Last night, Congressman Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), the senior Northeastern Member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, offered an amendment to H.R. 7, the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act, seeking to restore to that legislation the Projects of National and Regional Significance (PNRS) program.  The PNRS program is a bipartisan program designed to help finance major public works projects with regional or national importance; it is directed through competitive merit-based grants.  Three Republicans joined Democrats on the Committee in supporting the measure, but it was ultimately defeated 27-25 on a near-party line vote.

“Historically, traditional transportation funding programs have been insufficient to the financing of many major infrastructure projects,” said Nadler.  “Because funding formulas are distributed to each state, it is difficult to get multiple states to coordinate their budgets and to make the financial commitments necessary to build big regional projects.  Yet, many of these projects are critical to the functioning of our economy, particularly projects that improve the flow of goods and relieve major freight bottlenecks.  We clearly need to preserve a dedicated funding stream for major, multi-state projects.”

The following is the text of Nadler’s statement on the amendment, offered at the markup of H.R. 7 in the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee:

“As many of my colleagues on this committee may recall, when we wrote the SAFETEA-LU bill, we recognized that the traditional transportation funding programs were insufficient to finance many major infrastructure projects.  Because the funding formulas are distributed to each state, it is difficult to get multiple states to coordinate their budgets and to make the financial commitments necessary to build big regional projects.  In some cases, the projects are simply too expensive to fit into a state’s transportation plan that is already stretched too thin to maintain the system, let alone expand it.  And, in some cases, critical projects can involve many different agencies and modes of transportation, and they are not easily eligible for funding under the core highway programs.

“Yet, many of these projects are critical to the functioning of our economy, particularly projects that improve the flow of goods and relieve major freight bottlenecks.  I have never understood why we don’t have a robust program dedicated to freight movement.  Projects that assist in goods movement should not be in competition with passenger highway or transit projects.  The reality is that, whether Congress, the Administration, or some other body is making the decision, there are political considerations made in determining which projects to fund, and something that saves people 10 or 15 minutes off their commute will invariably be given priority over something that helps freight move more efficiently.  As the old adage goes, ‘freight doesn’t vote.’  As a result, freight planning tends to receive short shrift.  We must have a dedicated freight program that is structured so as not to be in too much competition with passenger highway and transit projects.

“The entire system is really an intermodal global shipping system.  A truck on the highway hauls a container that was loaded overseas, handled through a foreign port, carried on an ocean vessel, and that probably traveled by rail at some point.  These goods travel through several states, and relieving freight bottlenecks and chokepoints will only benefit highway users.  As the American Association of Port Authorities wrote in a letter to this committee, ‘Many freight needs are national in focus, so providing all funding to the states will continue to leave a void for the national and regional projects.’  We must continue to fight for public policy that recognizes the multimodal and multijurisdictional nature of goods movement, and encourages energy-efficiency and reduces congestion.

“That is why I am offering this amendment to restore the Projects of National and Regional Significance account, as it was originally included in SAFETEA-LU as a competitive merit-based grant program.  We are not creating a new program.  This account is well-known.  When this committee held preliminary hearings on surface transportation reauthorization, we heard testimony from numerous people about major projects that need to be built, and the need for a Projects of National and Regional Significance account to enable their completion.

“This is a program that has bipartisan support.  I, along with my colleague, Representative Jean Schmidt, sent a bipartisan letter to this committee urging the inclusion of a robust Projects of National and Regional Significance program in this bill.  I ask unanimous consent to include a copy of that letter in the record.  And, in the Senate EPW committee markup, this program was included with bipartisan support.  We should do the same today and put our ability to fund large projects vital to the survival of our economy on as strong a footing as possible as we head toward negotiations with the Senate on a final bill.”

###