Kudos to the President and his Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood for responding to the need for more infrastructure investment by gathering an impressive array of public officials at the White House. Among those gathered on Columbus Day were Governor Rendell of Pennsylvania, co-leader of Building America's Future. Also present will be L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, whose city has provided a model for accelerating investment by proposing to build a dozen key transit project in a decade rather than thirty years as projected, with citizens backing it up by agreeing to tax themselves to get it done. NRDC supports this initiative which has attracted a lot of local support.

Two former Transportation Secretaries from Republican Administrations -- Norm Mineta and Samuel Skinner -- were also there in the wake of the rollout of an impressive report about the proceedings at a transportation conference last year at the University of Virginia's Miller Center for Public Affairs (Full disclosure: I was one of the eighty participants). This publication, "Well Within Reach," is worth a read especially for its nine policy recommendations spanning the gamut of concerns from financing to governance to data collection and can be found here.

The group discussed ways of moving forward with a national agenda, something the President pressed for in a Labor Day speech as I wrote about here. An economic rationale was proffered by a new Treasury Department report released just a couple of hours ago. The report addresses demand- and supply-side considerations. On the demand side, it points out that there is widespread public support for new infrastructure investments doubtless driven in part by concerns over crumbling roads and bridges and evidenced by remarkably successful election results in recent years for transportation ballot initiatives (such as the one providing new revenue for the 30/10 program in L.A.) and national surveys. The analysis also strikes an ominous tone regarding our nation's competitiveness globally noting that we invest a mere two percent of GDP on infrastructure, which is half the level in 1960 and small compared to China's investment of 9 percent and Europe's of five percent (in the case of China this can be in part justified because that nation is at an earlier stage of development and investing more to "catch up" but no such reasoning appies to Europe).

As for supply-side considerations, the report makes the astute observation that "now is a particularly opportune time to invest in infrastructure, because the availability of underutilized resources (especially labor) implies that the opportunity cost of infrastructure investment is currently well below its normal level." This refers mainly to the appallingly high unemployment level in the construction industry, which was at 17 percent in August, nearly double the general rate. The general state of affairs in construction -- lower asking prices for labor and materials, for example -- means that infrastructure investments, as the Washington Post's Ezra Klein notes in a recent column, are a phenomenal bargain right now. This is why recovery act investments have covered many more projects than anticipated, as the new analysis notes: "Overall, the Department of Transportation estimates that more than 2,000 additional airport, highway, bridge and transit projects were funded because of low bids, or projects being completed under budget."

The analysis is also noteworthy -- as are the Miller Center report and Mayor Villaraigosa's initiative -- for proposing a balanced portfolio of transportation investments. Not just road construction and maintenance -- which are important -- but also public transportation such as rail. And it's clear that new policy tools -- such as a national infrastructure bank -- must be used to ensure that investments moving forward offer the biggest bang for the buck in economic, social energy-saving and environmental terms. As the Treasury analysis describes, a new bank would

"develop a framework to analytically examine potential infrastructure projects using cost-benefit analysis, and would evaluate the distributional impact of both the costs and benefits of each project. Of course, not all costs and benefits from infrastructure projects can be quantified, but an effort should be made to quantify those that can be quantified and to take account of any additional benefits and costs to society. A rigorous analytic process would result in support for projects that yield the greatest returns to society, and would avoid investing taxpayer dollars in projects where total costs exceed total societal benefits. A National Infrastructure Bank would select projects along a sliding scale of support that most effectively utilizes the bank’s limited resources, targeting the most effective and efficient investments."

One thing I would note is that none of the ideas for making new, cost-effective investments preclude cutting wasteful spending in the current, bloated program. Ranking Member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee John Mica and fellow Republicans issued a blistering report earlier this month covering some opportunities worth consideration. Elimination of waste and reduction of bureaucracy is indispensable as a priority if the transportation program is to regain the confidence of taxpayers.

The bottom line regarding this week's question is that the President and his Transportation and Treasury Departments deserve praise for pulling together events and a new examination of the strong case for new infrastructure investment. Hopefully the use of the bully pulpit this month is a sign of more to come, since White House leadership is badly needed build a head of steam for overhauling and expanding our outdated, creaky national transportation program.

President Obama deserves enormous credit for his Columbus Day infrastructure push. But special accolades must be reserved for former secretaries Norman Mineta and Samuel Skinner for their insistence that rebuilding America’s transportation infrastructure is urgent and ought to be bipartisan. They have called for a comprehensive vision of upgrading our 20th century transportation networks while building a 21st century infrastructure that our children and grandchildren will be proud to inherit.

According to polls, many voters this year are angry and lack confidence in how Washington is spending our money. As Skinner and Mineta point out, we have been forced to bail out our nation’s Highway Trust Fund for several years because our revenue stream hasn’t aligned with infrastructure needs. We have also continued to spend federal transportation dollars without any performance measures or accountability. Both must be addressed and would be if we follow through on the recommendations of Skinner and Mineta, as well as President Obama’s blueprint.

It is understandably difficult to discuss policy prospects for 2011 until the election is behind us. The good news is that Representatives Jim Oberstar and John Mica, Chairman and Ranking Member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, have been able and visionary leaders who both understand the need for a more performance-based and multimodal approach to transportation investments. Regardless of what happens in the election next week, infrastructure is an issue that has generated significant bipartisan support in the past: a Republican Congress and Democratic President approved TEA-21 in 1998, and a Democratic Congress and Republican President passed ISTEA in 1991. If the two parties once again divide power, let’s hope the lessons learned by such giants as the late Senators Chafee and Moynihan are echoing through the chambers on Capitol Hill and can once again inform the important work of the next Congress.

President Obama has devoted more White House attention to transportation policy than we have seen from the White House in 50 years. In addition, the Miller Center report, well summarized by Greg Principato, is only the latest report by an esteemed group of transportation leaders documenting the problems of our current policies and recommending solutions to fix them. Few disagree with the notions that our current policies are failing us and than we need a new national transportation policy. Indeed, the stack of good policy reports sitting on my bookshelf is easily over a foot high.

Whether we are considering the surface or the FAA authorization--or policies governing maritime, rail, livability or any other issue of transportation policy--the problem is not knowing what we need to do, the problem is doing it. While we have advocates and analysts of various stripes on this blog, I would bet that 90% of the participants would agree on 85% of what needs to be done on transportation policy.

Sure, vested interests and advocates will be as they always are, results focused. Depending on where they sit, they will be concerned about their company's bottom line, the interests of members in their organization or association and/or the case they advocate. Thus, while the industry will continue to debate parts of the authorizations, ultimately those issues will be resolved as they always are--in committee, on the House and Senate floors, and through the bicameral reconcilation process.

The problem is not finding a magic formula for policy, or practicing alchemy to find the necessary resources to enact the policy, but the task is figuring out the politics. What we need is the collective will and leadership to enact long-term authorizations and policies.

How do we move the process forward? Based on past experience, we need the Obama Administration to lay out detailed policy and funding plans (or at the very least set boundaries for what it is prepared to accept) and we need committee and party leaderships that are willing to work together in a bipartisan manner to find solutions. Fortunately, this highly charged electoral season will soon be in the rearview mirror. Then our elected representatives need to do what we elect them to do: legislate.

Steve Van Beek

At the President’s Columbus Day meeting, I was proud to be at a White House that wants to transform the way we think about and invest in transportation. President Obama is thinking big, and his commitment to expanding and rebuilding America’s transportation network is going to be the key to getting it done.

I’ve long said that if we’re ever going to meet the needs of our decaying transportation system and infrastructure, we need to wring the partisan politics from the debate. Transportation bills have historically enjoyed bipartisan support. Decades of history are filled with examples of Republicans and Democrats coming together around big, often transformative transportation investments.

But today’s political stalemate is unlike any we’ve seen in recent history. The knee-jerk reactions to the Columbus Day meeting from a handful of congressional leaders – while not a surprise to anyone – were an illustration of a chronic problem in Washington that has derailed action on critically needed bills to invest billions in our nation’s surface, aviation and maritime transportation system.

It’s clear that we’re going to need the Administration’s leadership if we’re going to do anything worth doing.

The funny thing is there isn’t much disagreement about the need for America to invest in our infrastructure. 19 out of 20 Americans are concerned about our nation’s infrastructure, and 84 percent support greater investment to address it, according to the report by the Treasury Department and the Council of Economic Advisers at the President’s meeting. Major elements of the business lobby agree with us and not with the Congressional naysayers. Why? Because businesses of all sizes understand that the economy won’t turn around and they won’t thrive without a first-class transportation system, and that current investment levels get a failing grade.

In addition to the President’s $50 billion “down payment” on a long-term transportation funding plan (which should be enacted quickly), there are several key transportation bills and initiatives that flow naturally from the President’s plan. As we all know, the Federal Aviation Administration bill has been extended by Congress 15 times because a single corporate interest and its CEO didn’t like the House bill. Fortunately, the House and Senate are very close on a reconciled bill that boosts investment in airports and air traffic control, reduces airport congestion and delays, makes air travel safer and deals with key FAA operational and employee issues. The lame-duck session must not adjourn without completing this bill. The surface transportation bill has been delayed five times – it must be completed at a funding level of no less than half a trillion dollars. Estimates predict that this kind of robust bill would create six million jobs in six years. Transit systems and their workers are hurting – the Administration and Congress must move legislation this year that provides immediate operating assistance that stops the service and jobs cuts across America. In the absence of meaningful action, what is otherwise an industry poised for growth will instead go through a painful era of contraction. And making Amtrak the centerpiece of high speed rail and investing billions in our ports and freight rail systems must be priorities for today.

With transportation investments, we kill two birds with one stone: good, middle-class jobs get created in a sector that is in dire need of substantial new investments.

When all the election TV ads stop running next week and the lame-duck congressional session begins its work a couple weeks later, Members of Congress will have a chance to join the President and work on a bipartisan plan to rebuild our transportation system and put people to work.

It’s time for our elected officials to end the senseless, partisan squabbling, set aside the obstructionist tactics and step up to this responsibility. We will be doing our part to support the President’s plan to transform and massively expand America’s transportation system. Will those who want to lead Congress step up too? Or will they deploy the same old Washington playbook that for too long has turned Congress into a place where most good ideas go to die?

President Obama’s Labor Day announcement calling for a $50 billion investment in infrastructure should be an encouraging sign to the nation. It’s going to take that kind of vision and leadership to make the case for improvement and push for needed investments. Without a compelling national voice demonstrating what improvement means for our quality of life and economy, infrastructure will remain out of sight and out of mind.

In the past, our leaders dreamed big when it came to infrastructure, and those dreams brought us railroads, canals, telecommunications, electrification, interstate highways, clean water and parks. Their leadership and investment built the foundation for the life we enjoy today, but if we don’t work to maintain and rehabilitate the nation’s failing infrastructure we put all those gains and quality of life improvements at risk.

It’s not as though we lack the solutions and technology to support the big infrastructure dreams of the next century, and with the current economic climate, we could be bringing them to fruition in the most cost efficient way possible. All that’s missing is the popular will to pay for it.

Critics of the President’s announcement are right to point out that his plan is a little thin on the ‘how’ when it comes to paying for it all, and that it won’t eclipse the need to enact new authorizing legislation for the nation’s roads, transit, airports and waterways. ASCE agrees. We need a reliable revenue stream and a multi-year plan to begin improving the nation’s infrastructure.

However, having the man with the biggest microphone on earth stumping for pavement, bricks and mortar is vitally important to the overall improvement of the nation’s infrastructure systems. We have been sounding the alarm for years but we haven’t done enough to get the users engaged on the issue. With Obama’s involvement and support, maybe now we can shift this from being just a transportation issue to being an American issue.

Laura –

How right you are to point out that:

“With a shift of priorities we can create more jobs, give low income people more access to opportunity and make our world cleaner.”

And that

“Congress needs to ensure that funding goes to projects that will increase equity and sustainability. Our representatives also need to ensure that strong workplace equity requirements are attached to federal dollars.”

A useful start would be for Congress to legislate that all recipients of federal grants would have to remove the restrictions on entry into the transit business, and thus allow high-quality, high-frequency, public transport to be provided, nation-wide, by shared taxis (as by the “Black Taxis” in Belfast, “Sherut” services in Israel, and “Service” taxis in Jordan), and by associations of minibus owners, as in Atlantic City (legally) and in New York City (illegally).

Such services create employment not only directly to those who provide them, but also to those who benefit from increased mobility.

How about it, Laura?

Congress has delayed putting together a comprehensive transportation reauthorization for over a year. A new bill is long overdue. With the economic recovery flagging, the administration and Congress need to sell this to the public as an economic investment first and foremost. As a recent report authored by three former secretaries of transportation concluded, America's decaying transportation system is endangering our prosperity and our stance in the global economy.

Transportation projects have often been obscured by heated political debates. The reality is simply this: the nation urgently needs to put people back to work and to boost the economy -- two things transportation investments do extraordinarily well. The administration needs to take a vocal role in educating the public about the urgent need for a transportation reauthorization.

The recently announced TIGER grants offer a positive model for future transportation funding in the next transportation reauthorization bill. Congress needs to ensure that funding goes to projects that will increase equity and sustainability. Our representatives also needs to ensure that strong workplace equity requirements are attached to federal dollars.

TEN issued a new report recently, More Transit = More Jobs, that illustrates the effects of shifting money away from highway projects to transit projects. Transit investment creates more jobs than highway building. Our country is in desperate economic straits. With a shift of priorities we can create more jobs, give low income people more access to opportunity and make our world cleaner.

In a few weeks, the makeup of a new Congress will be evident. Our representatives need to put aside their political differences and set a transportation agenda for the next half-decade. America's infrastructure and economic recovery are hanging in the balance.

If ever there was a time for a “serious, high level policy discussion” on comprehensive planning and funding to enhance the efficiency and global competitiveness of U.S. transportation infrastructure, the time is now. Our economy is fragile, unemployment remains high, and other nations, our trading partners and competitors are making major investments in infrastructure to be successful in the world marketplace. A top priority of that discussion should be establishing a national policy on freight transportation that includes enhancing and maintaining the connections between modes.

Last week, following Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood’s announcement of the second round of Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grant recipients, AAPA applauded Secretary LaHood for the recognition that our nation’s seaports play a critical role as job generators and economic lifelines to the global marketplace, and they must not be ignored. This recognition was borne out in the fact that seaport-related infrastructure projects received 17 percent of the available funds, compared to having received only 8 percent of the grants in the first round of TIGER last February.

In this second round of TIGER, the percentage of capital funding awarded to ports is more than twice the percentage in the first round, moving us closer to the 25 percent of overall TIGER grant funding we believe is appropriate. We’re hopeful that in the next round of this crucial grants program that the share awarded to ports will reach 25 percent or more. To that end, we’re urging Congress to provide additional TIGER funding in fiscal 2011 appropriations and we believe this type of program should be a part of the overdue surface transportation reauthorization.

Advancement of that reauthorization is critical to establishing a national policy on freight transportation, including programs to enhance port infrastructure and the connections and corridors into and out of America’s ports.

In his call to Congress for $50 billion in up-front funding the surface transportation reauthorization, President Obama said that Republicans and Democrats ought to be able to work together to find more efficient ways to fund roads, bridges, rail, and runways. We agree this must be a bi-partisan priority, and ports and seaport-related infrastructure should be included in that modal list.

Now is the time to move forward to develop and implement policy and programs that will effectively and efficiently sustain and improve America’s critical gateways for global trade.

President Barack Obama has called for bipartisan support to bring about a "fundamental overhaul" of the country's "woefully inefficient" federal surface transportation systems to reduce unemployment and allow America to remain competitive in the global marketplace.

The current surface transportation system has served America well however the time has come to match the level of investment witnessed during the building of the Interstate Highway System and the expansion of transit. The President’s argument is a persuasive one because it links greater investment and the rehabilitation of the nation’s aging and deteriorating highways and transit systems to jobs and our quality of life.

The President has engaged the debate and gives voice to a major issue that has long-term ramifications for our nation. Think about it. America is growing by the millions. By 2035 the Census Bureau estimates 380 million people will live here. They’ll need an estimated 15.3 billion tons of cargo moved each year. Food, appliances, electronics and more – delivered from factories and ports in a fast, reliable, and safe, way or America will fall behind other countries like China and India which are now investing in transportation on a grand scale.

Transportation has become an issue blurred by our collective focus on the urgent need to create jobs and boost the economy. The fact is -- transportation investments do both.

AASHTO just issued a new report, More Projects and Paychecks: Transportation's Summer of Recovery that illustrates how states are delivering projects funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. A total of 13,000 highway projects worth $26.4 billion have been approved for construction that, when completed, will improve 35,399 miles of highways, and 1,200 bridges.

Those numbers are impressive; however there is a lot more work, yet to done. State DOTs have identified 9,800 Ready to Go Projects that if funded, could create and safeguard hundreds thousands of additional jobs and continue the positive and ongoing results of the recovery act.

Mr. Obama wants to jump start the next authorization bill with a $50 billion investment. The next step is up to Congress, which has been forced to extend SAFETEA-LU, the highway and transit authorization act that expired on September 30, 2009 -- five times in the past 12 months.

Later this week, AASHTO’s membership; representatives from state transportation departments from across the country will gather in Mississippi to reaffirm the commitment to roll up our sleeves and help the president and Congress pass a new transportation authorization act that is so desperately needed to continue addressing our most pressing transportation needs while adding jobs and improving the economy.

See the full report More Projects and Paychecks: Transportation's Summer of Recovery at: http://recovery.transportation.org

On Columbus Day, President Obama stood with former Transportation Secretaries Mineta and Skinner to call for bipartisan support for infrastructure investment. The two secretaries chaired a University of Virginia Miller Center conference on transportation, which last week released a report (which the president held up). The Miller Center is run by my old boss former Virginia Governor Gerald Baliles. I was among the 80 experts called upon by the Miller Center to participate.

While the report has a heavy surface transportation focus, its recommendations directly relate to aviation and the need for a serious, policy discussion on infrastructure improvement.

• Recommendation 1: Stop the Bleeding. Federal aviation infrastructure spending has gone down both in real terms and because more of the money is spent on FAA operations.
• Recommendation 2: Beyond the Gas Tax. Of course in aviation it is the ticket tax. But the point is the same; the mechanism to fund aviation in this country is out of date as airlines move toward charging fees not subject to the ticket tax. It is time to get beyond the ticket tax as currently constituted.
• Recommendation 3: Jobs for the Future Not Just for Today. Aviation infrastructure is the perfect illustration of this, look at all the economic activity that grows around airports. Those jobs last!
• Recommendation 4: Pass the Power Please. Airports are key parts of their community and we believe the law should be changed where appropriate to give airports more say in their own economic affairs, including what fees to charge and how to finance projects.
• Recommendation 5: Adopt a Capital Budget. Airports already essentially do this. It is time to give them the freedom to finance it.
• Recommendation 6: Connect the Dots. Airports are also increasingly doing this, looking to better connect to downtown and surrounding areas. Let’s remove restrictions that hold airports back.
• Recommendation 7: Getting Americans Home for Dinner. Air transportation congestion has been well documented. In fact, there was a report last week from the University of California at Berkeley that documented the $32.9 billion cost for the U.S. economy, with about half of that paid by passengers. Let’s move forward with NextGen, and allow airports the flexibility, especially including a higher PFC cap, to finance infrastructure to take full advantage of NextGen. There is NO NextGen without a PFC increase, and there will be lots more missed dinners.
• Recommendation 8: It’s All About Leveraging. Airports are involved in public-private partnerships every day. Perhaps there is no mode better at this. Let’s remove remaining obstacles, and I would implore the airline industry to join us (as they often, but not always, do).
• Recommendation 9: Delivering Transportation Investments on Time. Airports have an outstanding record in this regard, but the stop and start of 16 FAA Reauthorization extensions and no PFC increase puts this in peril. We need a long-term extension and a PFC ceiling increase so projects can continue to come in on time and on budget.
• Recommendation 10: Build a Foundation for Informed Policy. We need to end the rhetoric and talk about facts based on data. This is why airline misstatements about airport infrastructure are so frustrating and unproductive.

I was proud to participate in the formation of the 10 recommendations and I applaud Secretaries Mineta and Skinner, Governor Baliles and President Obama for focusing on them. I also call on all my colleagues in aviation to approach this FAA bill, and all its future successors, with the same constructive spirit embodied in the Miller Center’s report.

Updated at 1:10 p.m. on October 25.

We have an early response from former transportation secretaries Samuel Skinner and Norman Mineta.

When former Governor Gerald L. Baliles, Director of UVA's Miller Center of Public Affairs, asked us to lead the Center's effort to raise the profile of America's transportation crisis, we promptly agreed. Given our experience working together in the early 1990s to forge the historic transportation bill that became ISTEA, we know that great good can come from high-level, bipartisan attention to a problem, together with a determination to act.

Earlier this month we were invited to tell President Obama why we attach such urgency to addressing our transportation infrastructure shortfall. The productivity losses attributable to our deteriorating transportation system add up quickly. They create significant drag on our economy and reduce the quality of life for Americans everywhere -- whether it's the hours lost in daily commuting, the fuel wasted by idling trucks and airplanes (and the environmental impact of that wasted fuel) or the rising transportation costs that families must shoulder. Unless federal transportation law and policy address the country's needs in a more relevant, more effective, and more sustainable way, deficiencies in our transportation system will seriously compromise both the near-term prospects for economic recovery and our long-term economic productivity.

President Obama reiterated his belief in the importance of investing in transportation during our briefing. In his public comments immediately thereafter, the President said: "Reports confirm what any American can already tell you: our infrastructure is woefully inefficient and it is outdated."

There is a vital need today for the bipartisan cooperation that produced ISTEA nearly 20 years ago. The outcome of the mid-term elections and the prospect of a divided government do not have to mean additional delays and stop-gap measures.

But it isn't enough merely to call for reform. We need clear ideas about the content of that reform. The Miller Center called on 80 of the nation's top transportation policy minds and has worked for the past year to formulate a meaningful contribution to the debate. We hope that the Miller Center's report, Well Within Reach: America's New Transportation Agenda, will help underscore the urgency of the transportation imperative and engender a more propitious environment for meaningful action next year.
Congress and the Administration need to agree on a program of pilot projects, studies, and other ways that edge us toward true reform in how we plan for and finance our transportation investments. It should move us back to a pay-as-you-go system, including adoption, in time, of a VMT fee. It should end General Fund bailouts of transportation, and contribute to our shared goal of deficit reduction. It should be structured to meet national energy policy goals.

We have heard a great many compelling calls for action in recent years -- President Obama's plan and the Miller Center report are only the most recent. The challenge now is to ensure that citizens and policy makers appreciate more fully how a suboptimal transportation system saps our strength and competitiveness as a nation.

President Obama supports change; former Cabinet members, senior officials and experts on both sides of the aisle agree. If we can engender once again the a bipartisan political determination to address these requirements, we can deliver the essential transportation solutions that ensure America's future prosperity.