Congress Seen Taking Lead On Transport Policy, Not DOT

This story appears in the May 18 print edition of Transport Topics.

The debate over future surface transportation policy is likely to be directed by Congress, rather than the Obama administration, several industry lobbyists said following the recent release of nu-merous documents.

Last week, in a handwritten outline for the bill, Rep. James Oberstar (D-Minn.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, sketched out a dramatic overhaul of federal transportation policy that would include “freight improvement.”

Oberstar’s outline was obtained by members of the news media.

In the Senate, key transportation leaders introduced a bill containing several specific goals for transportation policy, including reduction of freight movements by truck.

On the other hand, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, the administration’s point man, has avoided committing to any specific policies to be included in the legislation, beyond opposition to raising the fuel tax.

“It would appear that the balance of power has shifted back to Capitol Hill,” said Tim Lynch, a senior vice president of American Trucking Associations.

“All indications are that [DOT staffers] are quite comfortable having Congress take more of an activist role in crafting the next transportation legislation,” a transport lobbyist, who asked not to be identified, told Transport Topics.

“It does not surprise me that committees that have been working on legislation and holding hearings for several years now would be further along than an administration that’s been in office for a little more than 100 days,” said Matt Jeanneret, a spokesman for the American Road & Transportation Builders Association.

Oberstar has repeatedly staked out Congress’ claim on the policy agenda. His two-page memo dated April 22 outlines several changes to the federal highway program, cutting the main themes for DOT spending to four from the 108 DOT currently uses. The four themes would be: critical asset preservation, highway safety im-provement, a surface transportation program and congestion mitigation/air quality improvement.

Lynch said that while Oberstar’s sketch “holds some positive prospects for reauthorization because it outlines a bold vision . . . many of the key details remain to be written.”

Among those details, he said, are the makeup of the freight program and the final price tag of the bill.

Oberstar spokesman Jim Berard said “the financing is going to be the last piece of the puzzle,” and that the chairman has had “a lot of discussions back and forth” with Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, about how to fund the bill.

Meanwhile on the other side of Capitol Hill, Sens. Jay Rockefeller (D-W. Va.), chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, and Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) who is chairman of Commerce’s surface transportation panel, introduced a bill they said would be the “foundation” for reforms to the highway program in the upcoming bill.

The Rockefeller-Lautenberg bill proposes to “increase the proportion of national freight transportation provided by nonhighway or multimodal services by 10% by 2020.”

ATA’s Lynch said that while it was good the senators “recognize the need for a freight transportation policy, the bad news is that a simple of act of Congress cannot overturn the entire distribution and logistics system of the United States, which relies on trucking for 80%” of its freight deliveries.

“At this point, it’s a goal,” a Democratic Senate staffer told TT. “This bill is more concerned with laying out policy and less concerned with authorizing programs.”

“If the Congress wants to seriously look at ways to reduce commercial vehicle miles traveled, it should consider allowing more productive equipment to operate on the nation’s highways,” Lynch added.

ATA is one of several groups, including the National Industrial Transportation League and Volvo Trucks North America, pitching an increase in the maximum weight for trucks to 97,000 pounds from the current limit of 80,000 pounds (see story, p. 2).

Ed Hamberger, president of the Association of American Railroads, praised the Rockefeller-Lautenberg bill, saying it was “imperative” to address the needs of freight rail, citing the industry’s claims of superior safety and environmental performance.

Greg Cohen, who is president of the American Highway Users Alliance, told TT he viewed the Rockefeller-Lautenberg measure as “anti-highway,” and said if it gains traction, it could affect support for the upcoming reauthorization.

“I think that if this is the kind of stuff that Congress is looking for, then we should all really assess whether this is something we would support paying more taxes for,” he said. The congressional activity contrasts with DOT’s release of its proposed budget for the 2010 fiscal year.

DOT said its proposal “contains no policy recommendations for surface transportation,” but uses “placeholder” figures for the budgets of the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Motor Carrier Administration and other agencies funded from the Highway Trust Fund. Usually, DOT’s budget provides specific policy initiatives or figures to be appropriated for the next fiscal year.

DOT spokesman Bill Adams said work on the administration’s policy was “under way” and LaHood has said DOT would provide principles for the bill to Congress.

Lynch said that “almost by default” DOT has to send a vague proposal to Congress because there are many vacancies within the department. The Senate has yet to confirm nominees for FHWA, FMCSA or any other modal administration within DOT.