Surface Transportation Reauthorization and Reform Act of 2015, October 22, 2015

General Support 

Mr. Chairman, I commend you and Ranking Member DeFazio for working together to bring a six-year reauthorization bill before the full committee today.  I also want to acknowledge the contributions of Highway Subcommittee Chairman Graves and Ranking Member Norton. 

This bill basically provides flat funding with adjustments for inflation, and frankly, it falls short of providing all the investments needed maintain the safety of our existing infrastructure -- much less the new infrastructure America needs to compete globally. I wish we were considering a bolder bill that authorizes truly robust funding that is sustainable over the long-haul.   On the plus side, this bill provides the much-needed certainty that can only come from a long-term bill.  Instead of another short-term patch, this six year bill will give state and local governments the ability to plan good projects and actually build them.

I am also pleased that this bill focuses on freight transportation, which is critical for a state like Indiana and a city like Indianapolis, which is the crossroads of America.  I strongly support the rail provisions in this bill to get Positive Train Control (PTC) implemented and to increase resources for grade crossings.  I am pleased that the hazardous materials provisions will provide more real-time information about hazardous cargo traveling through each state.  I believe that these changes can help save lives.

Today’s bill is far from my ideal or my dream bill.  But I believe it’s the best bill that we can get passed and signed into law this year.  So I’m urging my colleagues to support this bill and let’s rebuild our neglected infrastructure.   I yield back the balance of my time.

General Support of the Manager’s Amendment

General Support - Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the “Big 4” process in this committee and the way you and Ranking Member DeFazio have encouraged each of us to work with our colleagues across the aisle to find and build support for amendments to improve the bill and make changes that can help our communities and our constituents.  I also appreciate your collaboration to include many of our recommendations into this manager’s amendment.

Buy America - I joined my colleague, Mr. Hanna of New York, to submit an amendment that we believe would help improve the implementation of the Buy America provisions in the bill.  I’m disappointed this amendment was not accepted into the manager’s amendment, but I hope that we can work together on ways to improve the Buy America program, which I strongly support.

Mr. Chairman, although I’m disappointed that my amendments were not included in the manager’s amendment, I am urging my colleagues to support the managers amendment.   

Other Amendments

Ribble-Carson - Emergency Vehicles

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank my colleague, Mr. Ribble from Wisconsin, for working with me on this amendment.   This is a good amendment because it helps to expedite the delivery of emergency vehicles to first responders who need them. I’d also like to enter into the record a bipartisan letter from a number of our colleagues in support of this change.  We strongly support a uniform standard under federal law to ensure that fire trucks and other heavy emergency vehicles are exempt from axle weight rules that are designed for commercial vehicles.   This should apply to emergency vehicles in service and for delivery.  By allowing fire trucks other emergency vehicles to be delivered by road, without citations for possibly exceeded the current weight restrictions, the fire departments and localities that need this equipment can avoid the freight delivery fees which can add several thousand dollars to already significant costs.  As the Ranking Member of the Emergency Management Subcommittee, and as a former former cop and first responder, I believe we should do everything possible to get fire-fighting and life-saving equipment delivered as expeditiously as possible.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this common-sense amendment.

Rokita-Carson Amendment – Donor States

Mr. Chairman, I join my fellow Hoosier, Mr. Rokita, in offering an amendment that will help our home state of Indiana.  This amendment is very similar to one offered by our Senate colleagues, Jeff Flake of Arizona and Joe Donnelly of Indiana, in the other body.   Our amendment would restore an “equity guarantee” provision to ensure funding fairness.

Historically, Indiana has been a “donor state” and since the creation of the Federal Highway Program, Hoosiers have sent half-a-billion dollars to other states to subsidize their road construction and maintenance.   And if our roads were in great shape, I might not complain.  But, unfortunately, that’s not the case.  Just this summer, a portion of I-65, which connects Indianapolis to Chicago, was closed for an extended period for emergency repairs to prevent a bridge collapse.  The Indiana Department of Transportation estimates that we need an additional $260 million dollars annually to properly maintain our roads – this is far above current state and federal funding levels.  

SAFETEA-LU, the last six-year reauthorization bill, included an “Equity Bonus Program” which guaranteed that each state received back 92% of its share of contributions to the Highway Trust Fund.  Since this provision expired in 2009, Indiana has slipped backward, and today only receives 91% of its share of contributions to the Highway Trust Fund.  The entire Indiana delegation wrote to our Chairman and Ranking Member asking for a 95% rate of return on our state’s share of contributions. Instead, the bill includes at 95% guarantee on the amount of contributions.  Unfortunately, this isn’t the same thing.  The difference would result in an additional $38 million dollars for Indiana.  Our amendment will ensure that the rate is calculated correctly.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment would adjust the funding formula so that donor states like Indiana are treated a bit more equitably.  I know we don’t want to completely reopen the formula debate, but this is a real concern for Indiana.  So I hope that you’ll consider working with us on ways to address these concerns.  

Carson-Waters Amendment – Transportation Goals for Urban Communities

Mr. Chairman, I’m offering this amendment on behalf of my colleague, Ms. Waters of California, who is not a member of this committee, but she is a passionate advocate for transportation resources for underserved areas.  This amendment reflects the Integrated Transportation and Economic Development Act, which was introduced earlier this month, and which I was proud to join as an original cosponsor.  This bill simply adds one new factor to the existing federal goals to ensure that economically distressed urban communities are not left behind.  Currently, the Federal Aid-Highway Program includes goals for safety, infrastructure condition, congestion mitigation, system reliability, freight movement and economic vitality, environmental sustainability, and reduced project delays.  The program also establishes performance measures that require states to report on their progress.  “Freight movement and economic vitality” is defined as “To improve the national freight network, strengthen the ability of rural communities to access national and international trade markets, and support regional economic development.”  But there are no goals in this program that are focused on ensuring that economically distressed urban communities aren’t overlooked or left out.

Mr. Chairman, this amendment does not cost any additional money, but I think it’s important that urban communities and rural communities are both included in our national goals.  Since rural communities are specifically included in the national goals, I think it’s just a matter of fairness to make this small but important change.

Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment.