Vote to Extend Now Rather than Later

by AsphaltPro Magazine Editor Sandy Lender

I’m a pretty optimistic person. I do ascribe to the theory that “only the paranoid survive,” but that’s more of a survival mantra than a viewpoint. When it comes to the transportation funding options floating around Congress these days, I’d say my take on things mirrors a mix of paranoia, preparation, hope, prayer, survival plans—a cornucopia of caution, if you will. When it comes to Congress, I don’t often feel comfortable.

For instance, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) is what I’d call a loon.

She presented a nearly $340 billion plan ($339.2B over six years to be precise) for surface transportation legislation from her Senate Environment and Public Works Committee last week that would authorize funding for six years. The mind-boggling aspect of her plan, given all the talk of the Highway Trust Fund an

d reliable funding during the past few YEARS, is its lack of funding suggestions.

The woman went on record saying that’s the Finance Committee’s job.

Really, Babs? Can no one follow through anymore? Does no one take responsibility for the schemes they create? You sound like Ray LaHood. (with less whining)

As if the $340B price tag—and its football-field-size gap from what The House has been murmuring about—isn’t enough to make a reader stop and say, “Wait, will that pass in today’s climate?” here’s something else of interest she’s suggested for state departments of transportation (DOTs) that are trying to make long-term plans concerning development, redevelopment and repair.

Borrow what you need.

Thousands of former homeowners can comment on this option. Boxer recently joined the cheerleading squad to expand TIFIA (the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act). This act gives low-interest loans to states for their federal transportation projects. Apparently, Congress has magically increased TIFIA’s lending power from $122 million annually to $1 billion annually. Boxer encourages state DOTs to get on board the housing market—I mean the transportation market train now to take care of their long-term projects.

Look, no one has the crystal-encrusted magic wand that makes all members of Congress—especially the freshmen members who don’t think they have a stake in transportation legislation—suddenly work in blissful harmony to pass a highway authorization bill within the next four to six months.

Senator Boxer has done her Democrat best to present a plan for which someone else will need to prep a funding plan, and John Mica (R-Fla.) will need to raise his sights to reality to get a little closer to her plan. Then everyone else will need to work in concert to draft a bill that gives the transportation industry the money and the confidence it needs to repair the infrastructure that’s been floundering during the highway bill extensions the past couple of years and to build the roadways that ease congestion (thus pollution) and assist economic recovery where necessary.

If no one in Congress thinks that bill can pass in the next four months, they should go ahead and vote for the SAFETEA-LU extension now, rather than waiting for it to come up to its next deadline in September. Then state DOTs can at least plan for the immediate future and immediate, emergency needs.

(Opinions are those of AsphaltPro Magazine Editor Sandy Lender.)
Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, Highway Trust Fund, Highway Bill, TIFIA

What Comes After CONEXPO?

(From the February 2011 editor's note in The AsphaltPro Magazine)

This issue of The AsphaltPro Magazine is dedicated to two things: technology and CONEXPO-CON/AGG 2011. I’ve noticed that, similar to the turn of a new century, winding up to CONEXPO sends the construction industry into a sort of burst of technological advancement. There’s more on that concept in this issue’s technology roundup article “Automate Your Production Control” on page 18, so I’d like to concentrate on the “event” side of things here.

With technology and automation comes the promise of doing things more efficiently, more quickly, with better quality, with better control, with precision and with confidence. Whether it’s mixing asphalt at the plant, loading it safely from the silo, tracking it by the minute from Point A to Point Z, or placing it at the perfect depth and rolling it to the perfect density, there’s an app for that. What I wonder is will there be a need for that?

What are we going to do after the excitement of CONEXPO dies down and we all stare at the messes in our research & development departments. Technology has been on everyone’s collective mind as we rush toward the deadline of March 22—and much earlier if you’re shipping the final product out to a stand in Vegas.

Drayage invoices and credit card statements make for a financial hangover that puts corporate bosses in a foul mood. They don’t feel so technologically-motivated after CONEXPO, do they? Who carries the load then? Who’s going to come up with the next great idea that provides a super funding idea for the transportation construction industry?

Ah, yes. After CONEXPO, we still have to fight for our right to support the nation. The President’s State of the Union address Jan. 25 suggested he’s all for taking care of our crumbling infrastructure. He’s all about getting people back to work fixing our roads, bridges and transportation network.

The problem is he’s got this grand idea that we can do all that and build a bunch of high-speed trains that few people are interested in while Congress is going behind our backs with secret ballots to appropriate federal highway funds for whatever special need they come up with. AEM’s Dennis Slater and AASHTO’s John Horsley can get up the morning after such a speech and say they’ll hold the President accountable for his promises (and they did), but who in this country believes that man can get anything besides stump speeches done in the next two years?

It’s Congress we have to appeal to.

It’s Congress we have to write to.

It’s Congress that has to create a reliable highway bill this spring.

It’s Congress that has to pass a strong, fully funded highway bill that contains provisions that keep special interest groups—such as Congress—from undercutting the Highway Trust Fund on a whim.

It’s Congress that we have to get in touch with and get in touch with right now.

You all saw the timeline Jay Hansen outlined in this magazine in December. Get on the ball! The President releases his budget in early February, about the time this magazine hits the streets. By the time dandelions start blooming in the cracks in your concrete sidewalks, Congress needs to have a transportation authorization bill drafted. That’s not a lot of time for members of this job-creating force of ours to get ideas in front of the drafters.

Have you informed your representatives of just how important it is to improve roads and highways? As sad as it sounds, you also have to inform them of how important it is to guarantee funding for improving those roads and highways so your state can make long-term, realistic, efficient plans. Stop-gap measures don’t cut it anymore. This is where we put technology and intelligence to work.

I asked you what we do after CONEXPO. We can’t wait until after CONEXPO. You and I have to pick up the phone today. After CONEXPO, what does all our fancy technology matter?

Stay Safe,
Sandy Lender (sandy at theasphaltpro dot com)
Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, Federal Highway Funding, CONEXPO-CON/AGG, automation, technology

Let's Sue Someone in 2011

(from the January 2011 editor's note in The AsphaltPro Magazine)

A new year always rings in with people asking what your New Year’s Resolution will be. I find that irritating 99 percent of the time. As a magazine editor, I have goals and deadlines every day of my life. As a member of the asphalt industry, I have additional goals that involve legislation and letters to city planners. Why would I add more? One of the goals I’d like to specify this January is to talk less about this obnoxious funding issue we’ve been facing the past few years. Aren’t you sick of it? Aren’t you ready for a big ol’ lawsuit to put it to rest?


Think about it.

Roads need to be fixed. The entities that own the roads must be responsible for fixing them or the motorists getting injured are going to sue the pants off those entities. (Pardon my glibness; it’s a function of my frustration with the subject.) I have to believe that once the first multi-million dollar lawsuit hits the courts for a federally-funded highway that didn’t get federally fixed because Congress couldn’t gets its collective act together on funding, we’ll see faster action. What’s the saying? It takes money to make money. For our purposes, I think it takes a discussion of loss of money to make money.

Perhaps that’s cynical, but it’s better than sending zombies from the concrete industry’s ill-planned pollutant-reactions to frighten our representatives into passing meaningful legislation. (See last month’s editorial column.)

I mean, the House did vote in a landslide 212 to 206 victory to approve H.R. 3082 back on Dec. 8, which would have continued appropriations for all of FY11. That means all federal government operations, including federal surface transportation and aviation programs, would get extended authorization through Sept. 30. Status quo, people. Status quo. That should be good enough for government work. Then the Senate stepped in and said, “wait, we’d like to add these 7,000 special items right here.” Enter government progress, right?

So we ended up with more hashing and re-hashing of the same old argument about spending and money and funding and earmarks. In the end, the continuing resolution will only carry our working government through March 4. Name one state DOT that can plan with that.

James Oberstar, ousted rep from Minnesota, got up Dec. 8 to say he’d rather we were voting to approve an adequate transportation bill that funds a real highway plan. Amen, Brother! As stated on the http://transportation.house.gov website, Oberstar stated that H.R. 3082:

• rescinds all remaining highway earmarks designated in the Surface Transportation and Uniform Relocation Assistance Act of 1987 (STURAA) (P.L. 100-17);

• rescinds all remaining highway earmarks designated in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA) (P.L. 102-240);

• rescinds all highway projects designated in the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA 21) (P.L. 105-178) that have not obligated at least 10 percent of the funds authorized for the project; and

• rescinds all High Priority Project program funds authorized by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU) (P.L. 109-59) that were not designated for use on a specific project.

What’s left? Apparently, we have $42.3 billion for federal-aid highway programs and $10.5 billion for federal transit programs. I think we’re all aware that that’s not enough to maintain the current system, let alone allow DOTs to plan ahead for serious maintenance projects or congestion-relief projects down the line.

It looks like 2011 is going to be another spot-check kind of year for industry. I encourage you to call on your Congressmen about funding, but I’m sick and tired of harping on it. I don’t want to spend the next nine months of FY11 haranguing readers to do what should have been done two years ago. This industry needed a long-term authorization plan, and a reliable system to pay for it, long before H.R. 3082 rescinded items and offered meager droppings from Congress’s table. If you’ve not already made the decision to participate in this May’s legislative fly-in to discuss this with your representatives, I can’t imagine a few sarcastic comments in my frustrated editorial column will convince you that you need to add it to your calendar.

Maybe you need to fall back to Plan B: Find someone who’s already had an accident or lost a loved one on a deteriorated federal roadway. Convince them to sue the pants off one of those Congressmen.

Let’s get to work.

Stay Safe,
Sandy Lender (sandy at theasphaltpro dot com)
Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, Federal Highway Funding

The Man Said No

With a concept similar to what state DOTs have dealt with for the past couple of years, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie made a decision this week. He decided not to move forward with the Access to the Region’s Core (ARC) project.

ARC was a large, multi-billion-dollar rail tunnel project that would move commuters from New York to New Jersey and back again. The published goal was to reduce congestion.

While that’s a nice goal, it left me with a few questions concerning its proposed drop-off points. I felt sympathy for the taxpayers who wanted New York’s DOT to foot a commensurate amount of the bill with New York’s benefits from the project, and with those who wanted more important stops added to the train’s destination. It looked as though political haggling would then delay a project that the higher-ups needed to ramrod through right away.

U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, who seems more interested in where we have our hands when we’re driving than where we’ll get funding for making roads safer, made a special plea to Governor Christie earlier in October to keep the project alive. You see, the feds were only paying part of the bill, yet seemed to hang their political hats on the project’s success.

According to the Oct. 27 post on TransportationNation.org bemoaning Christie’s economic decision and giving LaHood yet another place to whine, “FTA does not require cash commitments to deal with such contingencies, and only requires that a project sponsor identify a non-Federal funding stream that could be called upon to cover contingency costs.”

Apparently, Christie didn’t want to search for additional funding streams. He didn’t want the offered loan from the USDOT Railroad and Rehabilitation Improvement Financing program. He didn’t want to set up a public-private partnership assuming some of the risk.

I wonder if he figured he’d be looking for streams to fund the drying federal well. Think about it. If you’re counting on funds from an unreliable national trough, why move forward with a $9 billion-plus project that someone has already said might creep over the $10 billion mark if a few small bits and pieces go awry?

So Governor Christie has made a sound business decision based on what all 50 states have been basing infrastructure decisions on for the past couple of years: lack of long-term funding reliability from the top. Where’s the reauthorization plan to back up the infrastructure plan LaHood wants Christie to sign off on? Ain’t seen it yet.

Let’s get a long-term authorization plan for transportation infrastructure in place before we badmouth the planners for not planning ahead. The project that Christie had no confidence in could have reduced congestion. It could have provided jobs and stimulated the economy exponentially because that’s what construction projects do. But construction projects don’t materialize out of thin air. They require reliable funding sources. I think Governor Christie gets that.

Tags: ARC, Governor Christie, reauthorization, federal highway funding

What Nice Rhetoric You Offer, Mr. President

By Sandy Lender, Editor, AsphaltPro

At a Labor Day celebration earlier this week, President Obama unveiled a surprise for road-builders. He has a six-year plan for re-building roads and rail. Apparently, he doesn’t have a plan to PAY for re-building roads and rail, but he’d like to see us fix up 150,000 miles of road and put down 4,000 miles of track.

Not too shabby.

I’d like to suggest to my boss, whom many of you know, that we just hire some extra editorial staff, bump up the pages of AsphaltPro to about 102 per issue, add three safety features per issue, and tack on some producer and contractor profiles per issue so we can showcase more “here’s how your peers can help you succeed” information. Wouldn’t that be cool? Who cares how it gets paid for!? My plan is what’s important. Now aren’t all you readers behind me? You’d help me get the extra staff elected, right?

Not too shabby.

The fact of the matter is 20 percent of the construction industry is out of work right now. Fact check that at any unemployment, ARRA, or construction resource you like. We’ve all got the same figures. During President Obama’s speech Monday, he called it “nearly one in five construction workers.” (For non-industry readers visiting the blog, that number will see its seasonal increase this winter.) The scary thing is this: folks are afraid of how we’re going to pay to keep roads and bridges safe, thus the 80 percent of workers employed right now and the President’s strategy for transportation are endangered.

I think it would help if we could get it through representatives’ minds that user fees and taxes are different beasts, and they need to educate their constituents on that fact. Here’s an example:

I have a friend named Joe who owns a small red car. Joe purchases gas for that car regularly, thus pays a user fee for the Highway Trust Fund. Joe has a friend whom we’ll call Pete who does not own a car. Pete does not have a driver’s license. (Pete isn’t a conspiracy theorist, but he does live “off the grid,” if you catch my drift. In fact, I’m not using his real name.) Pete never pays the user fee for the Highway Trust Fund because Pete does not buy gas to walk around on our sidewalks and streets. When Pete has a doctor appointment in Miami, he borrows Joe’s little red car and has a friend, whom we’ll call Dolores, drive him across the state. At that time, Pete buys gas for the car. He’s using the system and paying the user fee that day.

Do you see? The gasoline user fee is not a tax. Pete doesn’t pay it when he’s not using it. Neither does anyone else who opts to ride a bike or walk around or take free transportation.

Is that how we’ll pay for the President’s new transportation strategy? Or will Congress, already hesitant to talk about “taxes,” shoot it down? You can visit NAPA's site to get more information. Also check out a popular Congressional opinion on tax increases.

Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, Federal Highway Funding, transportation, user fee

Give Us Something We Can Rely On

(from the August/September 2010 Editor's Note of AsphaltPro Magazine)

For quite some time now I’ve suggested that raising the gasoline user fee to supplement the Highway Trust Fund would be problematic. I’ve encouraged members of the asphalt industry to write in with their ideas for funding; I’ve offered some painful ideas of my own. Now, I’m disappointed to say, the secretary of transportation has made what I consider an irresponsible announcement for someone in his position by stating “raising the gas tax is not an option.”

How dare he slam that door?

He’s falling back on the already disproved concept of toll roads and the not-yet-disproved Obama plan for highway funding. I cringe. I assume I don’t have to explain to the AsphaltPro audience the problems with relying on tolls for funding—or the sudden detriment to parallel corridors and those corridors’ pavement maintenance plans when tolls are set in place.

We can all agree the current gasoline user fee doesn’t cover Highway Trust Fund needs. You don’t need me to tell you it’s been losing “currency” for years due to inflation and, more recently, due to fewer miles driven and ethanol additives, etc.

What the trust fund needs is a good shot in the arm with a cost-of-living tax hike. Whether or not such a beast can be conjured during this economy is for the pundits to debate. Although I have an opinion on the matter that’s south of positive, I’m not ready to go down without a fight. There are people who can read a graph, if you present it to them logically. There are people who will understand that the gasoline user fee is a deficit-neutral item that is truly a user fee. If you don’t use the road today, you don’t pay the fee on gasoline today. It’s pretty simple.

Unfortunately, the loss of the gasoline user fee’s effectiveness coupled with Congress’s inaction on a long-term reauthorization bill has gutted infrastructure planning and expenditures. Jay Hansen of NAPA pointed out during a transportation coalition webinar at the end of July that this means highway jobs and conditions are at risk. Jobs are at risk to the tune of 870,000 people over the next two years. That’s something your representatives need to know. They have a chance to save their constituents’ jobs if they’ll just get on the ball and get a user fee increase and a reauthorization bill taken care of.

While we’re on the topic, Congress has bandied about a new transportation bill that throws another $4 billion on top of the expired SAFETEA-LU’s allotted monies. Again, where does the funding come from? We love to see Congress finally give attention to an industry that can rescue the economy and create lasting jobs from one end of the construction spectrum to the other, but we must enforce the idea that this industry of superheroes deserves to have a strong, reliable, lasting bank account behind it. Congress needs to put in place not just the rosy idea of planned projects that make a safe, positive transportation infrastructure, but also the resources that make the building of those very real and solid projects possible.

We must enforce the idea that long-term planning at the state level happens when agencies and owners can rely on the money promised in a transportation bill. The bill must be lasting, it must be stable, it must be adequate for the times. Otherwise, a soft and mushy set of half-plans and half-promises leaves unsteady work orders on tap. What Congress must do is deliver a strong and reliable bill backed by a strong and reliable funding stream so we, as an industry, can deliver a strong and reliable work force with strong and reliable infrastructure for the future.

Have you shared this message with your representatives? Do they know how important their actions are when it comes to transportation funding legislation? I encourage you to fill them in. Please visit NAPA’s website to download toolkits for contacting your representatives. Also, be sure to take advantage of the brief window you have with your representatives while they’re in their home districts as this issue of AsphaltPro hits your desk. They return to Washington soon and you can reach them in their offices there after Sept. 13.

Stay Safe,
Sandy Lender
Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, Highway Funding, reauthorization

Highway Funding from a Local POV

Your AsphaltPro Magazine editor, Sandy Lender, was invited to prepare an article for a Southwest Florida magazine, Business Currents, on the topic of highway funding after ranting about the Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act to the editor one evening. (You will find information about the Kerry-Lieberman bill in the posts below.)

If you're interested, you can read the locally-slanted piece titled "Highway Funding Affects You, Your Clients" at the Greater Naples Chamber of Commerce website, or try this shortened URL:

http://tinyurl.com/SandyHwyFunding


Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, Sandy Lender, Highway Funding

Sammy Hagar Funding Initiative

(from the June/July 2010 Editor's Note of AsphaltPro Magazine)
I ask you to bear with me for just a moment while I plagiarize Sammy Hagar.

Go on & write me up for 125
Post my face, wanted dead or alive
Take my license & all that jive
I can’t drive 55!

(Many thanks go out to Steve Jackson of NB West Contracting, Missouri, for sending this shot of himself with Sammy at a show July 1, 2010! Rock on!)

There’s a reason I’m channeling ’80s hair band rock today. I’ve got an idea. You see, I read an article online about a month or so ago claiming county police officers were stepping up their diligence in detaining and ticketing speeding motorists in an effort to make up languishing budgets in our current economic distress. Of course the obligatory quote from a sheriff suggested that officers are always diligent in keeping motorways safe, thus there’s no increase in ticketing these days. (Statistics showed otherwise, but that’s not the point of this editorial piece.) The point of this editorial piece is to suggest we make good use of increased diligence in all state highway patrols.

I would like to suggest all speeding fines be increased dramatically.

I would further like to suggest that a significant percentage of all speeding fines assessed by state highway patrol officers be allocated specifically to highway funding.

I would further like to suggest that the imagined “10-mph grace” allowed for motorists to travel in excess of posted limits be decreased. This will not only enhance motorists’ safety on our nation’s roadways, it will add funding to much-needed highway building and maintenance coffers in every state.

Now, I have to admit that it pains me to write this editorial. I’m guilty of driving too fast most of the time. The only time I truly slow down is when passing a work zone because I’m aware of the danger to workers there. You can imagine the irritation I cause for following drivers when I approach a work zone and start slowing in accordance to the law.

I-75 runs up and down the state of Florida with a posted speed limit of 70 mph. Drivers run up and down I-75 at a clip of 80 mph on a good day. We hit 90 when we can get away with it. Surely members of the state highway patrol are as aware of this as the rest of the driving public. Why aren’t they out there slowing us to something safer? Why aren’t the citizens of Florida sharing the profits in the form of safer roads? Yes, a percentage goes into the funding coffers now. Apparently, it’s not enough.

The FAA funding bill faces its headaches that spell another delay this July 3. The Lieberman-Kerry bill dooms potential user fee increases later this year (see the post below for more on that). Current measures fall short of necessary funding for infrastructure maintenance. What’s the nation to do to keep commerce lively and safety in check?

It’s time to hike up the consequences for speeding and hike up the benefits for the highway system. The next time a Lamborghini races a Corvette—and, yes, that happens down here in Collier County—toward Miami, a string of Florida’s finest should be waiting in ambush to hand them citations that will make my Charger’s smug—and easy—drop to 70 mph feel smoother. (Or maybe I just have to live with Dodge’s funky transmission problem that the dealer refused to fix while the car was under the original warranty…)

As Mr. Hagar says, it’s difficult to drive those slower speeds, and therein lies the genius of this funding plan. Speeders can’t keep their feet off the accelerators. One of those crazy TV channels even has a show about it. We’ll be getting funding from here until the end of time, no matter what kind of car the motorist drives or what kind of fuel he/she puts in it. Now who wants to take the idea to his senator? You know Ray LaHood will sign off on it if you add in a no-cell-phone-use-while-driving clause.

Stay Safe,
Sandy Lender, Editor
Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, highway funding

Where are Those Transportation Monies Going?

Late last week, Senators John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) introduced the American Power Act (APA). I wish these things would have more transparent names. This particular bill could be called the Gouge Energy Companies Until They Gouge Consumers at the Gas Pump Act (GECUTGCGPA). The acronym would sound a bit like hacking up something unpleasant.

Fitting.

What the Kerry-Lieberman bill proposes is that GHG emissions in the transportation sector would be addressed by mandating oil companies purchase carbon allowances at a price set during quarterly auctions. To offset the hit in profits, companies would probably pass those price-problems along to consumers at the gas pump. Sounds about like a motor fuels user fee, doesn’t it? Why on earth would any tax-paying, red-blooded American vote for a user fee increase to help get monies into the transportation fund later on down the road if he or she is already feeling the effect of a user fee increase at the pump? Presents a conundrum, doesn’t it?

As it turns out, Kerry and Lieberman’s bill will allocate a bit of money to transportation funds, but it’s paltry at best. It’s not enough to keep current systems solvent (and that includes the mass-transit leeches sucking money from the parts of transportation that move our economy). So there’s no time like the present to get on the phone to make your voice heard in Congress. Let your representatives know that we need ALL transportation monies funneled to transportation resources.

I invite you to visit NAPA's government affairs page to get more info and to get connected with your Senator today. When you talk to your Senators and their staff, please discuss the following:

* The amount of funding for the Highway Trust Fund in the Kerry-Lieberman bill is inadequate.

* Will they contact Senators John Kerry (D-MA) and Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and other Senate leaders to insist that 100 percent of new fees on motor fuels detailed in the bill should be returned to the transportation sector and invested under a multi-year authorization bill.

* Explain to your Senators that because the bill will raise the price of motor fuels, it will be almost impossible to finance a long-term authorization bill unless a much larger portion of the APAs revenues are dedicated to the Highway Trust Fund.


Tags: highway trust fund, Kerry-Lieberman

HR 2847 Progress

Today H.R. 2847 passed 217-207 in the House.
It's now been kicked back to the Senate.

Get a nice summary of the bill (again) and an update on its status as of late in the day March 4 at this AASHTO link.

The "Hire Bill" extends funding for 9 months March 17. Story at AASHTO link.

Tags: Federal Highway Funding, HR 2847, hire bill

The Next Step in Funding

As reported last night in the post titled "Funding Wars" below, H.R. 4691 passed in the Senate, allowing current road projects to resume (among other important issues for Americans). For the transportation construction industry, this gives a mere one-month window of opportunity to work on safeguarding the nation's roadways and economy. It's not enough for planning or future safeguarding. Luckily, representatives will debate something to keep the industry (and motorists) alive through the summer. As reported at AASHTO:

"The House is expected to debate HR 2847, a jobs bill amended last week by the Senate to include a 10-month Highway Trust Fund authorization extension, $19.5 billion in additional General Fund revenue to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent into next year, restoration of highway funding this year to $42 billion from a reduced level of $30 billion, and additional federal support for states and municipalities who want to issue Build America Bonds to finance infrastructure construction."

This is still a short-term fix for a long-term industry and economic question, but it offers at least a stop-gap measure while legislators look for real answers to pay for America's infrastructure requirements.

Tags: Highway Trust Fund, General Fund, HR 2847, infrastructure

Funding Wars

As the fight for Federal Highway Funding rages on, AsphaltPro brings you some links worth reviewing. Most of our readers are well-informed on the issue already, so here are the latest updates on what's happening. Follow editor Sandy Lender on Twitter as well. More links will be added as they deserve attention.

First, I'll announce that HR 4691, Temporary Extension Act of 2010, just passed (9:16 p.m. ET) 78 for, 19 against. It looks like inspectors can return to work, thus road projects can resume. Other updates to be posted as the usual pundits post them tomorrow and beyond.

To follow: older posted items that give play-by-play
CQ Politics, A White House play for attention/relevance
AASHTO, More of the same rhetoric with extra gloom-n-doom thrown in
Federal News Radio, Explains the stalemate and furloughs succinctly
AASHTO followup to HR 4691 passage, good introduction of HR 2847
AASHTO's summary of HR 2847's status as of March 4
AASHTO's report of the HIRE Bill's passage March 17

Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, Federal Highway Funding, stalemate, furloughs, Sandy Lender

Ch-ch-ch-ch-Changes in Funding

(from the January 2010 Editor's note in AsphaltPro Magazine)

Please allow me to plagiarize for just a moment from the fabulous David Bowie.

Ch-ch-ch-ch-Changes
(Turn and face the strain)
Ch-ch-Changes
Oh, look out you rock 'n rollers
Ch-ch-ch-ch-Changes

My digression into 1970’s glam rock can be explained by the changes around us. Nearly everyone you talk to is making resolutions about turning over a new leaf. It’s an exciting time for renewal and new starts.

The big change on everyone’s mind in our industry is the funding Congress will bless us with through a set of bills passed in mid-December. The first—House Joint Resolution 64, which extends Defense Department appropriations and surface transportation authorization for about a week to keep projects and the economy from grinding to a sudden and frightening halt—will be a faded memory by the time this issue mails.

HR 3326 is up next. It’s a good stop-gap measure that keeps projects running and workers employed while Congress works toward something more permanent for jobs and the economy. This is the Defense appropriations bill and it extends the surface transportation authorization until Feb. 28.

By that time, HR 2847 should have kicked in. That’s the jobs bill and it’s set until Sept. 30. I’m convinced industry will remain vigilant in lobbying Congress to put a more permanent, reliably-funded transportation plan in place before the September deadline rolls around.

The jobs bill—HR 2847—is the one to keep track of. AASHTO reports that the jobs bill will give industry $53.3 billion for use in fiscal year 2010 for SAFETEA-LU programs in the areas of highways ($41.546 billion), highway safety ($729 million), motor carrier safety ($550 million) and mass transit ($10.508 billion). It will also help out the Highway Trust Fund by 1) putting $19.5 billion into the fund ($14.7 for the highway account and $4.8 for the mass transit account) and 2) changing federal law to allow the fund to collect interest in the future. According to AASHTO, the Transportation & Infrastructure committee says that gain of interest could mean a gain of between $500 million and $1 billion per year. That seems like a pretty big gap in projections, but this is all conjecture right now based on fuel taxes. Remember that when fuel prices rise consumers curb their driving habits. And that takes me back to the idea of lobbying for a more permanent, reliably-funded transportation plan.

There’s more money in HR 2847 earmarked for extra job creation. Also, an important note that AASHTO pointed out about this bill is a provision for states: the bill waives state matching requirements for federal surface transportation grants for the remainder of FY2009. That means states having a tough time making the budget have a bit of grace coming.

Plenty of good changes keep us on our toes this winter season. It’s not just Congress that’s got our industry’s economic future in mind. Equipment manufacturers are pitching new technology at the upcoming World of Asphalt. This publication is making new strides with editorial content and a new Web site to bring not just equipment and technology changes to you, but also to bring new practices and safer work methods to you.

Not all change is scary. We welcome you to write to us here at AsphaltPro and let us know what changes are taking place in your neck of the woods. Let us know how we can help you adapt to those changes. Contact the editor.

Stay Safe,
Sandy Lender, Editor

Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, Funding, Jobs Bill, SAFETEA-LU

The Answer: We Must Stop Driving

(from the November Editor's Note of AsphaltPro Magazine)

Shortly, you will see how simple it is. The answer to our country’s economic problems lies in the fact that we all own cars. What selfish pigs we are to expect freedom.

Let me delve into reality for just a moment. At press time, Congress had voted to extend the currently expired SAFETEA-LU program another seven weeks. That means, by the time you receive this in the mail, we’ve got just more than a month (through Dec. 18) for legislators to come up with a new plan to get funding in place to keep additional monies flowing for federal highways, to accept an 18-month extension, to accept a six-month extension, to accept an extension to Dec. 31, or to accept Oberstar’s approximately $500 billion six-year bill.

At first blush, it seems like a lot of options are on the table and we should be swimming right along with keeping infrastructure up to par. Unfortunately, when the last bill expired Sept. 30, states felt a jolt. Money was rescinded. Some people in this country who have a difficult time understanding the very real need for a healthy and safe highway and roadway system have suggested this is for the best because we shouldn’t be driving cars anyway.

A byproduct of the current rescission of $8.7 billion in federal transportation funds that I don’t think anti-roads lobbyists expected is the cancellation of green projects. For instance, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) reported that officials at the Tennessee Department of Transportation (DOT) pulled $30 million out of its coffers for enhancement grants. That means:
* no restoration of old train stations
* no new bike trails and
* no new sidewalks.
AASHTO also reported that Nevada DOT officials are cutting $8 million from transportation enhancements. They’re also cutting $4 million from their federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) projects and another $4 million from the Safe Routes to School Program.

These are not positive developments, but state money movers have little choice. Back in 2007, Congress decreed that when state officials make cuts (rescind funds) from programs, they have to do so proportionally. That means if you take a little from this road, you have to take a little from that CMAQ project, too.

Even with the worry building around whether or not Congress understands the process involved in realistic transportation, there’s some ray of hope for motorists. Note that states can still let state projects (if there’s a state budget for that). Counties can still let county projects (if there’s a county budget for that). Cities can still work on city projects (if there’s a city budget for that). You catch my drift.

The problem is everyone gets nervous when you talk about cutting his or her budget for next year in half. And rightly so. What’s worse is we’re talking about cutting the budget in half for “who knows how long?” Folks suddenly worry about all their projects.

I’m a proponent for cautious creative funding (I’ll call it CCF). If you’re a state DOT official, you’ve got to get creative with your project funding. There are interstates and bridges that need repair. There are asphalt roadways that might not need repair yet, but by performing preventive maintenance on them, you extend the pavement’s life. You make a small investment now to keep a larger investment from happening 10 or 20 years from now. But if your budget’s just been slashed, what on earth is going to compel you to run out and perform anything but the absolute worst-case reconstructs?

Some municipalities have raised their own bond measures, sales taxes and property taxes to pay for everything from specific road projects to maintenance of specified areas of the grid. What this leads to is shiny streets and well-kept utilities right up to the federal-funded interstate that’s causing high car-maintenance bills for those folks who just voted to have their taxes raised. I bet those citizens won’t be too keen on another tax hike next election season.

Some counties have seen toll measures pass. Funds for future repairs, enhancements and preventive maintenance start rolling in, but motorists unwilling to add $5 to $10 to their weekly commute take alternate routes not built for the increased traffic loads. Safety problems, repair costs and user delays rise on the parallel routes.

The solution to all of this has been suggested already. We must stop driving. Anti-roads lobbyists have actually suggested that people in both rural and urban settings must get out of their cars and into buses (although I’m not sure what the buses will be driving on), trains, trolleys and other people movers. While I can see a logical pattern to mass transit in city situations, it boggles the mind to think this would work in rural areas. But this is the suggestion put forth to clear cars from roadways, thus getting us “off” that horrid road and oil dependency we have.

Obviously, we have to raise taxes and spend inordinate amounts of money to build a metallic people-moving infrastructure. While we’re at it, I suggest we train ourselves to be lackadaisical about deadlines and meeting times because, coming from a purely cynical point of view, I don’t think these things are going to run in a timely fashion. They’re being created by legislative action, after all.

If we recycled our cars into something else (and I’m sure there are people in Canada and Switzerland working on that “something” now) and all moved into cities where the mayors have magically raised the funds to build superfragicagilisticexpialodociocidous (I changed it so as not to get sued) mass transit services to move people around, why, there would be no need for cars or roads or road R&D or safety or innovation or jobs or any of those crazy things that the Federal Highway Fund has been encouraging.

All our goods would be delivered by train because trains never have accidents thus don’t require funding to find ways to make them safer or more efficient or to ensure none of their operators (remote or otherwise) have sleep apnea. And we can conduct all business meetings by teleconference and Internet now so we no longer need airplanes. No one actually has to see their loved ones in person when we have Webcams. Besides, once the current generations kick off, people will be living in those insular inbred cities anyway. There’ll be no need to travel far…

So why is it important to renew funding for transportation? Why think of CCF ideas to supplement a gas-tax-based funding program? Why worry about a road that needs repair? Why worry about bridges that crumble into the waters beneath them? Why make plans to resurface and keep asphalt pavements in pristine condition for maximum safety and perpetual life? I mean, isn’t the world ending December of 2012 anyway?
Stay Safe,
Sandy Lender, Editor (sandy at theasphaltpro dot com)

Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, highway funding, Congress, SAFETEA-LU, green projects

Tell Our Good Story to Your Representatives

(from the April/May Editor's Note in AsphaltPro Magazine)

I’ve got a friend in the asphalt industry who gets excited about seeing celebrities. I don’t want to embarrass him by throwing his name down in print, but it’s as if the celebrity has some superior element about him or her that non-celebrities don’t. I’ve got another friend who says he could never visit his Congressman because the guy is too “official”. Too important in the world. It’s as if the Congressman has some superior element about him or her that we non-Congressmen don’t.

Now, I’m not suggesting that we ignore the authority of an elected official’s position, but I’d like to remind everyone that our representatives are people just like us. We gave them their jobs when we voted for them, so we shouldn’t be intimidated when it’s time to sit down and visit with them; especially when that visit is over something as important as infrastructure funding.

This is the last issue of AsphaltPro that you’ll receive prior to the May 19 through 20 legislative fly-in to Washington. Can you afford not to send someone from your company to discuss the importance of transportation funding with your representatives? (Visit www.transportationconstructioncoalition.org for details on the fly-in.)

Let me tell you who will fill the void you leave if you don’t participate: multiple members of special interest groups with extreme anti-infrastructure ideas. When Former Speaker of the House Trent Lott spoke to the audience at the National Asphalt Pavement Association (NAPA) meeting in San Diego in January, he informed us that for every couple of construction representatives calling him to promote safe roadway funding, he could have at least a dozen overly exuberant folks calling for an end to more roads and what they perceived as urban sprawl.

That’s one reason why the good environmental messages of the asphalt industry are so important to get across to our representatives as we make our case for reauthorization of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). As recently as March 31, Mike Acott, president of NAPA, sat before the House Science and Technology Subcommittee on Technology and Innovation to brief members on the technologies of asphalt recycling, warm mix, Perpetual Pavement and porous asphalt that offer a sustainable future for the transportation grid of our nation. Acott told representatives: “Within five years, I believe you will see full deployment of warm mix, much higher rates of recycling, and development and application of Perpetual Pavement and porous asphalt technologies leading to a substantial reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and other environmental and economic benefits within the asphalt pavement sector.”

As you can see, there are myriad talking points, but the main point is we should each be talking.
For the article “Spread it Around: Black is the New Green” on page 24, industry leaders discussed different safe and sound practices they’ve tried or seen for enhancing air quality, improving neighbor relations, reducing carbon footprint, etc. For the article “Asphalt Proves Correct Choice for LEED Project Credits” on page 20, we show how asphalt products can gain points for engineers designing projects eligible for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design Neighborhood Development certification. And, my personal favorite this month, in “When It’s the Right Thing to Do” on page 28, the S.T. Wooten family shares their experiences setting up an ecological masterpiece in Southwest Florida. These are the kind of positive stories and ideas we should be sharing openly and often with not only legislators, but also with the public in general.

Jay Hansen, vice president of government affairs for NAPA, has asked that, even if you can’t make it to the legislative fly-in in Washington, make it a point to meet with your representative in your district office, away from the distractions of D.C. Make it a point to share with representatives that asphalt products can help in mitigating the impact of transportation infrastructure on the environment. Make it a point to let your representative know that environmental issues matter to you as a member of the asphalt industry that can help support economic growth and safe corridors for transportation in this nation.

Stay Safe,
Sandy Lender, Editor (sandy at theasphaltpro dot com)

Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, environment, economic growth, air quality, carbon footprint, LEED credits, porous asphalt

Anticipation

(from the February 2009 Editor's Note of AsphaltPro Magazine)

We’ll have in-depth coverage of the recent National Asphalt Pavement Association (NAPA) 54th annual meeting in our March issue, when there’s time to compile all the information for you properly, but I have to say that I came away from the conference sensing an air of anticipation in the asphalt industry. We’re waiting to see what happens with oil prices. We’re waiting to see what happens with transportation funding. We’re waiting to see which equipment manufacturers cut how many jobs. We’re waiting to see if the competitor down the street brings back all his crews or if he works short-handed this paving season.

This waiting around can be stressful if you’re a Type A personality like me.

What do all of the Type As and other interested business persons do while we wait? There’s an excellent opportunity to influence our destiny with legislation. By the time this issue hits the streets, the economic stimulus package should have passed, promising just about $30 billion for roads and bridges. I’ll provide you a breakdown of how that money gets divided among the states once it’s a sure thing—no point in counting the chickens before they’ve hatched.

We also have the 2009 Transportation Appropriations Bill to inject some funds into our coffers and the reauthorization act to get Congress to approve. It’s the reauthorization act that professionals all over the industry are focused on. This is the one we should be talking to our legislators about.

From the very nature of the word “reauthorization” you can guess that, as an industry, we’re asking Congress to give us what we’ve had in the past. But we need, and are asking for, additional funding. That’s going to take effort because no one really relishes the idea of raising the gas tax. Call it a user fee if you like; we’re still asking a legislative body to make people pay more at the pump. Of course, we’re asking for this money to protect those people—to give them safer roadways and economic growth. And that’s a message we need to send to our legislators. By investing in the highway industry, a Congressman invests in his or her constituents’ livelihoods. It’s not a stretch to figure out, but it will take a concerted effort to convince folks when part of the convincing involves money.

Luckily, raising money isn’t unprecedented right now. Look at the example Tulsa has set for us on page 9.

Former Speaker of the House Trent Lott spoke to the attendees at the NAPA meeting last month and told us that the public should participate in transportation funding because it’s in the public’s interest to have safe roads. That sounds like another excellent point to put before our legislators.

But who’s bringing these talking points to the representatives that cast the votes for reauthorization? Are you relying on the staff at NAPA to do all the work? Trust me, Jay Hansen is working hard, but he’s just one person. As Lott told the packed room in San Diego, “This is the time to step up.” Every member of the industry needs to be in communication with the members of Congress to let them know that we’re ready and able to help the economy recover. Funnel the money into the roads and bridges of this nation and we’ll do the rest. We’ll employ workers who buy goods. We’ll fix roads that keep motorists safe. We’ll build corridors that move products from point A to point B. We’ll bring industry to regions that were formerly without economic growth.

I encourage you to get on the phone and tell your legislators that the asphalt industry is, as Lott said, “an important part of our recovery.” If you don’t know how to reach your specific representatives, visit http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt for a listing.

It’s going to take all of us to help the nation recover once funding funnels to project level. But first it’s going to take all of us to get that funding in place. I encourage you to do your part in controlling your destiny.

Stay Safe,
Sandy Lender, Editor (sandy at theasphaltpro dot com)

Tags: AsphaltPro Magazine, Asphalt Pro Magazine, Federal Highway Funding, economic growth, economic recovery

Transportation Funding Needs Your Voice

Join the Transportation Construction Coalition (TCC) this May 20 to 21 as members of the asphalt industry participate in the legislative process. Let your representatives know that the expiration of Federal Highway Funding Sept. 30, 2009, means the expiration of safe roads, economic growth and construction industry jobs.

If you can't participate in the 2008 TCC Legislative Fly-In this month, let your representatives know of your interest in the nation's future by writing or calling them directly. You can find their contact information at the site link below:

http://www.congress.org/congressorg/directory/congdir.tt

Tags: Transportation Construction Coalition, TCC, Federal Highway Funding, Legislative Fly-In