Senator Boxer on California's Transportation Needs
Thursday, August 23, 2007
On the heels of the tragic bridge collapse in Minneapolis, I recently asked a variety of officials from the State of California to join me to consider the transportation improvements and maintenance needs that exist for California. This is just the first in a series of briefings and other hearings that I will hold as Chairman of the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee. You can find my opening statement from the briefing below.
*********
Opening Statement of Chairman Barbara Boxer
Transportation Field Briefing
Sacramento, California
August 15, 2007
I want to thank everyone for being here today for this special briefing on the state of California’s transportation infrastructure.
I am very pleased that I am joined today by such a distinguished list of guests, who I know share my concern that we are not making the necessary investments in our transportation infrastructure.
I am pleased to welcome:
Senate President pro Tem Don Perata;
Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez;
Assembly Member Pedro Nava, Chair of the Transportation Committee;
Mr. Will Kempton, Director of Caltrans;
Mr. Jim Ghielmetti, Chair of the California Transportation Commission;
and Mr. Jim Earp, Executive Director of California Alliance for Jobs.
We also have with us in the audience --
Mr. Russ Burns of the Operating Engineers Local #3;
and Mr. Bill Camp of the Sacramento Central Labor Council.
Thank you all for being here today.
During evening rush hour on August 1st, the I-35 West bridge in Minneapolis collapsed, sending dozens of cars into the Mississippi River. The tragedy has already claimed the lives of 9 people, with several still missing.
It has also served as an urgent wake-up call that we cannot neglect our nation’s crumbling infrastructure.
It should not take a tragedy like the one in Minneapolis to remind us that the safety of our bridges, highways, and other infrastructure is a matter of life and death.
Half of all bridges in this country were built before 1964, and the average age of a bridge in the National Bridge Inventory is 40 years old.
Bridges built in the 1950s and 60s are reaching the end of their expected service life, and additional funding is needed for major repair or replacement.
This means we need to make significant investments in our bridges in the short term just to maintain them at safe functioning levels, followed by even larger investments over the next 20 to 30 years to completely replace aging bridges.
As Chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, today’s briefing is the start of a number of efforts I will be making in the coming months to review the status of U.S. infrastructure, beginning with the surface transportation sector.
Working together with my Republican ranking member, we are asking each of our colleagues on the Committee to talk with their local officials and gather information about the condition of surface transportation infrastructure in their State.
Moving forward, my immediate emphasis will be on addressing structural deficiencies and deteriorating infrastructure, which pose a threat to public safety.
When the Senate returns to session in September, we will begin hearings in the EPW Committee to identify critical transportation infrastructure needs and explore options for addressing them in advance of next transportation reauthorization bill in 2009.
Here in California, we already know that inadequate investment in our transportation infrastructure has had real consequences.
It has resulted in poor road conditions and increased vehicle operating costs for motorists. It has led to a major increase in congestion. And all the while, construction costs are rising with inflation.
The interstate system was designed in the 1950s when the number of cars on the roads and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) was far less than it is today. Miles traveled have increased from 600 billion in 1955 to 3 trillion in 2006, and it has been estimated that we could reach 7 trillion VMT per year by 2055.
And, according to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the truck tonnage carried on our freeways will increase by more than 100 percent between 2004 and 2035.
This increased truck traffic will only worsen congestion in urban areas across our country.
In the Sacramento area, the annual number of hours of delay experienced by motorists increased from fewer than 5 million hours in 1982 to more than 35 million hours in 2003.
Congestion in the Los Angeles metropolitan area costs commuters more than $1,600 per person per year in excess fuel and lost time, while the cost of congestion to San Francisco commuters is more than $1,300 per person per year.
Not only does congestion cost time and money due to delays, it is a major contributor to increased transportation-related emissions. So reducing congestion will not only help keep our people and our economy moving, it will also help improve air quality and public health.
This will require a major investment in our infrastructure to improve goods movement, which is particularly important for California.
Forty-five percent of all containerized cargo destined for the continental U.S. passes through California’s ports.
While this trade is vital to the economy, it clogs our roads, pollutes our air and water, and creates safety issues.
So in addition to finding new dedicated funds for much-needed highway investments, one of my priorities for the next transportation reauthorization bill will be addressing goods movement, clean air, and safety -- all of which are critical for California.
A concerted effort to address goods movement, with resources to match, has never been a central part of the transportation bill. But it will be this time. And in the process, we will need to explain why targeting investment in California’s transportation infrastructure benefits the nation and their local economies.
Congress will face many challenges in reauthorizing the transportation bill because the Highway Trust Fund, which funds the legislation through gas tax receipts, is expected to run out of funding prior to the end of the 2009.
That means we are spending Federal dollars on transportation faster than we are taking them in.
Reducing spending to match revenues is not an option, so we must be open to new sources of revenue and ideas.
When the EPW Committee conducts its hearings later this year and into next year on the many issues which need to be addressed in the next highway reauthorization, I want to hear from you.
I want and need to hear your ideas on what a modern transportation program should be. How do we fund it, and what do we fund?
I look forward to working with all of you who have an interest in transportation to develop proposals for the next reauthorization bill that will address the critical transportation needs of Californians and our nation.
What happened in Minnesota should serve as a warning for our states, for Congress, and for the Administration.
Last week I wrote President Bush and asked him to support immediate investment in emergency infrastructure repairs in America.
The Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction found that $2.1 billion that was appropriated for the Iraq Relief and Reconstruction Fund has not been spent on projects in Iraq. That is $2.1 billion that could be invested in our infrastructure here in America.
We have great challenges before us. But at the end of the day, it’s a matter of setting priorities.
If we are going to keep our people and our economy strong and healthy, we need to stop skirting the surface and make a serious investment in our transportation infrastructure.
So I want to thank you all for being here, and I look forward to hearing your thoughts.
Sincerely,
U.S. Senator Barbara Boxer