Stakeholders agree federal funds necessary for infrastructure investment

At a House hearing on infrastructure last week, Congress heard from highway and transit stakeholders, who all echoed the same sentiment: federal funds are necessary for infrastructure investment, yet they are shrinking.    The House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee held a hearing last week during which officials from state departments of transportation, industry groups and labor urged Congress to shore up the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) with sustainable new revenues for transportation infrastructure.
   The hearing, titled “Building a 21st Century Infrastructure for America: Highways and Transit Stakeholders’ Perspectives,” saw industry leaders all echoing the same plea: the federal government needs to be involved in infrastructure investments, according to a recap by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO).
   Patrick McKenna, director of the Missouri Department of Transportation, who also spoke on behalf of AASHTO, said at the hearing that the Highway Trust Fund “remains at a crossroads” because it currently has only enough funding to last through fiscal year 2020.
   McKenna said that unless Congress acts before 2020, Missouri’s federal highway and transit funding would shrink to what it received 15 to 20 years ago.
   Furthermore, states and local governments are already paying more than the federal government for transportation systems, said McKenna, who cited USDOT data from 2015 showing the federal share to be just 20 percent of highway and bridge funding and 26 percent of transit costs. More than two dozen states since 2012 have increased their transportation revenue streams, and others may follow, he said.
   As an organization representative, McKenna provided an AASHTO-generated listing of revenue options to supplement public-private partnership funding. Revenue can be generated from such things as a surcharge on drivers’ licenses, a tire tax on light-duty vehicles like truckers currently pay into the trust fund, vehicle registration fees, and various types of fuel taxes, he noted.
   But federal funds are still an important part of the equation. The routing of federal funds through existing formula-based highway and transit programs that spread the investments throughout the nation fairly is paramount, McKenna said, because states will need to direct the money where they need it most.
   Speaking on behalf of the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), Associated Industries of Missouri CEO Ray McCarty said, “Manufacturers believe the nation must undertake an infrastructure effort that seeks to modernize our aging systems and makes a long-term public commitment to infrastructure not witnessed since the era of President Eisenhower and the development of the interstate system. Addressing the long-term solvency of the Highway Trust Fund is vital to ensuring the preservation of the most important federal highway and transit investment tool. The NAM urges Congress to shore up the fund with a reliable, user-based, long-term funding stream.”
   Lawmakers were listening, but Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore., ranking Democrat for the full committee, said mere talk won’t actually solve anything.
   “We can do this in a bipartisan way, but all we’re doing is talking,” DeFazio said at the hearing. “That’s all we are doing is just talking while the country crumbles. Let’s get to work…It’s time for somebody to take the lead, and this committee should take the lead. It’s time to put proposals out and force the House to act.”
   Other speakers included Peter Rogoff, CEO of the Seattle area’s Sound Transit and former U.S. Department of Transportation undersecretary for policy, and Rep. Sam Graves, R-Mo., who chairs the Highways and Transit Subcommittee and presided over the hearing.