Majority Statement

• John D. Rockefeller, IV

  Senator
  Read statement

  Majority Statement

  John D. Rockefeller, IV

  I am excited about today’s hearing and regret that I cannot be in attendance. 

  Our national surface transportation system provides the physical foundation for our economy, allowing people and goods to move throughout the country.  Unfortunately, investment has not kept up with demand in the system over the past few decades.  As a result, our physical infrastructure is in disrepair, congestion plagues our highways, ports, and railroads, and limited financial resources are available to fix the broken system.  In addition, the transportation sector continues to be the largest emitter of carbon dioxide in the United States. 

  The upcoming reauthorization of federal surface transportation programs is a prime opportunity to prepare our transportation system for 21st century demands.  With an additional 120 million people in the country expected by 2050, significant changes must be made to make sure movement remains accessible, efficient, and affordable. 

   In order to correct our existing shortcomings and prepare our system for the next generation of users, we must set far-reaching goals and objectives that span across individual modes and develop reliable standards and methods for attaining them.

   We must take a holistic approach to solving our transportation challenges, especially furthering the connection to our rural communities, in order to remain competitive in a global economy, reduce the consequences of climate change, and maintain safety and efficiency in our daily lives.

   I recognize the hard work Senator Lautenberg has done to make intercity passenger rail a more viable transportation alternative throughout the country, and look forward to working with him closely to prepare our entire transportation system for the next 50 years. 

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

Minority Statement

• Kay Bailey Hutchison

  Senator
  Read statement

  Minority Statement

  Kay Bailey Hutchison

  “Thank you Mr. Chairman.  I do thank you for holding this hearing today.  It is the first hearing of this committee to consider the many important issues we confront in reauthorizing our nation’s surface transportation programs, which expire in September.  I believe there is a proper federal role in promoting the safety and security of our national transportation system and I hope this hearing marks the beginning of a thorough debate on this issue.  It is my hope, that we can reform the federal role in a manner that will better meet our states’ transportation priorities.  I want to welcome, Secretary LaHood, and also Ned Holmes, who will be on the second panel, who serves on the Texas Transportation Commission and is chairman of the Transportation Transformation Group.

   

  “It’s been more than fifty years since President Eisenhower signed legislation to create the Interstate System and construction on the final span of national highway was finished nearly twenty years ago.  Yet highway users in all fifty states are still paying into the national highway system through a formula designed around the now obsolete purpose of completing the Interstate System.  Many of those states, including Texas, are forced to shoulder an unfair burden through the current funding scheme, whereby a far greater portion of our gas tax dollars are being diverted away from critical transportation needs in our state.  In my view, the existing funding formula is no longer serving the best interest of each state and the traveling public.  Our transportation mission should evolve to maintain and improve this valuable infrastructure.  We must add highway capacity in areas where population and commercial growth is exceeding what our infrastructure can withstand.  Our funding structure must change to meet these shifting priorities.  That is why today I am introducing the Highway Fairness and Reform Act of 2009, along with Senators Martinez, Cornyn, and Kyl.  Our bill would give states the choice to opt-out of the Federal Highway Program and instead be rebated federal fuel taxes collected within our borders.  It would cut the overwhelming majority of federal strings attached, but would require that rebated taxes be spent on surface transportation projects. This option would allow all states to receive a more equitable distribution of gas tax dollars, while ensuring funds are directed toward improving transportation in the high-growth areas within those states.

   

  “The policy of revenue sharing was instituted in 1956 because some states with a lot of land mass but lower populations were unable to generate enough revenue to build the roads comprising a truly national highway system. Even though the highway system is complete, the current formula continues to send some states excess revenues while the roads and residents of “donor states,” those paying in more than they are receiving back, are shortchanged. In short, the gas tax revenues of states like Texas, Arizona, Florida, Ohio, and more, could be spent on bike trails in Vermont or bridges in Madison County, rather than on crumbling or congested highways in Miami or Cincinnati. 

   

  “I also think that as we address the proper federal role in transportation, we need to alleviate states from the unnecessary burdens that have accumulated over the years.  For example, of the federal funding that states do receive, there are no fewer than 108 federally mandated programs that must be factored into decisions on how the money will be spent. Once a state decides to begin a transportation project using some of its federal highway funding, it takes an estimated 12 to 15 years of bureaucratic process before a state can even break ground.  This level of federal micromanagement fails to acknowledge that our state and local leaders are best positioned to carry out the present transportation mission which should be maintenance and improvement.

   

  “My legislation is designed to ensure interstate equity and to allow states that will be able to maintain and improve their highways most efficiently, while removing unnecessary regulatory burdens.  Opt-out states would be required to maintain their Interstate Highway System, but could determine which federal program requirements could be eliminated.

   

  “So, Mr. Chairman, I thank you for calling this hearing.  I think this is the time to start this debate and I hope that we can come to agreement on what is equitable for all of our states, not just for some.  Thank you.”

Testimony

• The Honorable Ray LaHood

  Secretary

  Department of Transportation
  Download Testimony (24.51 KB)

Witness Panel 2

• Anne P. Canby

  President

  Surface Transportation Policy Partnership
  Download Testimony (2.93 MB)

• James Corless

  Campaign Director

  Transportation for America
  Download Testimony (45.50 KB)

• Steve Heminger

  Executive Director

  Metropolitan Transportation Commission
  Download Testimony (31.00 KB)

• Ned S. Holmes

  Texas Transportation Commissioner and Chairman

  Transportation Transformation Group
  Download Testimony (41.00 KB)