Last week I had the opportunity to participate in a conference on
rebuilding America's infrastructure. It was held at the Woodrow Wilson
Center in the heart of the Nation's Capital. It is the 200th anniversary
of the Gallatin Plan, initiated by President Thomas Jefferson, which
planned canals and post roads. And it is the 100th anniversary of
President Theodore Roosevelt's conference with all of the Nation's
Governors to discuss infrastructure. That began the National Governors
Conference.
This conference was initiated by Congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR). He
is known as the leading Congressional proponent of light rail and
streetcars. In addition to Blumenauer, Congressmen Tom Petri (R-WI) and
Chris Shays (R-CO) also spoke at the conference. Senator James Inhofe
(R-OK), one of the most principled conservatives in the Congress, is
fond of saying that the only two activities sanctioned by the
Constitution are to provide for the common defense and to build
infrastructure.
I served on the panel which dealt with transportation. All of the
panelists agreed that we need a vision to explain to the American people
what needs to be done. The major disagreement among the panelists
occurred as to whether the existing mechanisms we have to fund
transportation projects are adequate or do we need to start over. The
Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, upon which I
have served for the past two years, recommended that we do not merely
re-authorize the highway and transit program which expires next year but
rather that we have a fundamentally different way of authorizing
projects. It is an utter disgrace that it takes more than a decade and a
half between the time that a project is proposed and it is funded. Cost
escalation alone eats up most if not all of the federal contribution.
Finally, the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) is permitting Salt
Lake City to build two different light-rail branches simultaneously
rather than fully completing one project before the next line is built.
Now Houston would like the same consideration for several light-rail
lines which have been approved by the voters.
Some of the panelists thought that the existing system only needed to be
perfected whereas some of us contend that we just need to start over.
One question arose - to wit, do we need another commission to deal with
infrastructure matters beyond transportation? I have no objection to
that idea but what I really would like to see is a transportation czar
who could implement our recommendations.
I am grateful to Blumenauer for taking this initiative. We had an
excellent audience which asked extraordinarily good questions. One of
the participants was John Norquist, President of the Congress for the
New Urbanism. He likes to tell people that his organization and the Free
Congress Foundation (both of which have Congress in the title) are the
only two organizations which favor both mass transit and school choice.
He and Blumenauer were guests on the Right Hour, my radio show on the
Right Talk Radio Network, Both were optimistic that Congress would face
up to the need to deal with infrastructure. One issue which has proved
very controversial is the sale or lease of highways and bridges to
private investors. Our Commission came out four-squarely against the
sale or lease of our infrastructure to foreign governments and foreign
investors. Some politicians who have supported these public private
partnerships are now in trouble. Americans simply do not want to see
private interests, especially foreign interests, controlling our
infrastructure. Granted money is tight and it is tempting to raise easy
money that way but people who have paid for these roads with tax dollars
do not like the idea of leasing or selling them.
Next year is going to be a critical year for roads and rails. This
conference offers a preview. Exciting times are ahead of us.
|