Special Report: Federal Transportation Update
Senate Committee Approves Six-Year Highway Bill
On Wednesday, June 24, the Senate Environment and Public Works
(EPW) Committee approved a much-anticipated six-year highway
reauthorization bill. The legislation, entitled the Developing a
Reliable and Innovative Vision for the Economy Act, or the DRIVE
Act, was cleared by the committee on a 20-0 vote.
Sponsored by Senate EPW Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-OK)
and Ranking Member Barbara Boxer (D-CA), the bill (S 1647) would
authorize over $277 billion for surface transportation projects
for fiscal years 2016 through 2021, including over $257 million
for the Federal-Aid Highway Program. The spending level equates
to a roughly three percent annual increase above the amounts
authorized in current law (MAP-21), or an average growth rate of
$5.3 billion per year.
Drive Act
It should be noted that the DRIVE Act does not include a funding
mechanism to pay for future transportation spending. In the
Senate, the job of identifying a revenue source belongs to the
Finance Committee, which is currently examining various options
for funding road, safety, transit, bicycle, and other federal
transportation projects (please see section below on recent
congressional hearings regarding financing).
In general, the DRIVE Act would maintain the structure of MAP-21
while building upon some of the reforms that were approved by
Congress as part of the 2012 Act. With regard to funding for
local bridges – a key CSAC priority – the bill would require
states to spend a certain percentage of their Surface
Transportation Program (STP) allocations on bridges that are not
located on the National Highway System (NHS). Although MAP-21
created a funding “set-aside” for local bridges that are neither
located on the NHS nor on the Federal-Aid Highway system
(referred to as “off-system” bridges), the Act did not require
states to spend any money on local bridges that are off of the
NHS but on a Federal-Aid Highway.
During the committee’s consideration of the bill, Senator Kirsten
Gillibrand (D-NY) offered, but withdrew, an amendment that would
have made all bridges that are not a part of the NHS eligible for
funding under the National Highway Performance Program (NHPP).
The language is similar to the senator’s amendment from the
previous Congress, which was ultimately included in
then-Chairwoman Boxer’s MAP-21 reauthorization legislation.
It should be noted that Senator Gillibrand intends to offer the
amendment on the floor of the Senate. For its part, CSAC will be
working to modify the DRIVE Act to make the expenditure of NHPP
funds for local bridges a requirement.
The Senate EPW bill includes a number of other provisions that
are of interest to California’s counties, including: language
designed to further streamline the transportation project
delivery process; a requirement that states obligate increased
funding for rural road safety projects if the fatality rate on
rural roads does not decrease and the state fatality rate exceeds
the national average; and, updates to the Transportation
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) program.
It is unclear when the DRIVE Act will be considered on the Senate
floor. While EPW Committee leaders would like to see the upper
chamber debate the legislation prior to the August recess, there
are a number of complicating factors that may thwart the
expeditious consideration of a long-term bill.
House and Senate Committees Hold Hearings on Transportation
Financing
The congressional committees with jurisdiction over revenue
matters held hearings this past week to examine options for
financing a new long-term transportation bill. The hearings,
which took place in the House Ways and Means Committee and the
Senate Finance Committee, were the most recent in a series of
hearings designed to help inform committee members as they
wrestle with finding a consensus on how to pay for future
transportation spending.
While the focal point of the forums was examining financing
mechanisms for a multi-year highway bill, much of the discussion
centered around the need to identify a funding source for another
short-term bailout of the Highway Trust Fund (HTF). With the
latest extension of MAP-21 slated to expire on July 31, it
appears inevitable that Congress will need to, once again,
temporarily extend the Act. At this point, however, key members
remain deeply divided over how to pay for a short-term funding
patch.
Likewise, lawmakers remain far apart on how best to fund road and
bridge projects as part of any multi-year highway package. While
using taxes from corporate profit repatriation is an option that
has gained support among some members of Congress in recent
weeks, Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT), for
one, has expressed opposition to using revenues from repatriation
to pay for infrastructure projects. Additionally, several
prominent business organizations and conservative groups have
come out in strong opposition to such a plan.
Looking ahead, lawmakers will have very little time to reach
agreement on another HTF bailout before current spending
authority expires. In fact, with members heading into a weeklong
Independence Day recess, Congress will have less than four weeks
to pass an extension of MAP-21. The prospects of a battle over
the source and duration of a subsequent extension raises the
likelihood that efforts to pass a long-term bill will be delayed
until the fall or beyond.
House Panel Examines Rural Transportation Needs
On Wednesday, June 24, the House Transportation & Infrastructure
Committee’s Highways and Transit Subcommittee held a hearing
entitled “Meeting the Transportation Needs of Rural America.” The
panel received input from several stakeholders, including
Commissioner Bob Fox of Renville County, MN, who testified on
behalf of the National Association of Counties (NACo).
While there were a number of topics discussed at the hearing,
rural road safety and the need for adequate investment in local
bridges was a primary theme. As part of his testimony,
Commissioner Fox called on Congress to make more federal funding
available to locally owned on-system and off-system bridges,
while highlighting the need for the next transportation bill to
prioritize investment in high-risk rural roads.
Fiscal Year 2016 Transportation-HUD Appropriations
On Thursday, June 25, the Senate Appropriations Committee
approved a $55.6 billion fiscal year 2016 Transportation-Housing
and Urban Development (T-HUD) spending bill. The committee passed
the measure by a vote of 20-10, clearing the legislation for
Senate floor action.
Among other things, the Senate T-HUD bill would authorize $40.26
billion to be spent on the Federal-aid Highway Program – or level
funding – contingent upon the enactment of a new transportation
authorization measure. The spending package also would free up
$2.4 billion in unused earmarks, which could be spent on other
transportation projects.
Additionally, the legislation would provide $500 million for the
Department of Transportation’s TIGER grant program, equal to the
fiscal year 2015 enacted level.
It should be noted that the committee adopted an amendment by
Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL) that would allow longer trucks on
the nation’s roadways. The controversial amendment, which was
cleared on a narrow 16-14 vote, would permit the length of
commercial trucks to increase from 28 feet to 33 feet.
While the language is similar to truck-length provisions that are
included in the House-passed T-HUD spending bill, Senator
Shelby’s amendment would provide states with administrative
flexibility, including the ability to prohibit longer trucks from
driving on local roads and allowing states to seek certain
exemptions. The amendment also would require DOT to examine
three-years worth of crash data to determine whether 33-foot
trailers pose a greater danger than 28-foot trailers.