Of setting priorities. Making sure we are not going into fullblown crisis mode, spending money on whatever comes along. Instead, Getting Congress and the administration to focus on what is needed most. Host how does the government approach typical Infrastructure Spending . Guest it happens in different ways. One of the important elements of any debate that will emerge over the next several months is getting into the particulars of how the government functions in different areas of infrastructure. Has the primary responsibility for the transportation program. The money comes from, substantial sums of money, come from the government. On Water Utility state and local governments are making the primary decisions. The federal government does make some choices about dividing tax municipal bonds. It provides lowinterest loans for state and local governments to do various projects, and funds agencies such as the u. S. Army corps of engineers, the bureau of reclamation, and the department of transportation. Started this segment today talking to the American Society for Civil Engineers. They put out a report card of ds and cs. There isven though concerned, there could be a better way the government analyzes how it uses money, particularly for infrastructure . Guest the American Society of Civil Engineers did a great Public Service bringing this to light. Aat is not enough to drive policy discussion that we think needs to happen. The particular case of transportation funding, there has been no change in the federal gas tax that funds the federal share of highly spending. Since 1993. That represents a political impasse that needs to be addressed. Host Debra Knopman will be with us to talk about the report. If you want to ask questions, 202 7488000 for democrats. Republicans. 1 for for independents, 202 7488002. Lets look at roads. How could the federal government to a better job analyzing what projects to fund and the most efficient use of the money . Where we are at a point there is a lot of new technology coming along with smart vehicles, censored roads. This is a real opportunity for transformation. The federal government has historically taken a leadership role. It doesnt mean that it is the it can player, but a leadership and intellectual role in really encouraging a transformation. That could be one area that the federal government is focused on. We have the interstate highway built, the beginning in the 1950s. We needed to connect the nation. We needed a national network. We still need that. This network is aging. There is much that can be done in the build out. In urban areas where congestion is greatest. We have the chance to do it terms of how we will fix and modernize the system. Host some would say the highways are always being built. Does the government determine the life span of projects it funds . Arrangementriginal with the states and the highway act of 1956 was 90 federal funding for capital spending, 10 by the state. The states are responsible largely for the operation and maintenance. The federal government doesnt put much into that. The federal government does have ce somertunity to pla judicians on how the states spend the money. Host we heard the last guest talk about the federal government gives money to the states with some oversight involved. Is more oversight needed when federal money is granted . Guest i am not advocating for more oversight, but more priority setting when it comes to federal spending. Specifically, not about projects largely within an individual states borders, more the regional and National Scale projects that impact economic growth. That is where the federal government should be stepping up whereking judgments about the investments should go. For instance, most countries urban transit systems as national assets. That would be getting the subway cities in goodr operating order. Something that will benefit the country as a whole. We have major bottlenecks around ports up and down the east coast, around long beach in california. Many opportunities where National Benefits could be achieved through a focus on that goscale projects beyond the capacity of individual states. There is no reason for the federal government to micromanage state priorities. Host 202 7488000 for democrats. 202 7488001 for republicans. 202 7488002 for independents. We have been speaking about what the Trump Administration might use as a main for funding publicprivate partnerships. How has that model worked in other areas of the country . Guest we are waiting for details on exactly what the administration will be. I hesitate to make any strong judgments on exactly what they are doing. There is precedence for the federal government putting out programs initiating programs where there is cost sharing between states and local governments. That is certainly an rtunity, but host the idea of oversight. We had a previous guest talk desire of thise administration to change funding and the length of oversight, or reduce the amount of time. Concern, oruse you is there a case to be made that that could work . The whole idea of pending project delays on regulation or Regulatory Oversight is somewhat misplaced. Reasons whyten large projects are controversial. There are multiple interests. Also, the underlying regulations go back to the clean water act, the clean air act. These are pieces of legislation with broad public support that have been in place since the 1970s. When we talk about procedures, oversight, the need to keep the discussion separate from the underlying intent of what those regulations are and the actual way some of these regulations are implemented. There is no doubt that the federal government, for example, could be more efficient in the way it applies oversight when there are multiple agencies involved and would make the process more streamlined in that sense. Present Public Comments without circumventing the law and standardss. The previous guest talked about consolidating the various agencies. How many agencies typically get involved in an Infrastructure Project . 6est as many as 4, 5, or federal agencies. There was an issue about california and the endangered species act in play. That brought in the department of the interior and fish and Wildlife Services hadarmy corps of engineers the responsibility of Water Management in the San Francisco bay. The bureau of reclamation had water supply responsibilities. The Environmental Protection agency was concerned about salinity standards. Not the federal level just at the federal level, there as well. L levels these can be complicated administrative procedural processes and challenges. Host can that consolidation be done to keep the level of safety and things you have to consider as well . Guest it can be done, and we have examples where it can be done well. Beginning with strong federal leadership, if that is the arent, to make sure laws honored and the public is heard. This is doable. It is not impossible. There needs to be a consensus and understanding of what that should look like going in, and not making it up. Report, nots the everything is broken, the future of transportation and water funding. You can go to the rand website. Our guest from the rand corporation. The first call is from ohio, democrats line. Caller i lived in cincinnati, west of cincinnati. We do not have an adequate bus system, no subway, no trains. Before i would allow one cent of my taxes to get a better train, subway, or bus to someone else, i want that here. On the west coast and east coast. Zero in cincinnati. You cannot give me a legitimate reason my taxes should support a better train from boston to washington, d. C. Their not and do not fund s. I want it for me and all of the millions of taxpayers in the midwest to get nothing who get nothing. We are told wait in line. We have waited long enough. We have a road system. I have been living on the road i am on for 35 years and it has never been resurfaced. Before i would give anybody anything i want some tax dollars spent on me. Host thank you. Guest i think you raised several points. Highway allocation of dollars through the federal Highway Program is apportioned to all states. That was a formula set by congress that takes into account population, land area. The Highway Program, the way the thes are spent, are up to states, not the federal government. Within the boundary of your state. The rail system, the question about rail and the federal role is one up for public discussion. You raised a total legitimate p a totally legitimate point about taxpayers all across the country should be supporting individual projects in one region over another. This is also a question of Regional Equity should be squarely on the table in a discussion about whether the u. S. Wants a worldclass real system. The next question is how to deliver in a way that is fair and equitable across the country. State generates more taxes, should they get more back in federal funding for infrastructure . Guest not necessarily. Your last guest would know more on that than i would, but by and onetoonee is not a correspondence on with the gas tax is giving out for the federal Highway Program. Host georgia, independent line. Caller i think all of america should pay for infrastructure. Not just gas. Just gas to pay for it. Everybody benefits from it. Interestingis an question. The federal gas tax was put in place as something of a surrogate for a toll or user fee. That was decided that that was going to be the fairest way at that time when virtually all vehicles were running on gas. That there should be correspondence to those who are using the highways and paying gas taxes. We are in a different era. The gas tax structure is not sustainable Going Forward. You have hybrids, electric vehicles coming online, vastly more fuelefficient vehicles and a wide range. There are inequities with the gas tax in terms of how we fund other infrastructure. Fees for inland waterways, harbor deepening, there is already a federal tax and Fee Structure in place for. Ater systems for Water Utilities that has been a state and local responsibility. 94 of the funding coming at that level. The federal government does not spend money directly on those utilities, except through tax policy through tax exempt in a municipal bonds. Senator moynihan, talk about the politics of raising the gas taxes. Is this something you saw firsthand question ma . Guest not firsthand at the time. The time of at raising the gas tax tied up with the politics of taxation, which is no one members of congress cannot be enthusiastic about raising the taxes on anything. Here is the case where we need a sustainable source of revenue to support our infrastructure. It has to be coming from some fund. When the highway truck fund has been depleted, congress dipped into general funds, which means everyone is paying, whether they. Re using the roads are not it is the reluctance to raise taxes and the fundamental question of the federal role Going Forward and infrastructure. There is a debate on what the feds should be involved in and what should be left. Is a group, the Consumer Energy alliance, and they are urging new england policymaker to develop infrastructure. Is this part of that discussion . The energy of in particular, does it accommodate situations like we are seeing on the east coast . Guest the electricity is the most private hands. There is public power at the municipal level. There have been Major Investments across the country in resilience of infrastructure to make sure we are prepared for storms and other disruptions in an elaborate and wellrun system. Regional transition operators coordinate individual utilities at a regional scale. I dont see the electric utility needing muche as federal assistance. There might be certain areas here in their, but basically they are charging their rate payers the amount of money they need to keep the system sustainable. States regulate this business very closely. They have to go in front of regulators and make cases for rate increases. That they cover Asset Management and resilience in the face of outages. That is what needs to happen on the water and transportation science. 2 areas dominated by public ownership, not private ownership. We dont have the discipline in those processes. You talked earlier about capital budgeting. We dont have a way to do that longterm planning usefully at the federal level. Joe in south carolina. Caller good morning. That iwant to say hope mr. Trumps infrastructure everything bought american. American steel, american blacktop. Not mexican blacktop, china steel. I hope he is going to put Americans First 20 puts these , and if we need to hire outsiders after. That is about my only statement. Host thanks. Guest in the government dictate who gets hired, etc. . Guest there is a long tradition of congress debating the labor terms and materials, things like that, in Infrastructure Spending. As much time as the senate and house is taking up this legislation that will be brought to the floor. Host independent line. Caller i think the of the structure is a response and anything that comes after economic activity. One thing we have to realize in this country, in this north america and south america we have the largest pool of oil, and energy. Coal when you study things with 4 different government panels, and have local, discussions for 10 years before you make a decision, it is not like the rest of the country where every 1 you have you have 3 worth of spending to see if it is a good idea or not. We waste money in that way. That is a a president businessman. Business is efficiency. When you decide to do something it was for the public good, like franklin roosevelt. When we have to make a decision we have to stand by and not waste and spend time studying for 10 years before making a decision. That is where we waste the money in the economy where we are now. Host thanks. Guest it took 10 years from the Congress First passed authorization for the interstate highway system and started funding it. There were some time Big Decisions in the hundreds of billions of dollars that could take time to get a public consensus. Callers comment reinforces the point we try to make in the rand report, we need a sense of direction, vision, and priority rather than deciding we are going to spend a large sum of money and spread it around without regard to real need. That was our major point with the study. Host i asked the previous of b theill. Study study of the bill. Guest we learned the stimulus package that Congress Passed in shovelreadyon projects. Projects ready to go. There didnt need to be much more discussion over whether they were good or bad. State and local governments were ready to go. The spending did get into the system rather quickly. Ook at the charts in our report that show the spike. It was quite pronounced. At the same time, when you do standardsckly, some met, or other goals or objectives may not be met. The biggest one we need to think the sustainability of the project. An ongoing source of revenue to maintain, operate, and repair what we are building. This is a test that needs to any type ofink, in federal spending on infrastructure. Host one more call. Republican line. Caller i think the electrical grid is obsolete. Littleer plants have devices called Programmable Logic controllers. H aro child 12yearold child tax into the roosevelt dam in tempe, arizona. Had he opened the Flood Control gates arizona could have been wiped out. Grid iselectrical obsolete. Host thanks. Guest i think the electrical the electric Power Industry is well aware of those vulnerabilities in the Industrial Control Systems and know they need to upgrade those. The caller is right. I would not say the whole system is obsolete. There is major investment going on throughout and a major transformation underway with the electrical grid as more states are bringing Renewable Energy sources online and making accommodations. There is a lot happening in that sector. Theres a lot of money being spent. There is great opportunity for major, major improvement. Host the rand report is called not everything is broken. Debra knopman what was the driving force between the creation of this report . There was likely to be some debate in this administration based on the campaign on the topic of infrastructure. There was a lot of hype about , thething is falling apart country is going to hell in a handbasket. We wanted to look at the numbers and understand what is going on. Is everything really falling apart . Are there particular areas that really need the attention . That is what drove us. Was not a broad understanding of the origins of haveof these programs that been in place for decades. The bureau of reclamations was started in 1902. There was some value, we hoped, in putting out a primer on how primarily the federal government with its partners in state and local government, approach water and transportation infrastructure. Host ranAmerican Society hek about it is the senior managing director for the American Society of Civil Engineers. Thank you. Thank you for being here. Talk about the purpose of his report cards. Guest we have been doing this since the 1970s. There was a report in the reagan foundation, and not much happened for a decade. In the late 90s we took up the charge on the report card a way to connect with the public on an important issue. We take these water systems, transportation systems,