that it will land squarely on your shoulders should you 

be confirmed, all the hard decisions. 

Now having said that—— 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. Having said that and before calling on Senator 

Warner and Senator Begich, it is the desire of the majority party 

to try and get all nominees approved this afternoon, if possible. 

And there is a way that we can do that and meet the four o’clock 

deadline. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. And that is by asking, in that I sense nothing 

but approval and willingness to work with you from our point of 

view and from your point of view exactly the same view toward us. 

I would suggest—I would ask if the members of the Committee, 

voting members of the Committee, would give Kay Bailey 

Hutchison and I the right to simply inform the floor that if they 

want to run a UC on you at 1 minute of four and get you nominated by four o’clock, the Committee will not be unhappy. The 

Chairman will be happy. 

Senator HUTCHISON. Mr. Chairman, let me just say that I agree 

with that. I think 4:30 was the deadline. 

The CHAIRMAN. 4:30? 

[Laughter.] 

54 

Senator HUTCHISON. So we’ll—— 

The CHAIRMAN. A little pressure—— 

Senator HUTCHISON. You know, the realistic responsible Republican here. 

[Laughter.] 

Senator HUTCHISON. But seriously, I think this is a very good 

idea of yours. I appreciate your leadership. Because I think it is 

fair for all of us and right for all of us that Mr. LaHood become 

the Secretary and go over there and start doing so many of the 

things that we have just asked him to address. And so I would approve of that. 

We will also notify our side that it’s going to happen. And if they 

want to object they will have the right to object. But I don’t see 

anyone doing that. 

I think that you have done a very good job. And I look forward 

to working with you. And I hope we can do that this afternoon, by 

4:30. 

The CHAIRMAN. And that means that a unanimous consent 

agreement will be run through the telephones on each side and if 

anybody objects then that ends that. And then we hope that nobody 

objects. And then that will end that. And we’ll have a new Secretary of Transportation. 

So that will proceed. And then in order of membership on the 

Committee I need to call on Senator McCaskill. And just so that 

Senator Warner and Senator Begich don’t feel mistreated, it’s just 

a problem of one day. 

So Senator McCaskill, you have what you have to say and ask 

and then Senator Warner, then Senator Begich. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CLAIRE MCCASKILL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MISSOURI 

Senator MCCASKILL. I will be very brief, Mr. Chairman. Thank 

you. I know there was some discussion earlier, Representative 

LaHood, about earmarks. I tried to research earmarks in the 

Transportation budget. And found out that one of the reasons it 

has flourished is because it’s so darn complicated. 

Most members probably don’t even understand the difference between an ‘‘above the line’’ and a ‘‘below the line.’’ Many of them 

don’t understand that—in fact when I talked to CRS about it trying 

to figure it out they told me to find an easier issue to work on. 

Clearly it is not a matter of bringing extra money into a state. 

Clearly there is some ‘‘robbing Peter to pay Paul’’ that goes on with 

the earmarking process. 

My state has an extensive planning process both through metropolitan planning organizations and through our state highway department. Lots of input, a regional approach, cost-benefit analysis 

and their STIP program is well thought out and with all the kind 

of input that you would ever want for a public infrastructure 

project. When we are earmarking around here, many times we are 

just putting projects upon these state agencies that they, frankly, 

don’t even want to do because they have other projects that have 

in fact had this kind of public transparency analysis. 

And in Fiscal Year 2008, for example $340 million of the $600 

million that was going to be extra money that could have gone into 

55 

core funding programs was skimmed off for earmarking. And one 

of the things that’s most frustrating is even what you have above 

the line that may be extra money, that money doesn’t go to the 

most valuable projects in terms of needs in our country. It goes to 

who’s most senior. It goes to the member that is most politically 

vulnerable. It goes to people that serve on certain committees. It 

doesn’t go based on some kind of analysis as to what is the best 

use of that money in a macro sense. 

I would like your answer today about what I just said and how 

you view your job as the Secretary of Transportation to have a 

more transparent and open process including local planning for the 

way we fund infrastructure in this country. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Well thank you, Senator. You know this because 

you, like all of us, have followed the campaign and followed the 

rhetoric. President Obama has made it very clear that, in the Stimulus bill, the lion’s share, which will come through the Department 

of Transportation, will not be earmarked money. 

We’re going to do everything we possibly can to make sure his 

mandate and his direction is carried out in our part of the stimulus. So we’re going to work with the Governors. And we’re going 

to tell the Governors that this money can come to your state, but 

it has to be for projects that have been planned, organized, and 

have met all of the requirements, because we want people working 

this summer, building roads, building bridges and doing infrastructure work. 

We’re going to hold Governors accountable. And we’re going to 

make sure that there are no earmarked dollars. That’s the mandate that I believe we have from President Obama on this. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Well—— 

Mr. LAHOOD. Now when it comes to reauthorization, we’re going 

to have to work with all of you. I was on the Transportation and 

Infrastructure Committee for 6 years. I’m not going to describe in 

detail all the stories that went on over there about when a bill like 

ISTEA was marked up. 

The point is, it’s up to the members to decide there aren’t going 

to be earmarks. And it’s up to the members to decide that this 

money is going to be spent in a certain way. And we’ll help you 

with that. But when we get a mandate from the Congress that x 

amount of dollars has to be spent on x amount of project—or this 

project in a certain area, that’s the law. 

President Obama wants to eliminate earmarks, particularly in 

the stimulus. I think that idea will carry over to the reauthorization of the surface transportation bill. And I—— 

Senator MCCASKILL. I know that President Obama wants to 

eliminate earmarks. I want to make sure the Secretary of Transportation also wants to eliminate earmarks. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Let me just repeat what I said, Senator. I work for 

President Obama. I work for the American people. And I’m going 

to work in collaboration with the Congress. Nobody has more of a 

healthy respect for Congress than Ray LaHood. 

I was a member for 14 years. I served as a staffer for 17 years. 

I have over 30 years working for Congress and I have a healthy 

regard for what all of you do. I know how it works. It’s hard work. 

56 

I’m going to work with you. And I’m going to work with the 

Chairman. I’m going to work with the Committee to fashion a bill 

that makes sense for America, that funds the infrastructure needs 

of America. And if it doesn’t have one earmark, that’s not going to 

cause me any heartburn. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Good. Good. I think you’re a terrific choice. 

I think it’s great that President Obama selected you because I 

spent a lot of time telling America that we were going to have a 

bipartisan Cabinet. And I’m glad we do. 

And I hope that you will forgive me that my first question felt 

confrontational, but it’s something I feel very strongly about. And 

I look forward to working with you and the Administration in the 

weeks to come on eliminating this. Let the strongest be the most 

powerful when it comes to spending public money. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Well, thank you, Senator. I certainly wasn’t offended by it at all. And I meant what I said. I have the highest 

regard for the Congress and what you all do, and I always will. 

You’ll always be a priority, always. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Thank you. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Thank you. 

Senator MCCASKILL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. Senator Warner? 

Senator WARNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to go back 

to the three points that I’d raised earlier, Representative LaHood. 

And first of all let me acknowledge this first question is more—you 

haven’t gotten there yet, you’ve got your arms around a very, very 

large department—but again, my prior experience as Governor and 

working somewhat over the last couple years on this issue, the 

complexity of the 11 agencies that fall within DOT. That structure 

seems to be pretty much set up in a 20th century structure. 

And as we move particularly toward this, in what I hope will be 

one of the directions of more looking at a project on a multi-modal 

basis, the funding streams and the revenue streams that come out 

of these specific agencies don’t always intertwine. As you look in 

your term as Secretary will you look at the structure of the Department in terms of how we can advance these more 21st century 

goals like multi-modal? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Absolutely, Senator. I think what you’re going to 

find is that I’m going to be a very hands on. And the Department 

will know I’m going to be very hands on. 

I’m going to get all these modal Administrators together and I’m 

going to explain to them very clearly that we have a mandate from 

President Obama to get things done. We want less bureaucracy and 

less red tape, and we want to put people to work. We want to make 

sure that we carry out the mandates of Congress on Amtrak and 

on FAA. 

I’m going to pull people together and I’m going to make them 

work hard. And we are going to work hard. And if it means eliminating something here or there, or combining a few things it’ll be 

done. 

Senator WARNER. Thank you. The second part kind of goes from 

the structure to the metrics and again I think Senator McCaskill, 

Senator Wicker was raising issues about accountability. I do think 

57 

there’s oftentimes a lack of knowledge at a lot of policymaker’s levels on what the metrics of evaluation are going to be. 

Again I think back about the old VMT standards and others. 

You’ve talked about a livability standard. There’s conversations 

about a mobility standard. My hope, and this would have to be 

done fairly quickly, but as you look at some of the projects that are 

going to come out of the President’s Reinvestment Act, I would love 

that some of those projects on almost a beta test model might be 

evaluated on some of these new metrics. So that as you get to the 

Reauthorization bill later in the year, you had some new metrics 

out there that are going to take into accountability. They’re going 

to take into account, livability, mobility, these, I think again, are 

more 21st century ways we’re going to measure our infrastructure 

investment. 

Mr. LAHOOD. You have my commitment to do that, Senator. I 

think it’s very important. We need to really move into the 21st century on some of these things. And I think the Reauthorization bill 

is going to allow us to do some of these—— 

Senator WARNER.—Looks at a whole new way of looking at 

projects—— 

Mr. LAHOOD. Absolutely. Absolutely. 

Senator WARNER. I mean that we’ve got more agreement. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Get more value. 

Senator WARNER.—Policymakers in terms of value. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Yes. 

Senator WARNER. And you’ve raised the issue. And I appreciate 

your comments and Senator Hutchison’s comments about the tolling. I do think public/private is going to have to be a piece of this. 

And I would add Senator Klobuchar’s idea of laying dark fiber 

while you’re putting in the roads is something we’ve tried in Virginia with some mixed success. But it makes an enormous amount 

of sense. And is one of those areas of public/private. 

But my hope, as a state that’s been kind of out there on the leading edge of public/private partnerships in transportation for more 

than a decade, that as we look at these initiatives on the public/ 

private side, that we make sure that the private party has actually 

got capital at risk and stays in the game. And there have been too 

often proposals that came by my desk as Governor that had a private partner looking good at the first blush, but taking none of the 

risk and getting all the rewards in the back end. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Certainly. 

Senator WARNER. As we look at public/private which often times 

involves tolling, making sure that they’ve got to stay in the game 

is very important. 

Mr. LAHOOD. I’d like to use your expertise on that and see if we 

can make it happen. And since you are a part of this committee, 

I think it will be a priority. 

Senator WARNER. Thank you, sir. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. Senator Begich? 

58 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARK BEGICH, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator BEGICH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I have 

one, kind of parochial for Alaska and then I just have some general 

ones I added as a couple more questions. But you know the big 

project for Alaska and for this country, I believe and actually President Obama has put it on his top five list, of the green job creations in the future is the Alaska Natural Gas Pipeline which will 

be thousands of jobs, a lot of investment, but will benefit this country greatly. 

With that project there’s about $2 billion worth of road projects— 

infrastructure that’s necessary to construct that project and get 

material to the sites. Is that something that you’d be willing to 

work with the Alaska delegation to figure out how to solve that 

first piece so that we can then move to this larger $40 billion 

project? 

Roads and bridges are part of the equation. We can’t get the 

project moving without those reconstructions or new constructions 

to move the equipment, move the construction material. Is that 

something that you’d be willing to work with us on to get this 

mega-project forward? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Yes, sir. I don’t know if you are in a position now 

to say that it’s ready to go and could be a part of the stimulus, but 

if it is—— 

Senator BEGICH.—Bid-ready. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Well. 

Senator BEGICH. Then we’ll talk. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Absolutely. 

Senator BEGICH. OK. I’ll leave it at that. I’ll take it because 

you’re half way there so I don’t want to blow it, so I’ll take it. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. LAHOOD. I guarantee you won’t blow it, Senator. 

Senator BEGICH. OK, good. Well they are bid-ready. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Yes, good. 

Senator BEGICH. Good jobs. The other one, just to put it on the 

record for you. I’m probably not one of those big fans for tolling, 

but we can have that discussion. I think it hurts the working people the most when they go on toll roads. 

But I know that we have to be innovative in the future in how 

we deal with roads. And I would like, maybe in the Reauthorization—you know as we look at this Economic Recovery bill one of 

the big problems is going to be and I noted when you mentioned 

Governors, as a former mayor we love the state, but we love local 

governments. Because we can deliver projects faster, more efficient 

and we know exactly what project is going to be done as quickly 

as possible. 

My biggest concern with the Economic Recovery bill is just that. 

It’s going so much to the state bureaucracy that the amount that 

they take on the DOT on the state level will knock 15, 20 maybe 

as much as 30 percent out of project for just adding an overhead. 

And then it will trickle down to local governments who then have 

to deliver these projects. So I have some great concerns over that 

in the sense of how the Economic Recovery bill is moving forward. 

59 

But in the longer term when the reauthorization of the Highway 

bill comes up, I honestly think the system is broken in the sense 

of deliverability of these projects. I’ll just give you one. In Alaska 

it was a pretty significant project because we did it with our 

money, went through wetlands, did a lot of things that met all the 

environmental requirements. The environmental community was 

very satisfied with the end project. We shaved off a year and a half 

of that project, saved $2 million because of the difference in the 

regulatory process. 

And I would like to work with you and whoever to try to figure 

out how we solve this problem. Because if you talk to any mayor 

and I talked to 200 of them on Monday across this country, this 

is a significant problem in how to deliver money in regard to the 

highway funds. As we reform it, we have to reform the ability to 

deliver these projects in a timely manner. And the Federal system 

just doesn’t do it. 

And that’s just from 6 years of a mayor and meeting with 200 

mayors this week. It’s a big message. And I hope you will look toward mayors also for your advice and get some good ideas about 

how to deliver those projects. 

Mr. LAHOOD. Can I just say something about local government? 

Senator BEGICH. Sure. 

Mr. LAHOOD. You may know this, but in Los Angeles County 

they just passed a referendum. The voters passed a referendum to 

provide an enormous amount of money for infrastructure in Los 

Angeles County. Now to me that’s thinking outside the box. Obviously, the local government leaders have a lot of credibility with 

local tax-payers, and they’re willing to raise their taxes because of 

the very point that you’re making. The money never gets there because places like California and every state has huge financial 

problems. 

So the point is that—I know the Mayors and local elected officials. We’ve heard from them and we know they’re not happy. But, 

as you know, President Obama wants to get this money out. There 

is a mechanism to do that. It goes back to what Senator Warner 

said we have to get the bureaucracy at DOT to make sure that people are held accountable, that the money is spent properly and it 

can get out the door and the people can be working this summer. 

And I know what you’re saying though, Senator. 

Senator BEGICH.—Watching the clock tick here. But we’re doing 

the largest in Anchorage, Alaska, the largest light conversion 

project for street lights in the country. It will save us about $1.6 

million, a year in energy cost. The investment will be paid back in 

5 to 7 years. And would you be willing to look at a national standard because the DOT’s don’t do that. And there’s a huge consumption of energy with street lights throughout this country with Federal highway systems. 

Would you be willing to look at a national standard that we can 

consider implementing to create energy efficient lights on all the 

highway systems? 

Mr. LAHOOD. Yes, sir. 

Senator BEGICH. Great. That’s all. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Begich. I’m going to close 

this now for two reasons. One, a vote started. The vote incidentally 

60 

is on the nomination of Senator Clinton who evidently isn’t going 

to get the same treatment that you are. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. And I want to say in my first opportunity to 

chair at the Commerce Committee hearing, I could not be more 

proud to have done so with you as the witness. You have an ability 

to answer questions in such a straight ahead way. You’ve been 

through it already. You understand in a cooperative way because 

of the 30 years of experience with the legislature. And I expect 

probably because of your own good DNA and good humor and a lot 

of experience. I’m tremendously pleased about you having been our 

first nominee. 

Mr. LAHOOD. So am I, Senator. Thank you for the courtesies. 

[Laughter.] 

The CHAIRMAN. OK. And with good luck you’re already in there. 

[Laughter.] 

Mr. LAHOOD. I like those words too, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. The hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:16 p.m. the hearing was adjourned.] 

(61) 

A P P E N D I X 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV 

TO HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1a. The Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: 

A Legacy for Users Act of 2005 (SAFETEA–LU) will expire in September 2009. I 

believe that it is time to rethink the purpose of our transportation programs and 

the proper Federal role in administering and managing the programs moving forward. This is going to be a major task that will require a strong leader, innovative 

thinking, and close coordination with Congress. What are your thoughts on developing a multimodal national transportation policy? Are you prepared for this large 

task? Should you be confirmed, when can we expect a surface transportation reauthorization proposal to be submitted by the Department to the Congress? 

Answer. As we approach reauthorization of the surface transportation programs 

in the ‘‘Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy 

for Users,’’ we need to ‘‘think outside the box,’’ particularly as to future funding 

mechanisms. I agree that new emphasis on a multimodal transportation policy perspective is essential to renewing these programs and, if confirmed, would hope to 

bring strong leadership, innovative thinking, and close coordination with Congress 

to this undertaking. As I stated to Ranking Member Hutchison at the nomination 

hearing, I hope to develop a reauthorization proposal this year. 

Question 1b. Today’s Federal transportation programs lack overarching goals or 

priorities and transportation funding is generally distributed to states regardless of 

transportation outcomes. Do you support moving to a more accountable, performance-based transportation system that emphasizes getting more out of our transportation investments? If so, what standards of performance would you support using? 

Similarly, other countries (e.g., Britain, Canada) make choices between different 

types of transportation investments based on the projects’ estimated cost-benefit ratios, which include a wide spectrum of economic, social and environmental costs and 

benefits. Should we be doing something similar in the U.S.? 

Answer. A key challenge for those who craft the Nation’s transportation programs 

will be to link decision-making to performance at all levels. This will require a new 

commitment to measure performance, as called for by the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Commission’s recent report. Performance measurement is key to ensuring that new funding is invested wisely and that the public has 

enough confidence in our work to support continued investment. 

Question 1c. The Federal Government currently spends more than 80 percent of 

surface transportation dollars on roads and related infrastructure, with the balance 

going to public transportation, intercity rail, bike, and pedestrian infrastructure. 

Given the Obama Administration’s concerns regarding energy supply and the rising 

demand for alternatives to driving, do you support reconsidering this distribution? 

Answer. I am committed to supporting sound investment in our transportation 

systems to maximize our resources, increase energy efficiency, and provide greater 

accessibility, including innovative approaches to achieve our goals. The balance of 

funding among the surface transportation modes will be fundamental to the best investment of our Federal transportation resources, going forward. 

Question 2. What role do you see the Department playing in developing mitigation 

and adaptation strategies for the Nation’s transportation infrastructure to respond 

to climate change? How will the DOT work with other Federal agencies? 

Answer. We must acknowledge the new reality of climate change. This has implications in all areas. Sustainability must permeate all we do, from highways and 

transit to aviation and ports. President Obama is committed to this principle, and 

so am I. Making climate change a top priority as well as dealing with other environmental concerns will require a new level of attention to our transportation systems, 

as well as a new mindset for the Department. Increased energy efficiency in our vehicles and our passenger and freight transportation systems will significantly alleviate the problem of greenhouse gases. When I was in the House, I voted numerous 

62 

times to raise the CAFE standards. I think this is an important way for us to reduce 

emissions and I will do everything I can to meet the deadlines. 

Among the key challenges for effective mitigation strategies is the development 

of close working relationships with other agencies whose goals and programs interact with those of the Department of Transportation—and this is something I will 

move quickly to accomplish if confirmed. 

Question 3a. Will you be a strong advocate for small community air service? 

Answer. I served for 14 years in the House of Representatives and represented 

many communities that were lacking air service. I understand the importance of air 

service to small communities. 

Question 3b. Do you believe any changes need to be made to the current Essential 

Air Service (EAS) program? 

Question 3c. What can be done to make certain sufficient funding is provided to 

EAS communities? 

Question 3d. What steps will you take to make certain small and isolated communities across the Nation have access to affordable air service? 

Answer. I believe that air service for small communities can help serve as an economic engine. Although the new Administration’s policy on specifics of this nature 

is not yet established, if confirmed, I am committed to working with this Committee 

to ensure that small communities remain connected to the national air transportation system. 

Question 4. The National Weather Service (NWS) provides the Federal Aviation 

Administration (FAA) with weather forecasting services to make sure that air traffic 

across the Nation receives adequate support. I understand that the FAA has requested the NWS provide a proposal to consolidate its Center Weather Service Units 

from 21 to two. I am concerned that the potential consolidation initiative might not 

result in the best model to meet aviation forecasting needs. Do you think it would 

be appropriate for the NWS and the FAA to request a study on aviation forecasting 

needs and options for improving services prior to moving forward? 

Answer. Before offering an opinion on this matter, I would need to consult with 

the experts at the Federal Aviation Administration. That said, I understand the 

criticality of having weather forecasting services in place to support aviation needs. 

Question 5. Current Federal law generally prohibits the use of surface transportation funds within a port area. With aging port infrastructure and projected waterborne transportation growth over the next twenty years, do you believe a larger 

Federal role in the planning and development of port infrastructure is appropriate? 

Answer. The Department of Transportation is already leading port modernization 

and expansion projects in Alaska, Hawaii, and Guam. Some of the funding for these 

projects is through existing highway and transit mechanisms, but it is very limited. 

Other opportunities exist under the short sea transportation section of the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act, which mandated a new Marine Highway Program. The program’s objective is to shift freight and passengers from our congested 

highways and railroads to water every place it is practicable. 

Question 6a. Annual large truck crash deaths remain shockingly high, totaling 

around 5,000. What can the Congress do to make the most immediate improvements 

in truck safety? 

Answer. I am concerned about truck crash deaths. As I said in my opening statement, my first goal is safety on the roads, on the rails, in the air, and on the water. 

The Federal Government clearly plays an important role in preventing truck crash 

deaths. I believe the upcoming reauthorization of the surface transportation bill will 

provide an opportunity to ensure the Department has the authority it needs to conduct effective oversight of the motor carrier industry and the resources it needs to 

continue its successful partnerships with State law enforcement and motor vehicle 

administrators to implement commercial motor vehicle safety programs. 

Question 6b. What do you believe is the best way for the Federal Motor Carrier 

Safety Administration to improve its oversight and enforcement over the trucking 

industry? 

Answer. I believe the best way for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to improve its oversight and enforcement of the trucking industry is 

to maintain and strengthen a rigorous enforcement program in conjunction with 

State partners. This includes targeting high risk carriers for compliance reviews, 

maintaining a strong roadside inspection program, working with States to ensure 

unsafe carriers receive vehicle registration sanctions, and targeting unsafe carriers 

through a more comprehensive safety measurement system and a performancebased safety fitness standard. 

63 

Question 6c. Where do you see the role of new technology, such as electronic on 

board recorders, in improving motor carrier safety? 

Answer. I see a role for current and emerging technology in improving safety on 

our highways. Safety is the top priority at the Department of Transportation. Perhaps the most important influence on improving heavy truck and bus safety in the 

future rests with integrating smart technologies like on-board safety devices to improve driver performance. This is an area I want to thoroughly explore. 

Question 7. The DOT and its authority to regulate fuel economy is specifically 

crafted for the agency to maximize fuel economy while taking other very significant 

factors into account, including the safety of the passenger fleet and the financial stability of the automobile industry. This authority and expertise is vital in achieving 

our goals to decrease the greenhouse gas footprint of the transportation sector. How 

do you plan to use the DOT’s leadership and authority in the CAFE program in 

working with the Environmental Protection Agency and its authority to regulate 

greenhouse gas emissions? What synergies do you see being developed between the 

agencies to improve your authority and the CAFE program? 

Answer. I believe a management emphasis of the new Administration is to stress 

inter-agency coordination, such as should be the case with Clean Air Act and automotive fuel-economy regulations, to a greater extent than has been the case in the 

past. President Obama is committed to ensuring that the Administration’s transportation policy furthers his goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote livable communities, and so am I. If confirmed, I would expect to work closely with 

the Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that fuel economy is improved and 

carbon dioxide emissions are reduced in a responsible, consistent, and effective manner. 

Question 8a. Do you support the Jones Act? 

Answer. I support the Jones Act. Reserving domestic waterborne transportation 

to U.S.-flag, U.S.-built, and U.S.-citizen owned and U.S.-crewed vessels ensures the 

availability of U.S.-flag vessels in an emergency. The Jones Act fleet is an important 

link in the national transportation infrastructure, and its ships can carry an uninterrupted flow of vital commodities necessary to our troops while avoiding disruptions to our economy and industrial base. 

Question 8b. What steps do you believe the Department could take to assist in 

educating other Federal agencies about the importance of the Jones Act to our national security and to ensure the enforcement of the law? 

Answer. Congress amended the law in 2008 to require that the Maritime Administration (MARAD) be consulted about the availability of U.S.-flag vessels before any 

national security waiver of the law is granted. This new consultation role for 

MARAD will enable the agency to work more closely with other Federal agencies 

to ensure the law is enforced. By working more closely with MARAD, other Federal 

agencies will become better acquainted with the importance of the Jones Act fleet 

to our defense and economy. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. DANIEL INOUYE TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1a. Several safety concerns have been raised regarding Hawaii’s air 

transportation system. One issue is the aging infrastructure used for air traffic control. Both the facilities within which the air traffic controllers work and much of 

the equipment they depend on, such as radars, are decades old and are in need of 

replacement. Concerns have also been raised specifically about the airspace around 

Kona. Air traffic controllers have identified several incidents where operational errors have led to the near misses of aircraft, raising questions about how well the 

airspace is being managed. Finally, there have been several accidents involving air 

tour helicopters. The National Transportation Safety Board’s (NTSB) investigations 

of these helicopter accidents have led to several recommendations, including better 

oversight of air tour operators and the installations of Automatic Dependent Surveillance-Broadcast (ADS–B) throughout the islands. National trends in runway incursions and operational errors suggest the FAA must take immediate action to reduce the possibility of a catastrophic accident. What steps do you believe the Administration should take in the next year to bring down the number of near-misses that 

the system is experiencing? 

Answer. I can assure you that transportation safety will remain the top priority 

for the Department if I am confirmed, and DOT will be focused on improving safety 

across the board. Before offering specific plans to improve aviation safety, I will conVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00067 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
64 

sult with the experts at the Federal Aviation Administration, and get the benefit 

of the perspective of a new FAA Administrator. 

Question 1b. Although FAA has taken important steps to modernize the air traffic 

control system, there is no clear schedule for the implementation of NextGen, nor 

a good idea of when the system will start to see the benefits of key technologies, 

such as ADS–B. Given Hawaii’s unique terrain and unpredictable weather patterns, 

air traffic control (ATC) modernization would be particularly beneficial for our state. 

Answer. NextGen will be a priority for the Department. The Department should 

be committed to NextGen implementation within realistic benchmarks, working 

closely with Congress and all the stakeholders to develop milestones for the delivery 

of key technologies. 

Question 1c. How soon do you expect that the FAA will be able to fully implement 

NextGen across the nation, and in Hawaii? What resources do you need to expedite 

the implementation of NextGen? 

Answer. NextGen is a priority for the Nation. I can assure you that, if confirmed, 

I will be personally focused on implementation—working closely with the FAA to 

expeditiously develop timelines for full implementation and to determine the resources it needs to be successful. 

Question 2a. In the past year there have been a few incidents where commercial 

aircraft have made emergency landings because pilots suspected smoke in the cockpit. This has raised concerns about the adequacy of current safety measures in the 

event an aircraft’s cockpit completely filled with smoke, obscuring the pilots’ vision, 

and inhibiting their ability to fly the plane. What safety measures are currently in 

place to prevent an aircraft’s cockpit from filling with smoke? 

Answer. I am told there are numerous systems and procedures in place to both 

prevent, and mitigate the effects of, smoke in the cockpit. Airplane design requirements enable the flight crew to use the ventilation system to evacuate smoke from 

the cockpit. The crew can also change the source of ventilation if the smoke is originating from outside the flight deck. 

Question 2b. Are there safety measures in place to help ensure pilots can continue 

to operate the aircraft if the cockpit fills with smoke? 

Answer. I am told that all cockpits have emergency equipment that includes oxygen masks for breathing, smoke goggles that allow pilots to see the instruments, 

and fire extinguishers Also, each crew has a specific checklist in case of smoke, fire, 

or fumes designed to maintain control of the aircraft while isolating and mitigating 

the source of the malfunction. 

Question 3a. Many reports show that within the next 20–30 years, the United 

States can expect huge increases in population, congestion, and global trade. Freight 

flows are expected to double within this same timeframe. Despite this, the Department of Transportation has failed to develop a comprehensive national strategy or 

policy for freight movement to prepare the transportation system to guide investments to meet these future demands. Nor has the Department proposed possible financing mechanism for needed freight infrastructure improvements. The Surface 

Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission recommended that both 

freight fees and public-private partnerships form the basis of a new Federal freight 

investment program. With freight flows expected to double over the next 20 to 30 

years, I believe it would serve the Nation well to develop a national freight policy 

to guide investment in freight infrastructure to meet these increased demands. The 

Bush Administration made little progress in developing such a plan. What are your 

thoughts on the need for a national freight policy and investment strategy? 

Answer. I do believe we need a national freight policy that approaches freight 

transportation as a seamless system of goods and product movement from port of 

entry, whether that be a seaport, an energy platform in the Gulf of Mexico, or a 

factory or farm, to place of destination. Only by maximizing all of our transportation 

options and streamlining freight movement can we save commuters time, and the 

Nation energy. 

Question 3b. Do you support freight or user fees as a mechanism to finance 

freight-related improvements to port, rail, and highway infrastructure as well as 

intermodal facilities? 

Answer. As we approach reauthorization of the surface transportation programs, 

we need to ‘‘think outside the box,’’ particularly as to future funding mechanisms. 

We need to reexamine current fuel excise taxes, and we need to identify additional 

revenue resources for surface transportation programs, including mechanisms to finance freight-related improvements. As Secretary, I would explore innovative financing techniques. We need to be creative and, if confirmed, I would look forward 

to hearing from all affected parties. 

65 

Question 4. In the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 Department of Defense Authorization Act 

you included language to clarify that cargo preference laws apply to any person or 

organization receiving Federal funding, unless they are otherwise exempted. This 

clarification eliminates confusion over the application of cargo preference and will 

provide the Secretary of Transportation with the appropriate enforcement authority 

for administrative oversight of cargo preference laws. The Department of Transportation now needs an improved method to track Federal contracts that involve the 

waterborne transportation of cargo. Until such an information technology system is 

developed, enforcement will continue to be on an ad hoc basis. In last year’s Department of Defense Authorization Act, we included a provision to enhance the Secretary’s enforcement authority of our Nation’s cargo preference laws. You now have 

the responsibility to execute these changes and administer the program. Do you believe it would be helpful to establish a better methodology to track Federal contracts 

that involve the waterborne transportation of cargo under Federal contract to assist 

you in effectively enforcing the law? 

Answer. An improved method to track Federal contracts that involve the waterborne transportation of cargo would no doubt benefit many aspects of government, 

including enforcing the cargo preference laws. The new law will enhance enforcement of cargo preference laws. 

Question 5. The Maritime Administration (MARAD) is the lead Federal agency responsible for assisting states and localities in addressing their port infrastructure 

modernization goals. The MARAD provides Federal oversight and coordination of 

projects, acts as a central procurement office to facilitate the leveraging Federal and 

non-Federal funding resources, and streamlines the environmental review and permitting process. Currently, the MARAD is managing port modernization programs 

in Alaska, Hawaii, and Guam. 

The Maritime Administration is assisting my home state of Hawaii with addressing port modernization planning, environmental assessments, and construction by 

acting as a coordinator between other Federal agencies. Similar projects are ongoing 

in Alaska and now Guam. We have been very pleased with this program thus far. 

What role do you believe the Department of Transportation should play to assist 

ports in addressing their complex demands in order to make the movement of goods 

more efficient, while also reducing congestion and pollution? 

Answer. I am pleased to know of your support for the Maritime Administration’s 

work on port modernization. Other U.S. ports have requested similar support to 

that in Hawaii to help them meet capacity and infrastructure demands, several of 

which are ports that are designated as Strategic Ports that accommodate military 

cargoes in times of emergency. The agency’s Gateway Offices, its day-to-day presence at the ports, can help bring agency and departmental expertise to the table 

for other local port projects. 

Question 6. According to press reports, Hawaii’s per-capita fatality rate for 2006 

due to alcohol-related vehicle crashes ranked among the top three in the United 

States. In the same vein, a December 2008 news article reported that the number 

of Oahu drunken driving arrests through October of 2008 was on course to reach 

a nine-year high. The improvement of programs intended to reduce drunk driving 

and State highway grant reform are among the issues that will be incorporated into 

the next surface transportation reauthorization bill under the Committee’s jurisdiction. The reduction of impaired driving is a primary mission to be undertaken in 

the next surface transportation reauthorization bill. What new strategies will you 

deploy to address the recidivist drunk driver? 

Answer. I agree with you that a focus on the recidivist drunk driver should be 

central to new strategies to deploy in the fight for reduced highway fatalities overall. While the new Administration’s policy on specifics of this nature is not yet established, I would, if confirmed, be pleased to advise you of developments in this 

policy area. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN KERRY TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1. Our congested roadways and skies continue to serve as a drain on our 

economy and are likely to only get more congested. The National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission laid out a bold new vision for transportation policy, and High-Speed Rail figured prominently in their recommendations. However our rail infrastructure remains dramatically inferior to most other 

developed countries, with only a few miles of true high-speed rail anywhere in the 

country. Do you believe high-speed rail can offer a fast, safe, and reliable means to 

travel between major city centers? Do you believe we need to rethink how we apVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00069 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
66 

proach passenger rail in this country, and invest significantly in developing true 

world class high-speed rail? Would investment in high-speed rail help stimulate the 

economy and create jobs? Should investment in high-speed rail be part of an economic recovery package? 

Answer. At this time, the new Administration’s policy on specifics of this nature 

is not yet established. However, the recently enacted Passenger Rail Investment and 

Improvement Act of 2008 authorizes a new high speed rail development program 

along with new authorizations for Amtrak’s operating and capital needs and an 

intercity passenger rail service corridor capital assistance program. If I am confirmed I will work to effectively implement the new legislation. 

Question 2. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) draft 

fuel economy rule under the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 

demonstrates that the agency continues to be mired in incremental changes to fuel 

economy using flawed gas and carbon prices and over-estimated technology costs. 

Congress explicitly provided that a 35-miler-per-gallon standard in 2020 was a floor 

not a ceiling. The Bush Administration has not finalized its proposed rule. How do 

you anticipate moving forward to create a more robust standard setting process that 

can achieve President Obama’s critical oil savings and global warming goals? 

Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that final CAFE standards are consistent with the best available information, including information on gas and carbon 

prices and on technology costs. 

Question 3. Last year President Bush authorized $17.5 million in loan guarantees 

to GM and Chrysler. While these loans required limits in executive compensation 

and the sale of corporate jets, they did not guarantee any oil savings or reduced 

global warming pollution. Will you work with the Treasury Secretary to ensure that 

any additional financial assistance to the auto industry is clearly tied to exceeding 

fuel economy standards? 

Answer. If confirmed, I would work with the Treasury Secretary and the other 

involved Administration officials in crafting any further financial assistance to serve 

the best interests of the Nation as a whole. 

Question 4. In the near future the Federal transportation program will be up for 

reauthorization. While the bulk of transportation bill spending has traditionally 

gone to new road and highway construction, the bill also funds our transit system 

and other forms of non-driving transportation. Will you work to ensure that a much 

larger share of resources are devoted to public transportation, walking, biking, and 

other forms of transportation that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and enhance 

communities? 

Answer. Our transportation system and the development it enables must be sustainable. We must acknowledge the new reality of climate change. This has implications in all areas. The intercity rail and mass transit funding in the Administration’s economic recovery plan are part of the equation, but only a part. Sustainability must permeate all that we do, from highways and transit to aviation and 

ports. The Administration is also committed to focus on people and communities 

where they live and work. This implies a commitment to the principles that some 

refer to as livability—that is, investing in ways that respect the unique character 

of each community. The era of one-size-fits-all transportation projects must give way 

to one where preserving and enhancing unique community characteristics are primary goals, rather than an afterthought. President Obama is committed to ensuring 

that the Administration’s transportation policy furthers his goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote livable communities, and so am I. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. BARBARA BOXER TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1. I re-introduced my Passenger Bill of Rights legislation along with my 

colleague, Senator Snowe, to prevent airline passengers from being stranded on the 

tarmac for hours without food, water, adequate restroom facilities or medical attention. Will you commit to working with us to pass and implement our passenger bill 

of rights legislation this year? 

Answer. I recognize this as an important issue and am aware that the Department has proposed rules to ensure adequate food, water, and restroom facilities for 

passengers during lengthy tarmac delays. I understand that the House also may be 

introducing a bill on this issue as part of a broader FAA reauthorization package. 

If confirmed, I fully intend to work with both the Senate and House to ensure that 

appropriate passenger protections are in place. An aviation system that focuses not 

67 

only on the safety and confidence of the traveling public, but also their comfort during lengthy tarmac delays, is a successful one. 

Question 2. Southern California TRACON continues to experience numerous air 

traffic controller retirements. Air traffic controllers at Southern California TRACON 

continue to tell me the facility is understaffed and undertrained. Would you elaborate on how you would resolve the current contract dispute between NATCA and 

FAA? Will you commit to reviewing the situation at Southern California Tracon and 

take appropriate action as warranted? 

Answer. I know the FAA is focused on hiring new controllers to replace the retiring workforce and, as I said earlier, I am committed to finding an Administrator 

who will come to the job and work with Congress and the controllers, and resolve 

contract disputes as quickly as possible. 

Question 3. Last September, 25 people died and many more were injured when 

a commuter rail train collided with a freight train in Chatsworth, California. Following the tragedy, I worked along with Senator Feinstein and my colleagues on the 

Senate Commerce committee to pass legislation requiring the use of Positive Train 

Control (PTC) on all track shared by commuter and freight rail. Freight rail has 

committed to implementing positive train control in the Los Angeles basin by 2012, 

however, the cost of implementing PTC for commuter rail remains high. Where do 

you rank the implementation of Positive Train Control on high density commuter/ 

freight corridors as a priority for DOT? Will you commit to working with us to implement Positive Train Control in Southern California by 2012? What can Congress 

do to help assist with the quick installation of PTC? 

Answer. If I am confirmed, safety will continue to be the first priority of the Department, and I will make it a priority to carry out the Department’s responsibilities 

under the recently enacted rail safety reauthorization legislation—the Rail Safety 

Improvement Act of 2008, including the provisions related to the mandate that certain railroads implement PTC on certain lines by the end of 2015. My understanding is that the Federal Railroad Administration has already been in active conversation with the railroads operating in the region (Metrolink, Amtrak, Union Pacific, and BNSF), and all of those parties will be participating through FRA’s Railroad Safety Advisory Committee to address PTC issues. If confirmed, I look forward 

to working with Congress to ensure that this and other safety issues are successfully addressed. 

Question 4. Efficient goods movement is an issue that challenges our ports and 

our communities. It is not uncommon for residents throughout California to sit at 

a railroad crossing for as long as 45 minutes waiting for a single train to pass. Do 

you believe we need a national freight program? How do you see a freight program 

working within DOT’s current transportation programs and policy? 

Answer. I do believe we need a national freight policy that approaches freight 

transportation as a seamless system of goods and product movement from port of 

entry, whether that be a seaport, an energy platform in the Gulf of Mexico, or a 

factory or farm, to place of destination. Only by maximizing all of our transportation 

options and streamlining freight movement can we save commuters time, and the 

Nation energy. 

Question 5. There is a great appetite for reform in MAP–21. Separate programs 

and institutional arrangements for highways, transit, and rail have stymied mobility and innovation in the past. Can you share your thoughts as to how to bring the 

strengths of these individual surface modes of transport together to serve our Nation’s needs? 

Answer. I believe that we need a focus on at least four areas to implement President Obama’s national priorities for transportation—economic health, sustainability, 

safety, and meeting the needs of people and communities. Transportation is a critical part of the economy, and we must ensure that our transportation system supports efficient movement of people and goods. I agree that, as the Administration 

develops proposals for the next transportation authorization, we must consider ways 

to make transportation funding programs flexible enough to support the modal or 

intermodal solution that best meets transportation needs. Improving intermodal 

connections and reducing congestion will be an important part of that. Proposals for 

a new surface transportation authorization will need to continue programs that 

make progress toward a safer transportation system. Our transportation programs 

should support more environmentally sustainable, healthier communities through 

continued efforts to integrate transportation planning and environmental planning. 

Question 6. What priority would you give environmental issues when formulating 

our Nation’s transportation agenda? What role do you see the environment playing 

in our Nation’s long-term transportation policy? 

68 

Answer. Our transportation system and the development and economic activity it 

enables must be sustainable. Sustainability must permeate all we do, from highways and transit to aviation and ports. President Obama is committed to this principle and so am I. The environment is an area where the Department contributes 

to national goals and where I see a unique set of challenges. Making climate change 

a top priority as well as dealing with other environmental concerns will require a 

new level of attention for our transportation systems as well as a new mindset for 

the Department. Increased energy efficiency in our vehicles and our passenger and 

freight transportation systems will significantly alleviate the problem of greenhouse 

gases. Among the key challenges here is the development of close working relationships with other Cabinet agencies whose goals and programs overlap with those of 

the Department of Transportation. 

Question 7. In Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court held that there was no 

conflict between EPA regulation of carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles under 

the Clean Air Act, and NHTSA regulation of vehicle fuel economy under EPCA. Relying on Massachusetts, two Federal district courts have since held that there is 

similarly no such conflict between NHTSA regulation of fuel economy under EPCA 

and California’s regulation of CO2 emissions from automobiles under its Clean Air 

Act authority. 

Nevertheless, NHTSA heretofore has taken the position in its proposed CAFE 

rulemaking that such a conflict exists, and thus the tailpipe emission standards 

adopted by California and 14 other states under the Clean Air Act are preempted 

by EPCA. Please confirm that during your review of the proposed CAFE rule you 

will reconsider, in light of the courts’ decisions, NHTSA’s position on this question, 

and abide by the decisions? 

Answer. I believe a management emphasis of the new Administration is to stress 

inter-agency coordination, such as should be the case with Clean Air Act and automotive fuel-economy regulations, to a greater extent than has been the case in the 

past. President Obama is committed to ensuring that the Administration’s transportation policy furthers his goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote livable communities, and so am I. If confirmed, I would expect to work closely with 

the Environmental Protection Agency to ensure that fuel economy is improved and 

carbon dioxide emissions are reduced in a responsible, consistent, and effective manner. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. BILL NELSON TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and Congressman LaHood, welcome. I join 

my colleagues in applauding your distinguished record. 

As has been mentioned here today, there are a number of challenges facing us 

within the Department of Transportation’s venue. I hope you will place strong emphasis on implementing CAFE standards and NextGen, on helping to develop a 

highway bill that fairly allocates funds, and on being creative in the ways we may 

strengthen our investments in public transit and rail systems. I would also look forward to working with you and other committee members on finding ways DOT can 

help to make electric vehicle technologies a nationwide reality. 

Thank you for visiting with us today, and for your willingness to address these 

priorities. 

My colleagues have already mentioned the importance of implementing CAFE 

standards, including the interim model year 2011 standards that the previous administration did not complete. As you know, NHTSA will use an estimate of gas 

prices to determine cost-effectiveness in the MY2011 standard, so that the potential 

expense of buying a more fuel-efficient vehicle is balanced by the consumers’ savings 

in gas. 

Last month the Energy Information Administration (EIA) revised its projections 

for what gas will cost through 2030, finding much higher prices than were previously predicted. If NHTSA used these new, more realistic estimates in its cost-effectiveness calculations, we will likely see higher—but still feasible—interim CAFE 

standards. Cong. LaHood, will you direct NHTSA to use EIA’s latest gas price projections in its CAFE standard calculations? 

Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that final CAFE standards are consistent with the best available information, including information on gas prices. 

Question 2. Electric vehicle (EV) technologies promise fuel economy gains, energy 

security benefits and carbon emissions reductions that far surpass those of even the 

most efficient internal combustion engines. We are in a race with many countries 

around the globe to develop not only electric vehicles themselves, but also the pioVerDate Nov 24 2008 11:53 Jun 12, 2009 Jkt 050180 PO 00000 Frm 00072 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\WPSHR\GPO\DOCS\50180.TXT SCOM1 PsN: JACKIE
69 

neering battery and component technologies that will make the transition to EV’s 

a reality. By developing and manufacturing these technologies here in the U.S., we 

can maximize the economic benefit associated with transitioning away from our fossil fuel dependence—and create ‘‘green’’ jobs. Cong. LaHood, under your leadership, 

what role would the Department of Transportation play in trying to help incentivize 

investment in transportation electrification infrastructure necessary to support the 

market for EVs? Will you work with Congress to ensure this is a priority in upcoming transportation legislation? 

Answer. I am committed to environmental gains and reduced carbon dioxide emissions, and alternative-fueled vehicles can play a major role in accomplishing these 

goals in the transportation sector. If confirmed, I plan to work closely with Congress, the Department of Energy, and other involved parties to ensure that our 

CAFE standards encourage and do not inhibit electric-vehicle developments. 

Question 3. I appreciate your indications that you will make implementing 

NextGen a top priority. Do we have your commitment that you will work with this 

committee to expeditiously develop a timeline for implementation? 

Answer. I agree that NextGen is absolutely critical and I am committed to working with this committee to develop implementation timelines. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. MARIA CANTWELL TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1a. Congressman LaHood, one of your most immediate and most important decisions if you are confirmed as Transportation Secretary regards how the Department chooses to implement the landmark fuel economy increases enacted into 

law over a year ago. I am concerned that the draft CAFE rule used an inaccurate 

set of assumptions when coming up with their cost-benefit calculations, and therefore failed to meet the maximum feasible standard set in 2007 Energy Bill. Are you 

aware that the CAFE increase law that Congress enacted passed in December 2007 

requires the Transportation Department to set CAFE levels at the ‘‘maximum feasible’’ level, not just 35 miles per gallon by 2020? 

Answer. Yes. It is the case that the 35 mile-per-gallon figure is only a minimum 

statutory requirement. 

Question 1b. Please comment on whether you believe each of these assumptions 

in the draft CAFE rule are accurate and appropriate: 

(i) That the price of gas will be $2.26 a gallon in 2016; 

(ii) That hybrid cars will only be available in showrooms starting in 2014; 

(iii) That there will be no commercially available plug in electric vehicles before 

2015 (despite automaker advertisements and likely government purchase and 

production incentives); and 

(iv) That NHTSA’s estimated value of $7 per ton of carbon dioxide is likely to 

be found arbitrary and capricious based on what peer-reviewed literature concludes will be the true costs and benefits of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 

Question 1c. In Congressional testimony last year, EIA Administrator Guy Caruso 

testified that NHTSA should use EIA’s high gas price scenario in its CAFE rulemaking. Last July, I introduced a bill that would require the Transportation Department adopt the EIA’s ‘‘high gas price scenario’’ which would provide a more realistic 

assumption of future gas prices. Do you believe using EIA’s high gas price scenario 

will provide Americans with a better insurance policy against future oil price increases and provide a more realistic assumption of what future gas prices will be? 

Question 1d. Recent NHTSA analysis shows a 35 mpg CAFE standard in 2015 is technically feasible, but it’s only cost effective if gas prices range from $2.77 to $3.16 

over the next decade. Will you take into account the new data in the Energy Information Administration’s forecast report, Annual Energy Outlook 2009 Early Release, which forecasts that gasoline prices will rise each year after 2009, eventually 

reaching $3.90 per gallon in 2030? 

Answer. I am confident the new Administration will move quickly to address 

CAFE requirements. If confirmed, I will work to ensure final CAFE standards are 

consistent with the best available information, including information on gas prices, 

carbon emissions and new technology. 

Question 2. Congressman LaHood, on February 13, 2004, NHTSA issued a memorandum with the subject line ‘‘Final Economic Assessment Alternative Fueled Vehicles Part 538’’ (NHTSA–01–10774–37). On page 10 of that memo, it says that the 

cost of making a vehicle duel fuel capable for E85 would ‘‘increase consumer cost 

of a vehicle by $100 to $200 (in $2000).’’ Is that estimate still accurate? How have 

70 

changes that automakers made to fueling components to meet unrelated emission 

standards affected the marginal costs of making a car duel fuel capable. What is 

the marginal cost of making a vehicle M85 capable, in other words able to run on 

any blend of up to 85 percent methanol? What is the marginal cost of making a typical passenger vehicle or heavy duty-truck capable of running on any percentage 

blend of biodiesel? 

Answer. I do not have a basis at this time to address the specific ‘‘dual-fuel capability’’ issues you raise, but I agree that the ability to make use of alternate fuels 

is a very central element of our Nation’s ability to wean ourselves from over-reliance 

on foreign petroleum sources. If confirmed, I would be pleased to keep you advised 

of developments of the assumptions used in this area. 

Question 3. Congressman LaHood, will the new Administration support the current Federal laws on foreign ownership and control of a domestic air carrier? In 

those cases where the ownership structure of a domestic air carrier is the subject 

of dispute or challenge during the initial certification proceeding, do you agree that 

transparency in DOT’s review of the carrier’s ongoing compliance (post-certification) 

with U.S. foreign ownership and control laws is required in order to assure the public and Congress that the laws are being followed? 

Answer. If confirmed, I will work to ensure that current Federal law on air carrier 

ownership and control is carried out. The new Administration’s policy on specifics 

in this area has not yet been established but, if confirmed, I would be pleased to 

keep you informed of relevant developments. 

Question 4a. Congressman LaHood, as you know the Next Generation Air Traffic 

Control System has not progressed as quickly as Congress would like. When we 

met, you told me that you are going to make this one of your priorities as Secretary. 

One of the goals of the Next Generation Air Traffic Control Joint Planning Development Office is to encourage coordination between the Departments of Transportation, Defense, Homeland Security, and other relevant agencies. The coordination 

has not been as unified as many of us as hoped. Getting these joint offices to function properly is a management challenge that sometime requires the Secretarial 

leadership to resolve thorny issues before they become intractable. Can we count on 

you to make sure that NextGen efforts are coordinated across the participating 

agencies and that you will get involved in moving NextGen efforts forward if things 

start getting bogged down? 

Answer. If confirmed, NextGen will be a priority for me and for the Department, 

and improved coordination among the participating Federal agencies a primary objective. Implementation must be accomplished within realistic benchmarks, and 

there must be a commitment from the Department, Congress, and all the stakeholders—including other Federal agencies—to ensure that it moves forward expeditiously. 

Question 4b. Given the cost, complexity, and importance of the program, I believe 

it is critical for you to be able track the real progress of NextGen to ensure that 

the program is meeting the objectives and meeting the needs of our country. As you 

know, often measures of progress are more focused on effort rather than outcomes. 

Will you agree to developing and publishing metrics that show NextGen’s progress? 

Answer. I agree that meaningful metrics are absolutely critical and, if confirmed, 

I will ensure that we implement a transparent reporting process to track NextGen’s 

progress. 

Question 5. Congressman LaHood, we must look for ways to reduce emissions 

within our air transportation system. Given that studies show there are inefficiencies equaling around twelve percent in the current system, will you commit to finding air traffic management solutions that increase efficiencies and reduce emissions? 

Answer. Absolutely. I understand a key priority of the NextGen Plan is reducing 

the air transportation system’s environmental footprint. There are a comprehensive 

set of initiatives using new air traffic management capabilities, enhanced aircraft 

technology, and low-carbon fuel that if implemented fully will allow U.S. aviation 

to grow while reducing its emissions. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. FRANK LAUTENBERG TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1. As Secretary of Transportation under a new Administration, will you 

end Federal Highways Administration’s practice of withholding highway funds to 

states that are attempting to address corruption scandals through pay-to-play reforms of the government contracting process, particularly in Illinois and New Jersey? 

71 

Answer. I believe we must always adhere to the highest ethical standards in all 

our dealings. I have been told that the Federal Highway Administration’s concern 

with certain State ethics reform legislation to address ‘‘pay-to-play,’’ including reform legislation in Illinois and New Jersey is based on interpretation of a provision 

in title 23 of the United States Code. I am further told that the title 23 provision 

is intended to assure free and open competition for Federal-aid contracts, and that 

it prohibits State and local governments from adopting requirements for contractors 

that do not relate directly to the contractors’ abilities to perform work under Federal-aid contracts. Other Federal law, of course, does prohibit corrupt practices, including bribery for example, in connection with Federal-aid contracts. Nevertheless, 

I will look into this matter further, and I will take such steps as may be necessary 

to assure that U.S. DOT is not unnecessarily standing in the way of needed State 

ethics reform. 

Question 2. The newly hired air traffic controllers who are just beginning their 

careers at the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) are the future of Aviation 

Safety. Will you see to it that they have the chance to train with experienced controllers by doing everything in your power to stem the flow of veteran controllers 

from the FAA work force, beginning by returning to the bargaining table to reach 

collective bargaining agreement with NATCA—one that can be ratified by the 

union? 

Answer. I am committed to finding an FAA Administrator who will come to the 

job and work with Congress and the controllers, and resolve issues as quickly as 

possible. Addressing labor-management issues at the FAA is a key priority of mine. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. TOM UDALL TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1. Our nation’s transportation system is currently undergoing a major 

shift and will continue to do so throughout the 21st century. In cities across this 

country, people are being urged to utilize public transportation systems, and ridership of these systems is continuing to grow. However, in many communities across 

this nation, public transportation is still not available. How will you work to see 

that our transportation systems are modernized and the availability of these systems improve? For these areas where public transportation is logistically difficult, 

how will you work to see that their transportation needs are addressed? 

Answer. Too many of our Nation’s railways, highways, bridges, airports, and 

neighborhood streets are slowly decaying due to lack of investment and strategic 

long-term planning. President Obama believes that America’s long-term competitiveness depends on the stability of our critical infrastructure. The Administration will 

make strengthening our transportation systems a top priority. The Administration 

is also committed to focusing on people and communities where they live and work. 

This implies a commitment to the principles that some refer to as livability—that 

is, investing in ways that respect the unique character of each community. The era 

of one-size-fits-all transportation projects must give way to one where preserving 

and enhancing unique community characteristics are primary goals, rather than an 

afterthought. And I intend to make livable communities a big part of what we are 

going to do under reauthorization, should I be confirmed. 

Question 2. As a Representative of a rural district, you bring vital experience addressing the transportation needs of our rural residents. How are you going to use 

this experience toward addressing the extremely critical transportation needs of 

rural America? 

Answer. The Administration is committed to focusing on people and communities 

where they live and work, including rural communities. This implies a commitment 

to the principles that some refer to as livability—that is, investing in ways that respect the unique character of each community. The era of one-size-fits-all transportation projects must give way to one where preserving and enhancing unique community characteristics are primary goals, rather than an afterthought. And I intend 

to make livable communities a big part of what we are going to do under reauthorization, if confirmed. The Department is currently exploring options for reauthorization, and I am committed to working with Congress to enact surface transportation 

legislation that moves the country forward. 

Question 3. Given that the Highway Trust Fund has solvency issues, what measures will you this Administration take in order to assure that adequate funding is 

maintained in order for the Federal Government to meet the continued need for infrastructure improvements? 

72 

Answer. As we approach reauthorization of the surface transportation programs, 

we need to ‘‘think outside the box,’’ particularly as to future funding mechanisms. 

We need to reexamine current fuel excise taxes, and we need to identify additional 

revenue resources for surface transportation programs. Innovative financing techniques need to be further explored. I would also look to the comprehensive analyses 

of the two major Commissions established by SAFETEA-LU as the new Administration shapes proposals for our transportation future. 

Question 4. Railroad safety issues continue to be a significant issue across the 

country, particularly highway grade crossings and shared use of track by freight and 

passenger rail systems. Unfortunately, Federal funding for safety measures has historically been grossly insufficient to meet these safety needs. What actions will you 

take to address rail safety? 

Answer. If I am confirmed, I will see to it that the Federal Railroad Administration continues to focus its inspection, enforcement, and research efforts where they 

are most likely to reduce the number and severity of railroad accidents. I will also 

make sure that FRA carries out the numerous new safety requirements recently 

mandated by the Rail Safety Improvement Act of 2008. 

Question 5. Ridership on commuter rail systems across the country has been continuously growing to meet passenger demand, particularly since the dramatic fluctuation of gasoline costs. What actions will you pursue to provide funding for commuter rail operations? 

Answer. I recognize that commuter rail operations across the country provide riders with an important transportation alternative. I am also aware that the Federal 

Government has often been an important source of funding for commuter rail operations. If confirmed, I look forward to working with Congress on this and other important transportation funding issues. 

Question 6. Within this country, transportation is one of the largest sources of 

greenhouse gas emissions. We know that any work on climate change policy must 

include input and action by the Department. How do you see the DOT working to 

address this issue? What do you see as the role that you and the DOT will play 

in climate change policy changes? 

Answer. Our transportation system and the development it enables must be sustainable. We must acknowledge the new reality of climate change. This has implications in all areas, including the Department’s responsibility for setting automotive 

fuel-economy standards that also significantly reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The 

intercity rail and mass transit funding in the Administration’s economic recovery 

plan are part of the equation, but only a part. Sustainability must permeate all that 

we do, from highways and transit to aviation and ports. The Administration is also 

committed to focusing on people and communities where they live and work. This 

implies a commitment to the principles that some refer to as livability—that is, investing in ways that respect the unique character of each community. The era of 

one-size-fits-all transportation projects must give way to one where preserving and 

enhancing unique community characteristics are primary goals, rather than an 

afterthought. President Obama is committed to ensuring that the Administration’s 

transportation policy furthers his goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote livable communities, and so am I. 

Question 7. You sponsored a bill in the 105th Congress regarding motor fuel taxes 

on tribal lands and the infrastructure needs of these communities. Specifically your 

bill prohibited the Secretary of Transportation from allocating funding for public 

lands highways on tribal lands unless that tribal entity has entered into an agreement with the state to provide procedures for the payment and collection of motor 

fuel taxes unless the allocation of funds is essential to the construction of a road 

that is a critical component of the National Highway System and is essential to 

interstate commerce. What is your position on improving the aging and insufficient 

roads on tribal lands? How will the Department work with these communities to 

see that their infrastructure needs are addressed? Do you still in believe that the 

Secretary should require tribal entities to enter into agreements with state governments? 

Answer. I believe improving roads, bridges, and other transportation infrastructure across the Nation will be a top priority for the new Administration, and that 

certainly encompasses roads on tribal lands. The Indian Reservation Roads (IRR) 

program is an important component of the Federal-aid highway program. If confirmed, I would expect to be working cooperatively with tribal governments, through 

the IRR program, to address infrastructure challenges on tribal lands. 

For most issues involved in fuel taxation agreements, win-win solutions are possible. Respect for tribal sovereignty and economic development on tribal lands is important, and not counter to State interests. Both States and tribes can benefit from 

73 

a cooperative relationship, and I understand that a number of States and tribes 

have already entered into agreements for collection of fuel taxes to their mutual 

benefit. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTION SUBMITTED BY HON. MARK BEGICH TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question . Representative LaHood—The White House recently issued a new Arctic 

Policy that included a new emphasis on Arctic transportation, highlighting the Maritime Administration’s responsibility to protect maritime commerce in the Arctic and 

the Arctic environment. As we see more and more summers of an ice-free Arctic, 

the need for new investments in Arctic navigation, safety and security measures, 

and new vessel standards will be needed. Other countries—Russia and Canada to 

be specific—are already far ahead of the United States in development and exploration of the Arctic region. In Alaska, many of our northern coastal communities 

are ill-prepared for either increased shipping or increased development in the region. 

Representative LaHood, do I have your commitment that your Department, especially the Maritime Administration, will make it a priority to ensure that Arctic 

shipping lanes off the Alaska coast are equipped with the highest level of navigation, emergency response, and security equipment and expertise so the we can move 

forward to develop our Arctic resources without jeopardizing the very fragile Arctic 

environment? 

Answer. The national priorities for maritime transportation in the Arctic region 

should address safe, secure, and reliable navigation, the protection of maritime commerce, and the protection of the environment. The Maritime Administration is currently overseeing a three-year, ongoing project called the Arctic Maritime Shipping 

Assessment. This project will address issues such as safe and secure maritime navigation, search and rescue issues, the protection of maritime commerce and environment, the development of the necessary infrastructure to support these initiatives, 

and the welfare and impact on existing communities in the Arctic area. If confirmed, 

I commit to working, in cooperation with the Secretary of Homeland Security (who 

oversees the U.S. Coast Guard) and other appropriate agencies, to ensure that any 

development of maritime trade and commerce utilizing the Arctic as a trade route 

will be implemented in a safe, secure and environmentally responsible manner. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1. Mr. LaHood, this Committee, and its members, have long enjoyed a 

close and productive working relationship with the Department of Transportation. 

We often rely on the technical and legal expertise of the Department’s staff when 

we are developing or reviewing proposed legislation. Can members of this Committee count on this cooperative relationship continuing? 

Answer. If confirmed, I commit to continuing the close working relationship existing between the Department and Congress—and especially this committee. I would 

truly appreciate the opportunity to continue providing the committee with technical 

assistance and am certain that it will serve to enhance the objectives of both Congress and the Department. 

Question 2. Earlier this week, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) gave a preliminary estimate of how quickly the funds in the House economic stimulus bill will 

be spent. According to CBO of the $43.1 billion included for transportation programs, only $6.3 billion or 14.6 percent will enter the economy by September 30, 

2010. This hardly seems like it would have a major stimulative effect on the economy. What can you do to ensure the taxpayer that any funds Congress provides, 

first and foremost stimulates the economy and creates job, and two, does so in the 

most timely manner? 

Answer. If confirmed, I will ensure that the Department works with the States 

and other relevant potential grant recipients so that grant funds will be dedicated 

to projects that have been planned, organized and meet agency requirements before 

the funds are committed—in essence ‘‘shovel ready′′. This, we expect, will help put 

people to work as early as this summer working on roads, bridges, transit, airport 

projects, and other important infrastructure projects. 

Question 3. An early challenge you will face as Secretary will be easing the relationship between FAA Management and its unions. As you know, the new Administration has full discretion to renegotiate labor agreements, but I would hope you will 

74 

consider the fiscal ramifications of reopening the current NATCA air traffic controller contract which could potentially cost the FAA $1.9 billion through the year 

2011. During these difficult economic times I find it hard to justify such expenditures for a workforce that is already some of the highest paid in the Federal Government. In order to ease future management/labor tensions, will you work with the 

Committee to create a prospective labor contract impasse process that allows for fair 

and final closure of controversial contract issues? 

Answer. If confirmed, one of my top priorities is to find the most talented FAA 

Administrator that we can find, and recommend that person to President Obama, 

so he can recommend that person to the Senate for confirmation. I am committed 

to finding an Administrator who will work with Congress and the controllers to resolve issues as quickly as possible. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JIM DEMINT TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1. What do you foresee as the most immediate need at the Department 

of Transportation? 

Answer. While maintaining transportation safety as the Department’s preeminent 

goal, the most immediate need will be to implement the Economic Recovery Act rapidly, as soon as it is enacted, and emphasize projects that are ready-to-go and will 

also contribute long-term to the economic vitality of this country. It is imperative 

that expenditures be closely tracked, to ensure that they are expended in accordance 

with the law and good policy, and to be able to measure their positive effect on economic recovery, as Congress intends. 

Question 2. What do you believe is the Federal Government’s role in transportation policy? 

Answer. I believe that the major challenges facing the Department of Transportation relate to its support of key national objectives of safety and mobility. The Department’s programs and activities must contribute to solutions in areas critical to 

the Nation’s future. In the area of the economy, efficient and safe infrastructure is 

a fundamental requirement for recovery and growth. As a nation, we need to invest 

in our highways, bridges, ports, air and rail systems to strengthen user safety, bolster our long-term competitiveness and ensure that our economy achieves its growth 

potential. Through the Department of Transportation’s programs, sound and well 

managed investments will move us in the right direction. Leadership in the Department of Transportation is needed to set the objectives in these areas, gain support 

for the resources needed and provide benchmarks to gauge progress. 

In the area of energy, the transportation system must play a central role in conservation and sound development of energy resources. The fuel economy of the Nation’s automobile fleet must continue to improve, and I look forward to working 

within the Administration and with the auto industry to achieve this goal. Investing 

in advanced vehicle technology and development of supportive policies for alternative-energy vehicles, will also be an important contribution to the national goals. 

So will the Department’s support of efficient transportation modes and effective public transportation in our cities. Making these initiatives happen is a key challenge, 

involving both resources and hands-on management and the revitalization of the 

Department’s research and development skills. 

Environment is another area where the Department contributes to national goals 

and where I see a key set of challenges. Making global warming a top priority as 

well as dealing with other environmental concerns will require a new level of attention for our transportation systems as well as a new mindset for the Department’s 

leadership. Increased energy efficiency in our vehicles and our passenger and freight 

transportation systems will significantly alleviate the problem of greenhouse gases. 

Among the key challenges here is the development of close working relationships 

with other Cabinet agencies whose goals and programs overlap with those of the Department of Transportation. 

Question 3. The highway system is at a crisis. GAO first predicted that the Highway Trust Fund was unsustainable at its current levels, and last Congress, taxpayers had to bailout the transportation sector. What do you propose for restricting 

the way highways are funded? 

Answer. As we approach the renewal of the surface transportation programs, we 

need to ‘‘think outside the box,’’ particularly as to future funding mechanisms. We 

need to reexamine current fuel excise taxes and evaluate new proposals and ideas. 

I would also look to the comprehensive analyses of the two major Policy Commissions established by SAFETEA-LU as the new Administration shapes proposals for 

our transportation future. 

75 

Question 4. The last administration was progressive with looking for new ways 

and opportunities to give states the flexibility to fund infrastructure projects, will 

you office continue to push public private partnerships as a means to operate our 

highway system? Will your office continue to consult with cities and counties on 

their development of contracts with private companies? 

Answer. As I indicated above, we need to ‘‘think outside the box,’’ and the use of 

new financing tools is one of the ways to do this. 

Question 5. Will you recognize earmarks if they deviate from your agency’s transportation policy? Congressman LaHood, I want to get your perspective on the practice of Congressional earmarking. Last February The State Journal-Register reported the following quote from you, ‘‘’If people like Ray LaHood and others aren’t 

able to earmark dollars, that money will be spent by some bureaucrat in Washington, D.C., and who knows better how to spend money on worthwhile projects 

than a community and an individual Congressman?’ LaHood said. You seem to take 

a fairly dim view of the thousands of Federal ‘‘bureaucrats’’ you will be leading at 

the Department of Transportation. 

a. Do you regret these comments? 

b. Will the Department of Transportation budget be more effectively executed 

with or without earmarks? 

c. When earmarks aren’t written into law—such as when they are in committee 

reports, letters or phoned in by members—will you use the merit review procedures 

at the Department of Transportation to fund projects or will you abide by the suggestions of influential Members of Congress? 

Answer. I need to be clear, first, that I would be honored to head the Department 

of Transportation and be able to work with the extremely high-quality workforce 

there. My view as a Member of Congress might better have been expressed simply 

that sometimes a ‘‘one size fits all’’ government policy is maintained despite the 

clear case for a particular project in a specific set of circumstances. The more important point, however, is that the President opposes earmarks and that, were I to join 

the Administration, I would have a clear policy to carry out as a part of the executive branch. I believe that the President’s policy will govern the particulars of carrying out the law, and accompanying reports, and I would look forward to implementing his policy. 

Question 6. According to a U.S. Department of Transportation report in December 

2004, Amtrak is by far the most heavily subsidized mode of travel in the U.S. Between its huge Federal subsidies and it minuscule share of the intercity passenger 

market (less than 1 percent). Amtrak has misused their Federal funds and has 

failed to organize to make itself self sustainable. How will your agency force Amtrak 

to organize to become self sustainable? 

Answer. As Secretary of Transportation, I would serve as a member of the Amtrak 

board of directors, and I would work to make the system as efficient as possible, 

recognizing that intercity passenger rail is often subsidized to some degree throughout the world because of its contributions to reduced congestion and urban air quality. I also note that several provisions of the just enacted ‘‘Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008’’ address use of Federal funds, including requirements for improved financial accounting, development of a five-year financial 

plan, and development of methodologies for Amtrak route and service planning decisions and metrics, and standards for measuring the performance and service quality 

of intercity passenger train operations. If confirmed, I would make implementation 

of these financing reforms a priority. 

Question 7. A 2006 GAO report stated ‘‘the existing intercity passenger rail system is in poor financial condition and the current structure does not effectively target Federal funds to where they provide the greatest public benefits, such as transportation congestion relief. Routes of 750 miles or more, while providing service for 

from rural areas and connections between regions, show limited public benefits for 

dollars expended. These routes account for 15 percent of riders but 80 percent of 

financial losses.’’ How will you establish a system to eliminate some of Amtrak’s 

least profitable lines? Will you entertain private company offers to purchase Amtrak 

routes and rail lines? 

Answer. At this time, the new Administration’s policy on specifics of this nature 

is not yet established but, if confirmed, I would be pleased to advise you of developments in the area of the future of Amtrak’s route structure. The recently enacted 

Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act of 2008 includes the development 

of a pilot program allowing rail carriers to seek to be considered as alternative passenger rail providers. If I am confirmed, I will work to effectively implement the 

new legislation. 

76 

Question 8. How do you plan to pay for next-gen technology for the air traffic control system? Do you plan to impose a new flat fee on general aviation for costs associated with air traffic control services? 

Answer. As I expressed earlier about ‘‘thinking outside the box’’ with regard to 

the future financing of surface transportation programs, we need to approach the 

critical element of financing our aviation programs in the future with an open mind. 

That said, I would like to work with Congress throughout the FAA’s reauthorization 

process to address these very issues. 

Question 9. Do you support the National Air Traffic Controllers attempt to negotiate their contract to pre-2006 level? 

Answer. I believe that the FAA will work best with a satisfied work force, one 

that wants to come to work each day, and I am a supporter of good-faith collective 

bargaining between employee groups and management. 

Question 10. How do you plan to recruit new air traffic controllers? 

Answer. This is a very important issue because of the critical nature of air traffic 

control functions to aviation safety. That said, I would need to consult with the experts at the Federal Aviation Administration, and get the benefit of the perspective 

of a new FAA Administrator, before offering specifics in this area. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JOHN THUNE TO

HON. RAY LAHOOD

Question 1. Do you believe the current highway bill is an equitable formula that 

should serve as a fair model for the 2009 Highway Bill? Are there provisions you 

would change to the current bill? 

Answer. As we approach reauthorization of the surface transportation programs, 

we need to ‘‘think outside the box,’’ particularly as to future funding mechanisms. 

This includes investing in ways that respect the unique character of each community. The era of one-size-fits-all transportation projects must give way to one where 

preserving and enhancing unique community characteristics, be they rural or urban, 

is a primary goal, rather than an afterthought. And I intend to make livable communities a big part of what we are going to do under reauthorization. I am committed to working with Congress to enact surface transportation legislation that 

moves the country forward. 

Question 2. Essential Air Service plays an important role in South Dakota’s economy. Do you foresee any recommendations from the Obama Administration that 

would change the Essential Air Service program or limit air service in rural areas 

such as South Dakota? 

Answer. I believe that air service plays an important role as an economic engine 

for communities to enhance their livability. I look forward to working with Congress 

to help make the EAS program as efficient as possible to ensure that eligible communities maintain a link to the national transportation system. 

Question 3. Throughout South Dakota, ethanol plants, grain elevators, power 

plants and a variety of other shippers are captive to only one railroad. In which 

case, their only hope for rate relief is through the Surface Transportation Board 

(STB). Do you believe the STB is in need of reform? If so, what types of reforms 

do you believe would provide captive shippers with much needed rate relief? 

Answer. At this time, the new Administration’s policy on specifics of this nature 

is not yet established but, if confirmed, I would expect the Department to focus on 

this important aspect of freight transportation. 

Question 4. California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has asked President 

Barack Obama to waive or greatly streamline Federal requirements under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for several infrastructure projects in order 

to spur job growth and expedite construction of new roads, mass transit and energy 

systems in California. What is your opinion of the Governor’s request? Will the 

Obama Administration consider the economic urgency of job creation by setting 

aside or streamlining NEPA review when moving forward on any infrastructure 

based stimulus proposal? Separate from any stimulus proposal, would you as Secretary consider the need to shorten the length of time it takes to complete environmental reviews of transportation projects a priority? 

Answer. Our immediate priority will be to implement the Economic Recovery Act 

rapidly, as soon as it is enacted, and emphasize projects that are ready-to-go and 

will also contribute to the long-term economic vitality of the Nation. I intend to develop close working relationships with other agencies whose programs interact with 

those of the Department of Transportation to streamline environmental reviews 

whenever possible, while protecting the environment. 

77 

Question 5. SAFETEA–LU included several provisions aimed at shortening the 

amount of time it takes to complete environmental reviews of highway projects. 

Some of these provisions, however, seem to have issues with implementation that 

have resulted in little improvement in project delivery times. As Secretary, would 

you support efforts to improve these provisions? In particular, would you support 

efforts to allow States to assume the responsibilities of the Secretary of Transportation for environmental reviews? Would you support efforts to further rationalize 

the section 4(f) review process? 

Answer. I support increasing the efficiency of project reviews and will consider 

new approaches to improving delivery times while ensuring that important resources are protected. 

Question 6. Executive Order 13274 was intended to enhance environmental stewardship as well as streamline the environmental review and development of transportation projects. Among other things, the Secretary of Transportation is directed 

to designate, and amend as appropriate, a list of high-priority transportation 

projects to receive expedited agency reviews. What are your thoughts on the benefits 

or drawbacks of this Executive Order? Would you support continued implementation 

of it during the Obama Administration? 

Answer. I am committed to efficient transportation project delivery and, if confirmed, intend to develop close working relationships with other agencies whose responsibilities interact with the Department’s, in order to streamline environmental 

reviews while ensuring that the Department fulfills its environmental stewardship 

responsibilities. Executive Order 13274 provides a framework for working with 

other agencies toward these goals. 

Question 7. In SAFETEA–LU, the Congress included some modifications to the 

program aimed at improving the effectiveness and the cost-effectiveness of the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality program (CMAQ). What are your thoughts on 

the CMAQ program? Do you have any ideas on how to improve it further? 

Answer. Environment is another area where the Department contributes to national goals and where I see a key set of challenges. Making global warming a top 

priority as well as dealing with other environmental concerns will require a new 

level of attention for our transportation systems as well as a new focus for the Department. Increased energy efficiency in our vehicles and our passenger and freight 

transportation systems will significantly alleviate the problem of greenhouse gases. 

Æ