Kind of reserved and enigmatic quality to grant. Monday night on cspans q a. Next, trapgs infrastructure investment. Testifying about state gas tax increase, public and private partnerships and improvements to the Highway Trust Fund. This subcommittee hearing is two and a half hours. Well call the subcommittee to order. First thing id like to ask unanimous consent that members who are not on the subcommittee be permitted to sit at the subcommittee hearing today so they can ask questions. That is so ordered without objection. I would like to welcome everybody to the hearing today. Its going to focus on how we can build the 21st century infrastructure, and the committee is holding a host of hearings to gather ideas on what congress can do to achieve this goal. And today were going to hear ideas from our highways and transit stakeholders. Gathering input from the stakeholders is essential to the prot process that we use to gather policy. The fast track act was the first highway bill in more than a decade and well continue to need your assistance with future legislation. Even with the Additional Resources we provided in fast, the Transportation System still needs additional investments. Enacting a longterm solution to the Highway Safety program is critical to ensure those needs far into the future. There is a consensus to Fund Programs which has been a priority of mine and its always been a priority of the committee. Providing funding is a certainty for our nonfederal partners is vital to planning and Building Infrastructure for the 21st century. This is a bipartisan issue and i look forward to working constructively with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle with a strong america. It supports local and Regional Economic development and creates jobs. I want to thank all of our witnesses for being here today, and i look forward obviously to the testimony for that. I look to the Ranking Member for her opening statement. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and i must say at the outset i very much appreciate that the subcommittee is holding this hearing to get input on rebuilding our highway systems. I think thats the right way to begin after this hiatus, and the four of us, in a very bipartisan way, led the congress to pass the first surface transportation bill in a decade in 2015. Well, we realized then that we were not that we had not really begun. As important as that achievement was. It is not yet clear on where the Trump Administration stands or if it is really serious about Real Investments and infrastructure. Im pleased that they speak about infrastructure so often, but i think this committee is right to continue the Due Diligence that you have begun, mr. Chairman, to highlight our investment needs and the critical need to actually fund them, stop talking about it, lets get some money on the table. Perhaps this hearing can help bring our committee and subcommittee and the administration together and would all agree what is urgently needed infrastructure work. We already have a bipartisan majority on this committee about what needs to be done, because earlier this year, 250 members of congress, thats within this committee and within the congress generally, with robust representation from both sides of the aisle joined chairman graves and i on a letter to the leadership of the ways and Means Committee urging a permanent solution, with an emphasis on permanent, to our Highway Trust Fund crisis. In this letter, we specifically urged, quote, any htf solution, highway traffic Fund Solution should entail a longterm, dedicated, user based revenue stream that can support the transportation infrastructure investments. This strongly bipartisan letter stands in stark contrast to the administrations apparent view that an Infrastructure Initiative is an opportunity to begin chipping away at the federal governments responsibility to be the steward of our National Transportation network. Remember, ever since eisenhower, we have recognized that this is a network. You cant dice and slice it. It goes from coast to coast. It goes from rural to urban. Thats why the responsibility is federal. Based on what we have seen so far from the administration, we may get a white house proposal that contains various incentives designed to boost local, state and private dollars. Try telling that to the states and localities. Rural areas object to this, and members and senators representing rural areas are predictably strong proponents of keeping strong proponents of keeping the funding streams as they are. So the administration seems to hint that some funding would go to rural areas, and for the great bulk of other areas, there would be federal and local dollars. But there has been an agreement for my entire lifetime, republican and democratic administrations alike, that there should be federal grants that fund the entire network. And i am certainly happy to work with rural areas. They feed right into the urban area i represent, to ensure that they are treated fairly. When one part of the system is not treated fairly, we all have to jump in. I cannot support an infrastructure bill, of course, that is biased against urban areas, and i suspect that there would be a huge number of members with me on that. I doubt that such a bill could gather a majority from either party. So as an example of what our region looks like, i represent the District Of Columbia which, of course, is a densely populated city in a densely populated region where you see all kinds of construction trades, building all kinds of apartments, condos, amenities in collaboration with the rest of the region. Maryland suburbs, virginia suburbs, the federal government provides a Transportation Network for over 6 million people. Now, within this microcosm of our country, congestion, transportation problems, deteriorating bridges are challenges that we face no matter where we live. No part of the region is immune. So i may represent the district, but i believe i represent the entire region, and for that matter, the country when i speak of this region. These same challenges, the challenges i described in this region, are replicated in all our major urban areas across the nation. Maybe we should stop calling them urban areas, because the rural part of our region feeds straight into these roads and bridges because thats where they come for the jobs because thats where the jobs are. So parody in a transportation bill is essential. The top 20 urban areas contribute 52 of the total gdp of our economy. American population is expected to grow by 70 million by 2045, and by 2050, threequarters of americans are expected to live in 11 mega regions. We can no more leave behind urban areas than we can leave behind rural areas. Its pretty hard to disassociate one from the other. Urban areas, of course, are the economy engine of the nation. Thats why the rural areas need them. If we leave urban areas to fend for themselves, largely, then we are ignoring our constitutional mandate to ensure the freeflow of congress. Allowing bottlenecks to build up and traffic to grind to a halt in major population commercial centers is backwards and would hurt urban and rural areas alike. Some of our Witnesses Today support the repeal of the federal ban on tolling interstates, originally enacted to protect drivers from double taxation. Rasmussens survey found that just 22 of americans favor polling tolls on highways for infrastructure maintenance. 55 are opposed to turning the nations interstate into tolling roads. We should think seriously about the impact on drivers if the federal government incentivizes federal lanes, tolls that allow drivers to avoid the congested general purpose lanes. Such schemes, sometimes referred to as lexus lanes, allow those with disposable income to avoid congestion yet leave the great majority of drivers stuck in traffic. Just a few miles from here in virginia, the 495 express lanes, perhaps some members use them, these use congestion pricing with no price cap to ensure traffic flow remains at least 55 Miles Per Hour in express lanes. No traffic reduction requirement exists for the general purpose lanes and most people use, meaning any congestion benefits reside with those who can afford to pay more. In the same vein, the Public PrivatePartnership Contract discourages carpooling, of all things, that directly relieves congestion. While hov vehicles are exempt from tolls, if they exceed 24 of total vehicles, Virginia Department of transportation has to subsidize the lost toll proceeds. This means that the Virginia Department of transportation is incentivized to discourage cart pooling, which is a major instrument for relieving c congesti congestion. Finally, this is a particularly Bipartisan Committee as our recent transportation and infrastructure legislation shows. However, any adverse treatment to transit investment in an infrastructure package would surely break up this partnership. Perhaps we all remember when there was a bill that failed to get to the floor some years ago because it virtually zeroed out transit. Transit is critical to moving workers efficiently it minimizing congestion in urban areas. We need more, not less of it. However, the administration in fy 2018 and its budget continue the shortsided myth that cutting funding will somehow end our transportation funding woes. The transportation to transit is a recipe for congestion. Mr. Chairman, i look forward to hearing from todays witnesses and i thank you for calling this hearing today. Thank you, miss norton. I now turn to representative shuster, chairman of the full committee, for comments. Thank you, mr. Chairman, and i look forward to hearing from all of the witnesses. None of you are a stranger to the committee to doing it in missouri. Your folks are using it every day, and of course, mr. Rogoff, your distinguished career at the d. O. T. , this is a fabulous panel before us. To me building an infrastructure is about jobs, its about efficiency moving products, moving people, as efficiently and low cost as we can, making sure america is competitive and making sure we pay for it. Stop kicking the can down the road so my children or grandchildren or greatgrandchildren will be stuck with a bill for a road thats going to be built in the next couple years. I certainly believe President Trump is a builder. I think this is an area that he understands. He knows how to build things, he knows how to finance things and weve been working closely with the administration trying to figure out the outline, the principles, and we hope to see that soon coming out of the white house. But again, hearing from the stakeholders on your policy and Funding Priorities is absolutely key to all of this. One thing, as i said, i think we can all agree on is we need to fix the Highway Trust Fund. There are solutions on the table. Fixing our trust fund will help our nonfederal partners, and if you look across the country, 29 states have dealt with it over the last four or five years. And i dont believe any state legislature has been wiped out of either party for dealing with the funding stream. I know my state of pennsylvania itself with the republican governor, Republican House and senate dealt with their funding issue. One of the things, i think, just following up with a little bit of what ms. Norton was saying about urban, suburban, rural. The gas tax is a regressive tax and Rural America does pay more. But in the pennsylvania experience, and i think this is true all over the country, im certain its true all over the country, although rural folks may pay more in their gas tax, they get back a lot more. You cant build a roadway in Rural America. You cant build a road in my district that isnt subsidized to the tune of 50, maybe 80 . So my folks are going to fill up more because they use their cars more. But what they get back from the taxpayers, the folks in pittsburgh, i think its a balance and its a balance what they give back. We have to keep that in mind going forward, because that will be the cry. Its aggressive. But those folks who have to travel more to get to work, they benefit greatly, i believe. My district is an example of that, and i think if you go to any degree, unless the folks from the urban areas, their dollars are coming out there to make this country connected. Again, i look forward to hearing from you folks today, and i appreciate you spending your time and experience with us here. I yield back. Thank you, and well now turn to peter fazio. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you to the members and the witnesses who traveled here today. I didnt bring my poster, the poster of 1956 life magazine where the brand new interstate in oklahoma ends at the arkansas border in a farmers field, because arkansas default oed on their promise to build their section until we had a national highway program, then they got 80 of it paid for by the feds. We are talking about linking america together, a vision that dwight david eyisenhower had severen years ago with a national policy. We need the federal investment in fact, its 24 states, not just 21 24 states have stepped up and they have increased revenues principally with a gas tax, a couple areas went with wholesale taxes. They need a federal partner. Its not enough that they did that. And yes, no one lost their election, no one was recalled, so why are we sitting here jawing again today nine months, ten months into the year after the first hearing on our infrastructure needs with no proposals other than a few introduced by people like myself on a bipartisan basis. Two of my bills for infrastructure have Freedom Caucus sponsors and the other has lou ba rethetbaretta on it. We can do it the bipartisan way, but all were doing is talking while the country crumbles. Seriously, lets get to work. The republicans took a very substantive step last week on transportation, on infrastructure. They cut 25 billi 25 billion in budget. So why are we even here pretending. If thats their priority and theyre going to cut it 25 billion, why are they holding a hearing to talk about our needs . You cant meet needs without investment. We havent met our federal gas requirement since 1973. 24 states in the last several years have done it. Were promised a trillion dollars downtown by the white house, and then at the come up with an outline of 200 billion, maybe, sort of, and that might just be ppps. But then the president says he doesnt like ppps. Its time to take the lead and this committee should take the lead. Its time to push proposals out and push the house to act. Thank you, mr. Chairman. I would like to welcome our panel. First we have mrs. P. Patrick mckinney who is the director of transportation. Weve also got mr. James roberts who is president and chief executive officer of granite corporation. Hes here on behalf of the Transportation Coalition. Director of the Building Trade Union and chief executive officer of associated ministries in missouri and hes here on behalf of the association of managers. And with that i would ask unanimous consent that our witnesses full statements be included in the record, and without objection that is so ordered. Since your written testimony is going to be included in its entirety in the record, the committee will make a limit here to five minutes. And with that i start with mr. Kiroda. Thank you for the opportunity to represent the state transportation. My name is Robert Mckenna and i serve as the director of transportation. Today im here on behalf of in fact nafto. As they consider building a transit infrastructure package, please consider the following. The Highway Trust Fund must be concerned with federal uses. Wherever possible, traditional federal authorities should be assigned to states to expedite and streamline product delivery. Priority should be given to transportation investments that secure our nations future for the long term instead of shovelreed did i products. In the existing program structure, including highways yale and transit should be utilized. The fast track was the first longterm funding legislation since 2005. This allows for funding certainty and planning. It also should increase the amount of federal Fund Available that can be matched with state dollars. There was federal funding instability and he was in the difficult position of abandoning maintenance of 26,000 out of 30,000 miles of roadways. Missouri has taken on more financial risk as a state and increased our Capital Budget by 3 billion over five years. I want to thank chairman graves and this committee for your work to pass a fast track. The Committee Notes that in 2015, state and local governments provided 80 of funding applied to highway and bridge programs and 40 of transit programs. I cite these numbers because they disagree that any motion discourages state and local investment. Fast act funding ability shows missouri increased its funding alongside. The trust has enjoyed according to the congressional budget office, Highway Trust Funding is expected to show receipts. Without your action, missouri will be right back in the action of the fast track. 400 million less for the state. Critical maintenance and improvements will stop. We believe Grant Funding rather than federal financial support. The state d. O. T. S continue to finance procurement tools such as public partnerships. We also maintain that financing instruments such as municipal and private activity bonds and infrastructure banks are insufficient to meet most types of transportation investment needs. Any new infrastructure plan should focus on the needs of Rural America. Rural areas remain critical to the nations economic success to the production and movement of goods such as agriculture and manufacturing products. Ashto believes we can improve by moving funds from the federal government to states that wish to participate. We ask congress to consider establishing a project delivery pilot program. This program would develop innovative practices to streamline delivery and achieve outcomes. Missouri has more than the thousand miles of mississippi and missouri rivers. 12. 5 billion of cargo travels up and down those waterways each year. Weve seen how they can pay long term dividends. In the past five years, its led to 53 Million Development in the private sector. The Cost Share Program allows us to enable local communities with state funds priorities. 450 million in state participation has led to the delivery of more than a billion dollars of construction projects. We urge congress to build on a partnership that has flourished between the state Department Ask d. O. T. S. Allowing them to have public input allows partners to Work Together to meet the unique needs of rural and urban areas. Please take the necessary steps to ensure that all modes of transportation have access to additional federal resources that will keep our systems connected and provide economic growth. I want to thank you again for the opportunity to testify today, and im happy to answer any questions. Thanks, mr. Mckinney. Mr. Roberts . Chairman graves, ms. Norton, thank you for holding this hearing. We are a full Service InfrastructureSolutions Provider performing as a general contractor, construction manager firm and Construction Materials producer. Granite teams are happy to have built infrastructures across our great country since 1922. Across america, our Company ImprovesPublic Safety and it continues the gears of commerce. Whether alaska, arizona or california roadways or runway expansions or even the form of Infrastructure Projects of regional interests, we are part of the communities in which we build. Im pleased to appear on behalf of the Transportation Coalition or tcc. The tcc is a partnership of 31 national snoerconstruction unio. The country once again is ready to rally behind a bold infrastructure vision backed by a significant commitment to fund this vision. Taking to the queue after chronic action, they have released funding commitments to our transportation programs in the last few years. Now is the perfect time for leadership to reemerge at the federal level. Lets begin with the trust fund which has a relatively known shortfall which impedes the ability to fund state projects. While it was enacted last year, it is still not fully funded. If states follow past practices, as expected, then some will start scaling back some projects as early as 2019 due to funding uncertainty. The highway and Public Transportation programs in a manner that em phasized financing. We encourage counsel to allocate any resources in existing programs in a way that helps existing programs. The longer we wait to invest, the further we get behind the developing world and safety, equality and efficiency of our transportation, power and water infrastructure. We strongly agree with the 250 houses of representatives that have urged scott in any Transportation System. Tax reform would start a broadbased infrastructure package. The federal field tax has lost 70 of its purchasing power since 1993 is a simple and shortterm fix. However, given the pace of both mobility and technological change, we believe we should put it on the table. Any other highway construct includes resources to eliminate the shortfall. While resources and structure are central components, so, too, is ensuring the Timely Delivery of products. In my written testimony we suggested some tactical reforms. We also believe a reasonable measure to citizen reform is appropriate for todays all too common misuse of environmental laws. These be realized in a timely manner and not held up in red tape. Our society is decades long and puts a human face on our very real need to improve americas infrastructure. Now is the time to act as the work and the investment of previous generations is beginning to crumble right in front of our eyes. We look to you, our countrys leaders, to guide and promote the vision of credital overview in cities and rural areas across america. Delayed maintenance and investment in transportation, water and Power Systems continues to hamper the wellness of our country and decrease our global competitiveness. It is time to address infrastructure issues thavt hav been ignored for decades. I urge you all to take action and become strong leaders, just like our predecessors from over 15 years ago. Now its time for our countrys leadership to once again commit to real longterm solutions. Mr. Chairman, thanks again for inviting the ppp and i look forward to your question. Mr. Booker. Distinguished member norton and distinguished members of this subcommittee, on behalf of the nearly 2 Million Construction professionals that im proud to represent across the united states, id like to thank you to allow me to testify at this subcommittee. It is literally what our numbers do each day. Whether its roads to bridges, public buildings or skyscrapers. Our members for many of our members, the strength of their quality issue. As such, i had like to thank the people in this subcommittee to recently move the highway bill fast act. They will provide certainty to our memories that opportunities would be available. I believe that no one can argue. They believe a big, bold. The question before the subcommittee and the congress as a whole is what should a plan include