Manufacturers fully support the request made this week by House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor to the President to withdraw the Department of Transportation’s proposed changes to the trucking hours of service rules.  Citing a $1 billion  regulatory burden imposed by these changes and specific impacts to small business, the two House leaders identified this proposed rule as a “helpful first step toward lowering the $1.75 trillion annual cost of federal regulations.”

Manufacturers are heavily dependent on a healthy and competitive trucking sector.  Approximately 80 of shipments measured by value move by truck in the United States and the added costs of the proposed hours of service rule will create unwelcome challenges during a time of high fuel costs and continued economic recovery.  

The federal data shows that current rules have proven successful in achieving reductions in truck-related fatalities and truck accidents.  As we have noted in a comment submitted to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration earlier this year, the proposed hours of service rule changes will undermine manufacturers’ competitiveness, harm productivity and translate to higher consumer prices. 

The proposed rule is inconsistent with the President’s Executive Order on improving Regulation and Regulatory Review and manufacturers encourage the President and House leaders to work together to relieve this anticipated burden on our economy.     

Robyn Boerstling is director of transportation and infrastructure policy, National Association of Manufacturers.

With the six-month surface transportation extension now passed and signed by the President, manufacturers are eager for Congress to complete its long overdue work and get a robust, multi-year surface transportation authorization done in the early months of 2012. 

Twenty CEOs of large manufacturing and service companies echoed this message in a recent letter to the House and Senate leadership. The letter represents an important and relevant perspective from a mix of companies that support the overall manufacturing economy. 

Recognizing that there is “no singular solution to remedy the nation’s economic challenges” and the “need to rein in and prioritize spending,” these CEOs succinctly highlighted why transportation must be part of the pro-growth agenda. 

For these companies, it’s not just about jobs and keeping the transportation system safe and efficient which are critically important to the country.  The United States is in a situation today where our global competitors are outpacing us, building transportation networks for the 21^st century while we continue to hang our hat on what was accomplished in the 1950s and 60s.

Of note and recently highlighted in a report called Falling Apart and Falling Behind by the Building America’s Future Educational Fund, U.S infrastructure has dropped from number one in the world in 2005 to number 15 today according data published by the World Economic Forum. 

For these CEOs, that’s not acceptable and the NAM couldn’t agree more.

Robyn Boerstling, is director of transportation and infrastructure policy, National Association of Manufacturers.

Between the President’s jobs plan which includes a new round of $50 billion in transportation infrastructure funding and a late-breaking transportation extension agreement between House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid announced Friday evening, transportation issues will remain at the fore this week. 

The President formally unveiled his jobs legislation yesterday and the House voted today to pass the combined Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and surface transportation extension authorization (H.R. 2887) that maintains current policy and funding at FY 2011 levels for the next four months for the FAA and six months for surface transportation programs. 

For manufacturers that serve as a core group of suppliers to the transportation construction supply chain, the extension provides a level of certainty as Congress wades into larger discussions about two different reauthorization proposals from House Transportation & Infrastructure Chairman John Mica and Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman Barbara Boxer.  As the result of conflicts that have mired the ongoing FAA reauthorization effort and no guarantee that the surface authorization holds a place on the congressional calendar for the remainder of 2011, this multi-modal (FAA, highways, transit, FMCSA, NHTSA) extension provides the right amount of breathing room for Congress and stakeholders.  NAM supports this approach and House and Senate leaders are should be commended for coming together early and decisively. 

However, the reprieve for federal transportation programs and the President’s proposed boost in infrastructure funding should not be an excuse to put the FAA or the surface transportation reauthorizations on the back burner.  The expiration dates are still around the corner and manufacturers are eager for a serious, long-term approach to investing in infrastructure that will maintain our global competitiveness and help our manufacturing economy grow. 

The President’s proposal offers a needed one-year, $50 billion shot in the arm for various transportation infrastructure programs, but for the $50 billion and the $10 billion National Infrastructure Bank proposals to be truly effective, Congress needs to conclude the FAA and the surface transportation reauthorizations to counter our broken approach to investing in infrastructure.  Otherwise we’re just hobbling along and complex multi-year projects that support regional economies, require big factory orders and employ thousands, will be cast aside in favor of what’s easy to accomplish. 

Robyn Boerstling is director of transportation and infrastructure policy, National Association of Manufacturers.

Senators Wyden (D-OR) and Hoeven (R-ND) recently introduced the Transportation and Regional Infrastructure Project (TRIP) Bonds Act of 2011 which the National Association of Manufacturers supports. While TRIP Bonds will not solve the problem of shrinking balances in the Highway Trust Fund or a replacement for fuel tax revenues that fund critical transportation investments, the one-time $50B in new funding through bonding will provide much needed relief to states charged with building and maintaining a national network of transportation infrastructure.

Multiple modes of transportation would benefit from the bipartisan Wyden-Hoeven proposal, including roads, bridges, rail, transit, ports, and certain aspects of the inland waterway system (excluding locks and dams).  The TRIP Bonds proposal recognizes the enormous infrastructure gap facing the nation and seeks to use innovative financial tools to help meet long-term infrastructure needs. 

TRIP Bonds will be 100 percent targeted to eligible transportation projects and allocates 2 percent of the $50 billion to each state using State Infrastructure Banks as the primary vehicle to issue the bonds. The fair distribution of bonding authority avoids contentious equity issues among the states and also prohibits the practice of earmarking.  

Given the important role manufacturers play in supporting the transportation infrastructure supply chain (equipment, machinery, steel, asphalt, drainage systems, etc.) and the billions in unmet infrastructure needs that must be addressed in order to remain globally competitive, we encourage House and Senate leaders to advance this proposal during the ongoing surface transportation reauthorization discussion. 

While other nations are building and modernizing roads, bridges, transit systems, airports and ports at a rapid clip to serve manufacturing economies in Asia, South America and Europe, we need all the practical solutions we can find to help our economy prosper and grow. 

Robyn Boerstling is director of transportation and infrastructure policy, National Association of Manufacturers.

Ray LaHood

Secretary Ray LaHood gave the keynote address Tuesday night at the National Bike Summit. Bicycle Retailer and Industry News has a good report on the evening’s activities at the Grand Hyatt, “Sec. LaHood Calls for Action.” Excerpt:

LaHood, 65, shared his long family history in cycling, which began when he was a young boy riding his Schwinn bike—calling it “the best-looking bike in the neighborhood”—around Peoria, Illinois. He reassured attendees that he continues to be a “full partner” and that cyclists can also continue to count on President Obama’s support.

“Most of you worked hard to get him elected and the president’s budget for 2012 shows that livable communities really is his vision,” he said.

That’s an unusually direct political appeal for a Cabinet secretary to make at an ostensibly non-political event.  

Secretary LaHood elucidated the President’s agenda further in his post at the FastLane blog, “My message to the 2011 National Bike Summit: ‘We have work to do’.”

Now, the transportation budget President Obama proposed to Congress is a big, bold vision for the next generation of American transportation. And walkable, bikeable, livable communities are a central part of that vision.  The President’s 2012 budget would boost funding for pedestrian and bike-friendly communities to $4.1 billion.  And the Administration would like to see these essential resources included in the next six-year transportation legislation.

We thought the Administration was focused on jobs, economic growth and competitiveness, but instead we find that it has made “livable communities” a priority. And how, exactly, is urban development in Sheboygan, Montpelier or Corvallis a federal responsibility?

(continue reading…)

Lori Ann LaRocco, Senior Talent Producer at CNBC, solicited reaction to President Obama’s appearance Monday at the network for a blog post, “Dick Armey Strikes Back At Obama, CEOs Weigh In On the Rhetoric.” Among those she cites is the NAM’s president, John Engler:

Governor John Engler, President of that National Association of Manufacturers also echoed the need for private jobs stimulation to me when I asked him what was the one question he would have loved the President to have been asked.

“It is all about jobs and we would have liked to have heard President Obama talk more about specific plans to create jobs and allow manufacturers to compete.”

Governor Engler told me a story that would have lead up to his question.

“A year ago the transportation bill — the bill that pays for bridges, and highways, rail and public transit expired. It’s a six-year bill that’s usually reauthorized on a bipartisan basis,” said Engler.

“Last year, House Transportation Chairman Jim Oberstar proposed a plan to increase spending on infrastructure to $500 billion. That’s ten times the $50 billion down-payment that you proposed on Labor Day. And, getting the highway bill reauthorized early in 2010 would have created more jobs than your Labor Day proposal. Why didn’t you get involved into this debate a year ago?”

He makes a good point.

Green, Inc., the New York Times blog, interviews Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, delving into the Secretary’s recent pronouncement that federal policy would make no distinctions between motorized and non-motorized transportation. From “Q&A: Transportation Secretary on Biking, Walking and ‘What Americans Want’”:

Q. Bicycling and walking advocates had a very positive reaction to the policy change. But here at Green Inc., we heard mostly from critics who said it showed you were “delusional” or reflective of some sort of “Maoist” bent. What’s your response to the response?

A. My response is that this is what Americans want. Americans want alternatives. People are always going to drive cars. We’re always going to have highways. We’ve made a huge investment in our interstate highway system. We’ll always continue to make sure that those investments in the highways are maintained.

But, what Americans want is to get out of their cars, and get out of congestion, and have opportunities for more transit, more light rail, more buses, and some communities are going to street cars. But many communities want the opportunity on the weekends and during the week to have the chance to bike to work, to bike to the store, to spend time with their family on a bike.

So, this is not just Ray LaHood’s agenda, this is the American agenda that the American people want for alternatives to the automobile.

In the entire interview, there is not a single mention of “freight.” The words “truck” and “trucking” do not appear.

What Americans want right now is jobs, the creation of which requires the efficient movement of freight on trucks.  Secretary LaHood’s expressed vision of transportation priorities just doesn’t seem to recognize that economic reality.

P.S. Kudos to Green, Inc. for covering this issue. The Drudge Report linked to its previous story on March 26 with a headline, “War on Cars? Obama Transportation Sec.: ‘This is the end of favoring motorized transportation’…,” certainly driving a lot of traffic to Shopfloor’s coverage of the issue, as well.