The California Institute for Federal Policy Research
419 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington, D.C. 20003
voice: 202-546-3700   fax: 202-546-2390 ransdell@calinst.org   http://www.calinst.org

House T&I Committee Version of TEA LU 2005 Bill - 3/2/05
for more information, visit http://www.calinst.org/transpo.htm

Transportation Panel Approves $289 Billion Bill, No Minimum Guarantee Changes Yet

On March 2, 2005, the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee reported out a $284 billion highways, transit and highway safety bill by voice vote, taking concrete steps toward renewing surface transportation programs for the first time in this Congress. The bill (HR 3), sponsored by T&I Chair Don Young (AK), strongly resembles last year's bipartisan House transportation legislation; however, both Chairman Young and Ranking Democrat James Oberstar (MN) expressed disappointment at the funding level of the bill. Chairman Young also sidestepped the topic of securing more highway formula funds for donor states until the bill's floor introduction, expected to occur next week.

The reported House bill renamed the Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (TEALU) authorizes $225.5 billion in highway funds, $52.3 billion for transit costs, and $6.1 billion for safety programs over 6 years. It boosts overall transportation funds by 42 percent over prior levels under the 1998 Transportation Equity Act for the 21^st Century (TEA-21) law (P.L. 105-178).

TEA-21 expired in 2003 and Congress has not completed work on a successor. Instead, federal transportation programs remain in operation due to the passage of temporary extension laws. The most recent extension runs out at the end of this May.

Opening statements delivered by senior members reiterated the imperative need for a finished transportation bill before the extension's expiration, "we will not remain an economic power, if we do not maintain and improve our transportation infrastructure," said Chair Young. Rep. Oberstar viewed the House funding level as inadequate, calling the $284 billion total "a tragedy and a shame". He remarked that the bill did not reflect the funding level needed for transportation programs to keep pace with demands, and was concerned that insufficient transportation funds would impact the nation's safety, mobility and global competitiveness challenges.

A manager's amendment making several changes to the bill and folding in a number of earmarks was introduced and approved by voice vote. Among the bill's new provisions are: added flexibility for states to use excess funds after a project's completion; eligibility criteria for states to qualify for alcohol-impaired driving program funds; a new study examining the effects and risks of glare; expanded eligibility for Clean Fuels Formula program activities to include new facilities construction and improvements; language exempting transit capital projects costing less than $25 million from Small Starts evaluations; a study evaluating the needs of and barriers to effective public transportation of people with cognitive impairments; amended criteria governing motor carrier registration regulations; and hours of service exemptions for commercial operators transporting agricultural products.

No language was added during the mark up addressing the 90.5 percent minimum rate of return currently awarded to each state in the form of minimum guarantee (MG) funds. Members from donor states -- those that send more tax dollars to the highway trust fund (HTF) than they receive back in federal highway spending -- had pushed for a hike in the minimum rate of return to 95 percent for each state. According to Rep. John Mica (FL), an effort to raise the minimum guarantee to 92.6 percent would be an acceptable compromise. "Given the dollars available, it's the best we can do," said Rep. Mica. Details of a proposed minimum guarantee plan were not available. However, a plan is expected to be drafted and submitted as an amendment when the bill reaches the House floor.

Although the mark up was characterized by congeniality and bipartisanship, some members voiced concerns about potential changes to the MG. Donee state member Rep. Jerrold Nadler (NY), voiced opposition to any shift in the distribution of MG funds and argued that the structure of the program punishes energy efficient states such as New York. Committee member Earl Blumenauer (OR) preferred an MG framework that would focus on assisting communities and metropolitan areas suffering from funding disparities rather than states. According to Rep. Blumenauer, out of 256 metropolitan areas, 2/3rds pay more in gas taxes than they receive back in transit and highway funds. The Los Angeles/Riverside metropolitan area was highlighted as among the most disenfranchised communities, with residents there sending $1 billion more to the HTF than they collect in expenditures, according to Rep. Blumenauer.

In other news, the House Ways and Means Committee chaired by Rep. Bill Thomas (Bakersfield) approved companion legislation (HR 996) that would extend the HTF's authorization through 2009. HR 996, approved by voice vote with little committee discussion, updates the purposes of HTF and makes technical adjustments that would make the TEALU measure commensurate with the $289 billion price tag.

It is rumored that the Senate will mark up its version of the highway bill as early as March 16^th. A prospective Senate bill's overall cost levels are likely to match that of the House's; however, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chair James Inhofe (OK) has not ruled out the possibility of that figure rising, once the bill reaches the Senate floor.

For more information on TEALU (HR 3), visit the House Transportation and Infrastructure website at http://www.house.gov/transportation .

The data and capabilities are derived from the Federal Formula Grants and California Project – a joint venture between the California Institute and the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC).  http://www.calinst.org/transpo.htm 

TEALU Bus and Highway Earmark Data To Appear on Institute Website

The California Institute is reviewing the voluminous information regarding earmarked projects listed in H.R. 3, the new version of the House TEALU bill to reauthorize federal highway and transit programs. Project information includes 414 bus program earmarks and 3,315 road and highway earmarks, better known as High Priority Projects or HPPs.

Once the review is completed, information (including a list of all California projects and a comparison of state totals for projects) it will be posted on the California Institute transportation page, at http://www.calinst.org/transpo.htm .

The information and analysis is made available thanks to capabilities developed under the Federal Formula Grants and California project, a joint venture between the California Institute for Federal Policy Research and the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC). For all products in the study series, visit the PPIC website at http://www.ppic.org/main/series.asp?i=22 .

The project includes two major transportation reports. A paper on California's relationship with federal highway programs is available at http://www.ppic.org/main/publication.asp?i=467 , and a September 2004 report on federal transit programs is available at http://www.ppic.org/main/publication.asp?i=550 .

Click here to return to the California Institute home page.  Or click here to e-mail.