Its a bill that provides very certainty and funding so our nonfederal artners can make smart long investments. Implemented by the u. S. Department of transportation. We look forward to building a infrastructure with our state and local partners and their oing to welcome today. I am grateful for this subcommittee hearing. I think it indicates that our subcommittee wants to get behind all of the interest that weve heard on infrastructure and see what we can really do. We know that a large infrastructure package idea, the idea of a large infrastructure package, which is on the minds of many in the administration and on our minds is not going to magically appear. We did a lot of and ill say, deservedly so, a lot of selfcongratulation when we passed the First Service transportation bill in 10 years, and i must say im very grateful, mr. Chairman, that it was a good bipartisan effort and i know you share with me the disappointment in order to get any increase whatsoever after 10 years, we had to make a sixyear bill a fiveyear bill. I dont know how long we can keep that kind of disinvestment from going on. I say disinvestment, because if youre not even investing in a state of good repair, much less the new infrastructure we need, youre not investing, we are disinvesting, and when i say disinvesting, remember how we built this country. Ever since this idea of the federal transportation infrastructure package was created by president eisenhower, the country has understood that you cant be a great country unless you continuously invest in infrastructure of various kinds. The Congressional Budget Office tells us that we face a shortfall just over the next decade if were trying to continue to fund the f. A. S. T. Act funding levels, and it says we need 17 billion more a year than f. A. S. T. Act levels at the federal level to improve our infrastructure and maintain a state of good repair reducing that backlog. Im very pleased that the president has said good things about infrastructure, so i hastened to get a hold of his socalled skinny budget and was very disappointed to see really unheard of cuts to popular Transportation Programs. So instead of investing after my hopes had been raised, for example, in transit, urgently needed to alleviate congestion, the president wants to stop all new investments in transit by cutting off the new starts program. Im grateful nevertheless for the continuing bipartisanship on this committee. I was pleased to sign a letter with chairman graves and the leadership of the full committee to urge the Appropriation Committee to fully fund all f. A. S. T. Act programs as authorized for the remainder of 2017 and the upcoming 2018 budget. Im still banking on a president who talks about a trillion dollars proposal, at least supporting us as we fight to maintain the meager funding levels we had. We know that the budget, im not terribly im not terribly pulling my hair out that the president s cuts will go through because no matter who is president , the appropriators always rewrite the budget. But i am concerned that the administration seems to be more enamored with pushing private capital and financing, which would end up making projects more expensive than traditional funding mechanisms and regulatory reforms than making investments. And investorcentered approach will do little to improve infrastructure across the nation. You simply cant build your infrastructure and expect that toll roads will somehow pay for it. There must be a revenue stream, and for the modern era in had american life, it is always with this committee and subcommittee. Nor can we streamline our way out of inAdequate Funding. Secretary child said recently, the problem is not money imagine saying that about roads and transit. The problem is always money. She didnt say that, that was editorializing. It was the delays to permitting processes that hold up projects for years making them risky investments are nationwide, undergo any rigorous environmental review. Most are what we see everyday, 90 are exempt from the categorization process and are exempt from rigorous levels of review. Also refutes the notion that more streamlining now is the prudent cost of action it concludes that additional streamlining provisions in the f. A. S. T. Act are actually slowing down the department of u. S. Department of transportations ability to implement the project delivery accelerations put into map 21, in other words, streamlining measures on top of each other before they can be implemented and simply does not help and frankly does not happen. I have always defended opportunities for Public Participation and continue to believe that it helps us improve the ultimate project. Community input and buy in are crucial to the successful and expeditious advancement of transportation projects getting public im sorry, gutting Public Participation in the name of cutting red tape is something that will harm our roads and well harm constituents who use our roads infrastructure. I dont believe we can reinvent the wheel when it comes to transportation and infrastructure, i just think theres no way around our obligation, as the congress of the United States to provide states and local governments with the funding and the flexibility that they alone know what to do with to produce smart and efficient projects, allowing the states who have the wisdom once we give them the money, to go ahead. I very much look forward to todays witnesses. Ive read the headlines about atlanta. And i85 will be interesting to hear what we can do and what you can do on that unforeseen circumstance. Thank you very much, and i look forward to the testimony. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Thank you, Ranking Member. I now turn to the Ranking Member of the full committee, mr. Defazio. Rep. Defazio thank you, mr. Chairman. Thanks for this important hearing. Ill just restate a few things because they do merit restating. We have a 836 billion backlog on that need, nearly 140,000 bridges need repair and replacement, over 90 billion just to bring existing transit up to a state of good repair, let alone build out new transit options for people, yet we havent increased the user fee here in wdashington, d. C. In the quarter of a century, over the past few years, 17 states have raised their gas tax and nobody has been recalled, nobody has lost their reelection and it has not been a controversy, the American People get it. Theyre tired of sitting in traffic. Theyre tired of blowing out tires, and theyre tired of being detoured around weightlimited or closed bridges. Theyre tired of the decrepit state of our mass transit. They want to see action. Im sending a letter to urge her to come down and work with congress to create a consensus around Real Investment and solutions for the nations infrastructure problems. Im hearing a lot of talk about infrastructure banks, private tax credits, and were doing to streamline the federal approval process. Lets address that briefly. First off most p3s are projects a billion dollars or larger. You have got to have a rate of return. We have got to attract the investment. They have to be told of some other way to recoup the investment. Theyre generally 5 to 1 public money to private money. Now, the speaker has said he wants 401 private money to public money. That means no more p3s. There are no investors are going to put up, you know, at a 401 ratio and do a p3. They generally put up 10, 15 at the most, and the rest comes from local bonding or state bonding, municipal bonds, whatever. So thats myth number one. Infrastructure, banks, private activity bonds, you know, those are new forms of local borrowing again they require a revenue stream, hence tolling or some other way of recouping the investment and, of course, they increase the cost. Now secretary chao, unfortunately, was given some alternate facts by somebody. Investors say theyre waiting to invest, so the problem is not money, its delays caused by permitting projects that hold up projects up years even decades, making them risky investments. No, thats not the problem. In fact, we made 42 major policy changes for streamlining in 21. Some of them have run into conflicts with the f. A. S. T. Act we did streamlining and more streamlining on top of streamlining, lets get all of that implemented and see if theres still any issues. I dont think youll find many. In fact, more than 90 of the projects go for it, which is basically filling out a few sheets of paper and might take you a month or two months at the most. That isnt the issue here. You cant streamline your way out of lack of funding. 4 of projects require Environmental Impact statements, and as Ranking Member norton noted, most of those are held up at the local or state level because of controversies surrounding those projects redesign and other things, which came out in hearings which are required under the process. Thats 4 of the projects. 96 dont even have to go through a rigorous environmental review. A recent report by the treasury looked at 40 economically significantly transportation water projects whose completion has been slowed or in jeopardy, ah, Proof Positive about streamlining. No, the report found that a lack of public funding is, by far, the major factor hindering the completion of those projects. So plain and simple, a provision in the f. A. S. T. Act that says if Congress Appropriates more money to transportation, it flows through the policies in the f. A. S. T. Act. We dont need to spend a year or two rewriting the policies, arguing over transit highway split. Arguing how much goes here or there, arguing we dont have to go through any of the policy debate. All we need to do is have the guts to put up a little bit of money and thats why i introduced the penny for progress. As ive said before, if anybody around here thinks theyll lose their election, if they vote on something that caps the indexization increase at one and 1. 5 cents a gallon a year, then you dont need to be here. Thank you, mr. Chairman. Chairmain graves thank you. We have mr. Patterson. Hes testifying on behalf of the american state highway and transportation officials. We also have mr. Gary thomas who is president of the executive director of the dallas area Rapid Transit, hes testifying on behalf of the American Public transportation association. Rep. Johnson thank you very much, mr. Chairman. As a representative from dallas, im proud to introduce not only a friend and partner, but a good executive who is mr. Gary thomas, president and executive director of the dallas area Rapid Transit, which we call d. A. R. T. , the largest growing metropolitan area in the country. He joined d. A. R. T. In 1988 and since grown it to the longest and largest at 93 miles long. D. A. R. T. Has become a leading example of how to effectively manage and grow flourishing Public Transportation. I happen to know they have strong relationships with our federal partners at us d. O. T. And the federal transit administration, thanks to mr. Thomas. Hes effective at cultivating Strategic Partnerships to meet the needs of robust Transit Network in the dallas metroplex. With that, mr. Chairman, i am proud to introduce mr. Thomas to the committee with great anticipaon to his testimony and his plea for money. Thank you, and i yield back. Rep. Johnson i thank you, mr. Chairman. Its my distinct pleasure to recognize and welcome my friend kasim reed mayor, of atlanta. I can think of no better witness than to offer the honorable kasim reed. Mayor reed, when he first came into office, he balanced atlantas budget and took care of the challenge of the unfunded pension system, which had been languishing for many years, thats been taken care of successfully six years ago. He has invested in hiring more Police Officers in atlanta. Our crime rate continues to go down. Mayor reed is the 59th mayor of the city of atlanta, serving in that capacity since 2010. Bipartisan way with federal stake holders on Economic Development and transportation issues. Atlanta experienced Economic Development and a population boom, for instance, his work with governor nathan deal and the Obama Administration to obtain federal support for the port of savannah expansion project has resulted in much Economic Development for the atlanta region and for the state of georgia. Upgrading roads and bridges and improve the citys transportation infrastructure. The city of atlanta under mayor reeds leadership is undergoing a historic 2. 6 billion expansion of the metropolitan atlanta Rapid Transit authority, or m. A. R. T. A. , as well as expanding and completing such as atlantas belt line, which is a 22mile stretch of trails and transit around the city on the abandon railways. This project has opened up a lot of Economic Development in terms of new housing and rehabilitated housing, new residents coming in, businesses opening up, communities being created that are walkable, likable, and interconnected, and also at the same time, he has presided over the opening of the Maynard JacksonInternational Terminal at the Atlanta Airport as atlanta matures into a world class city. He is overseeing currently a 6 billion expansion of the Hartsfield Jackson airport, an international airport, the worlds Busiest Airport at the same time, building a state of the art stadium world class facility with the retractable roof for the falcons. So much that we can talk about mayor kasim reeds leadership of atlanta. Hes leveraging the strength of partnerships with the state of georgia, college and universities in the private sector to build an innovative transportation infrastructure that ensures mobility and creativity for atlantas residents, businesses and visitors, all taking place while atlanta remains an affordable city where every day working people can afford to live, work, and play. With that im proud to introduce to this committee, mayor kasim reed. Chairman graves thank you, mr. Johnson. With that ill ask consent that our witnesses full statements be included in the record. Without objection, that is so m ordered. Since your written testimony is going to be part of the committee, the committee will please ask that you limit your summary to five minutes. With that, mr. Patterson, well start with you. Mr. Patterson i am here to testify on behalf of odot. First we want to thank you, mr. Chairman, and other members of your committee for your leadership and efforts to increase the efficiency of delivering transportation projects in collaboration and cooperation with the federal government. The state d. O. T. s continue to seek opportunities and create solutions to solve the deteriorating Transportation System. All of us have come to realize traditional funding is important that serves as a partial solution to the problem. The f. A. S. T. Authorization of 305 billion for federal highway, highway safety, transit, Passenger Rail programs from 2016 to 2020 could not have have been timelier and supporting our transportation infrastructure. Equally importantly involves major problematic policy reforms contained in both the f. A. S. T. Act. It is our hope that congress will feel comfortable in seeking additional reforms that will provide further opportunities to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of Transportation Programs and project delivery while remaining responsible stewards of taxpayer resources and both human and natural environments. Moving forward, we must develop a modern revenue model for serving our transportation investments. The days of tax consumption for a fleet of ever increasing fuel efficient vehicles is nearing its end. What we consider what we consider innovative funding today must and will become a new normal for funding transportation. Until that time, it is imperative that the annual Obligation Authority and the f. A. S. T. Act be fully honored, the structural cashflow deficit in the Highway Trust Fund be resolved, and the schedule of rescissions of Contract Authority be abolished. Even in todays environment of financing solution, it remains imperative that direct funding of transportation investments remain the primary focus. The reality remains the most transportation projects cannot generate adequate revenue to service debt or provide the return on investment required by private sector equity holders. Everyone recognizes that the f. A. S. T. Act only provides a nearterm solution to the transportation funding. That is because the Highway Trust Fund continues to remain at a crossroads. The Highway Trust Fund has provided stable, reliable and sometimes substantial highway and transit funding for deck ka since its inception in 1956, but this is no longer the case. Since 2008, it has sustained through a series has been sustained through a series of general Fund Transfers now amounting to 140 billion. According to the january 2017 baseline of congressional of the Congressional Budget Office, the Highway Trust Fund spending is estimated to exceed receipts by about 17 billion in fy 21 growing to about 4 billion to 2027. Furthermore, the Highway Trust Fund is expected to experience a significant cash shortfall in 2021 since it cannot incur negative im sorry, since it ca