The enactment of “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century” (MAP-21) represents an important first step in the development of a national freight strategy. Thanks to a bipartisan and bicameral legislative effort led by Senator Barbara Boxer, it is exciting to see that the seeds of such a strategy are firmly planted in this bill. And while it may be too much to expect the freight title to bear immediate fruit, last week’s announcement by Secretary LaHood is a clear sign that a real process is taking root. It may be just what we need to get on the path towards a comprehensive national freight strategy that generates new jobs, expands economic opportunity, and enhances global competiveness from Main Street to the dockyards.

By establishing the Freight Policy Council, the Administration is beginning the difficult but critical task of creating a framework for strategic investment in our national freight system. It is difficult because the national freight system consists of projects infused with the economic needs and aspirations of all the multiple cities, regions, states, and coasts that are inter-connected by the system. And while this shouldn’t deter the Council from pursuing its work, it’s important to draw lessons from past experience.

The Harbor Maintenance Tax (HMT) serves as an example. One key provision of MAP-21 states that “the Administration should request full use of the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund for operating and maintaining the navigational channels of the United States." While the issue of full utilization is a important and worthy issue in the maritime community, other questions remain: Are we allocating these funds in a strategic way? How are we impacting the competitiveness of our freight system? These fundamental issues illustrate a collective failure to grasp the national freight system as a whole. At a time when global economic competition grows more intense, we cannot afford to view scarce federal dollars outside of the context of a national freight strategy and our interdependent logistics chain. We need to ensure U.S. dollars are invested in a manner that maximizes long-term American competitiveness and economic growth, including expansion of American exports.

While we can agree in broad terms about the goals of our national freight system, on an issue like HMT reform, regional interests vary widely and we might expect those differences to emerge as we identify the drivers of a national freight plan. For example, you might expect the impact of the Panama Canal widening to be understated on the West Coast and overstated on the East.

That’s why the formation of the Freight Policy Council is so important and timely. We need it to provide an overarching perspective and identify what’s in the national interest. This week the Council announced it will be holding outreach sessions. This is a very good sign. The early engagement and participation of a diverse and representative group of freight system stakeholders will be instrumental to collecting outside perspectives, showcasing best practices and achieving broad support for action and implementation. Collecting input from groups like the Congressional PORTS Caucus and, at a state level, encouraging the development and updating of State Freight Plans is also a logical way of capturing diverse interests; however, I would also encourage the Council to look at the role of metropolitan areas, where the majority of ports, gateways, and trade corridors are located and economic expansion is centered.

Just as important, the Council can serve as a critical forum both within the Department of Transportation and with other parts of the federal family, including Commerce, Energy, Homeland Security, and Environmental Protection. The existing joint MOU between Transportation and Commerce may serve as an interagency model. Also, understanding the participation of existing and planned working groups – such as the White House Task Force on Ports and the Commerce Department's Advisory Committee on Supply Chain Competitiveness – will help avoid duplication of efforts.

Ultimately, there needs to be the recognition that unless we forge a common cause and purpose around a national freight plan and policy, our global economic competitiveness will suffer. Canada confronted this reality when its national leadership pursued the “Asia-Pacific Gateway and Corridor Initiative.” They achieved that elusive alignment between the national, provincial, and local governments. We must do likewise.

As the Freight Policy Council confronts the reality before them, they should know that those of us who understand what’s at stake for our national welfare stand with them. And, I’d like to share with them a personal motto that captures what I often hear when taking on big tasks: It’s impossible. It’s difficult. It’s done!

The focus of the new Freight Policy Council, announced by Secretary LaHood on Aug. 23, is to improve the condition and performance of the nation’s freight network to ensure American competitiveness in the global economy. The American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA) agrees wholeheartedly with Congresswoman Janice Hahn, founder and co-chair of the bipartisan Congressional PORTS Caucus, who said in response to the announcement that ensuring the rapid and reliable movement of goods across the country is essential to our economy.

If the goals of the Freight Policy Council are to develop a national, intermodal plan for improving the efficiency of freight movement and work with states to encourage deployment of a forward-looking state freight strategy, the success of their work will be borne out in a reduction in the cost of freight transportation, generation of new business opportunities, job creation and making our nation’s exports more attractive overseas.
In the recently-passed MAP-21 bill, AAPA was hoping to see some dedicated freight funding, like the $2 billion per year to states for freight projects through the formula program proposed in the Senate language. Overall, while the bill falls short of dedicating needed funding specifically for freight projects, it does create a framework upon which we can prioritize freight mobility needs and address congestion and capacity demands on America’s freight network going forward.

Freight flows, congestion issues and system-level solutions don’t conform to single modes or state boundaries. Given the highway-focused nature of MAP 21’s funding stream through the formula program to states, as we look at how to lay the groundwork for a multimodal National Freight Policy and Strategic Plan, the Freight Policy Council would have the greatest impact by developing a multimodal framework and priorities which look beyond just highways and state borders. There must be a multimodal systems approach that focuses on achieving efficient goods movement throughout the transportation network.

As the Freight Policy Council considers its mission and goals, AAPA believes the following actions will be the key to their success:

• Include the Maritime Transportation System (MTS) when addressing the coordination needs for implementing a National Freight Policy and National Strategic Freight Plan, while factoring in MTS priorities, such as intermodal connectors, grade separations, congestion mitigation and marine highway alternatives, into performance metrics and a national freight strategy.
• Include all modes responsible for moving freight, not just highways. To ignore any of the modes (seaports, rail, marine highways, inland waterways) when creating a national policy and strategic plan creates weak links in the supply chain network.
• Consider the importance of exports and international trade. Exports rely heavily on the effectiveness and efficiency of our MTS and seaports. Transportation costs can be the difference in the international competitiveness of many of our export commodities.
• Include marine highways development as part of the National Freight Strategic Plan.
• Enable coordination and information sharing mechanisms between federal agency advisory committees that are tackling the same issues, such as the Department of Commerce’s Advisory Committee on Supply Chain Competitiveness, MTSNAC and CMTS, as well as the Congressional Ports Caucus and the White House Navigation Task Force.
• Create a pathway for freight and MTS priorities to be included at the state level where implementation generally occurs.

While the Freight Policy Council is a good start, our nation still needs to establish a permanent, dedicated multi-modal freight office at the level of the Office of the Secretary at USDOT to lead and have responsibility for the national freight policy and strategic plan, as enacted in MAP 21 and beyond.

If the new Freight Policy Council can achieve the above-mentioned actions, we believe it will be a positive step forward and provide a framework to build upon when dedicated freight funding is put into play in future authorizations.

Secretary LaHood’s announcement last week tocreate a national freight strategy is welcome and greatly needed for the vitality of our country. A blueprint for freight movement should work in tandem with the development of a national multimodal transportation vision—helping create jobs, buttress our economy and ease the cost of trade.

The health of the nation’s manufacturing sector is dependent— in large part—on a healthy transportation system which is, unfortunately, aging—and not aging well. If nothing changes, we will be the first generation in U.S. history to leave our children a system that is in worse condition than the one we inherited. We should keep in mind:

• Approximately 61,000 miles (37 percent) of all lane miles on the National Highway System are in poor or fair condition.
• More than 152,000 bridges—one in every four—are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.
• Demand for freight rail is expected to double by 2035. The Association of American Railroads estimates that an investment of $148 billion is needed to keep pace with economic growth and to ensure it can carry the volume of freight forecasted by then.
• Our ports need to accommodate a doubling of cargo volumes by 2020, with some ports facing a tripling or quadrupling of container volumes. Harbors need to be deepened to accommodate bigger ships.

And as we look at strategic investments in our infrastructure, let’s “Buy American” and invest in our highways so that our freight system contributes to our ability to compete in the global market place rather than being an issue that our industries need to work around.

As a result of underinvestment, the total cost of logistics for U.S. companies has increased from 8.8 percent of GDP in 2004 to 10.1 percent in 2008—a $412 billion increase in four short years.

According to a report by the American Road & Transportation Builders Association, Transportation Development Foundation, money invested this year in transportation construction industry employment and purchases will generate more than $380 billion in U.S. economic activity – nearly 3 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product.

Infrastructure is a public good—one that our federal government has invested in for as long as there has been a republic. Clearly, we must do more to meet our freight capacity needs and address the nation’s dynamic, evolving road, rail, air and port needs. We must establish clear priorities. We can do this by restoring our critical highway corridors to their preeminence.

• Adding capacity to the meet coming increase in freight traffic;
• Separating freight and passenger traffic where possible (strategy should include truck lanes, network of truck-only highways, and targeted investments to unclog the worst highway bottlenecks);
• Expanding freight rail capacity and utility;
• Encouraging and support an increase intermodal freight shipments; and
• Providing investment tax credits, encourage public-private partnerships where they make strategic sense.

As a country, we must develop a sense of urgency and understand how the United States benefits from such investments as well as how we are hurt by delaying such efforts. By addressing our transportation challenges through workable planning, prioritizing and funding solutions, we can generate jobs and bolster our economy as we boost our mobility.

Paul Yarossi is president of HNTB Holdings Ltd and 2011-12 chairman ARTBA.

For more on America’s infrastructure challenges, visit: HNTB http://news.hntb.com/viewpoints/

and ARTBA http://www.artba.org/search-results/?keywords=critical+commerce+corridor&show_results=N%253B