and that it’s hurting their business,
it will be very easy to have continuing resolutions.
QHow would you rate the Obama White House on its
knowledge of transport issues and
its management of transportation
policy?
AWe’ve seen a White House that has come to grasp the power of
infrastructure. What they haven’t
done yet is paint a comprehensive
picture of what transportation policy should look like. For example,
they haven’t talked a great deal
about the importance of the
nation’s freight infrastructure.
Freight doesn’t vote. People say
that over and over again, but it’s
more than just a saying. When I got
here, I was told the most important
thing I could do was bring business-
people to the table and talk about
transportation. That’s because
infrastructure is not facing busi-
nesses squarely in the face the way
taxes and health care are.
QIn previous reauthorization cycles, shippers haven’t
stepped up to the table and voiced
their opinions about transportation. Are you seeing a stronger,
more active shipper voice this time
around?
AI think we are seeing shippers becoming more engaged. But
it tends to be on very specific
industry-related issues. We could
always use more shipper involvement in simply talking about the
role that good-performing infrastructure plays in getting their business done. It is vital to hear a retailer saying how important our freight
network is in getting products to
market, and how it helps generate
jobs. We need more shippers talking about the role infrastructure
;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;
;;;!;;;;;;;;; ;;; ;; ;;;;;;; ; ;;" ;;;#;; ;;;;; ;;;;; ;;;;; ;;;;;;;;#
;"! ; ;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;
; ; ;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;; ;;;;;!;;;;;!;;;
; ;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;; ;
; ; ;;;;;;;; ;; !;;;;;;;;;;;
;;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;;;;; '&%$###$"! ;;;'&%$###$ %%;;$$$#"! ;#;;;
;;;;;;;; ;
;;;;;;;
; ;;;
;;;;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;;
; ;;;;;;;;; ;;;;;; ;;;!;;;;;;;
; ;; ;;;;; ;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
; ;;;;!;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
QDoes there need to be more focus on freight in this reauthorization cycle?
ADefinitely. Freight was left on the cut- ting room floor in the last reauthorization [in 2005]. As the bill was moving
through conference, freight programs
were cut to make room for member earmarks and in fiddling with the “formula”
here and there. There has not been a
focused effort on freight, and to be honest,
the freight community doesn’t help itself
because quite often they are at war with
themselves. It’s shippers against carriers.
Or it’s the trucks versus the rails. When
you tell Congress that freight is important
and they ask what we should do about it
and you can’t give them specifics because
no one agrees, you put yourself in a bad
situation.
QThe Chamber has said its members will support an increase in gasoline
and diesel fuel taxes to finance infrastructure improvements. Is that still the
Chamber’s position?
AOur board has said it would support a reasonable increase in fuel taxes as
long as the transportation reauthorization
legislation meets national needs, lays the
groundwork for a sustainable revenue
source for the future, creates the opportunity for more public-private partnerships,
limits congressional earmarks, and removes
barriers to project delivery.
QWhat’s reasonable in the Chamber’s view?
AI would guess something that’s phased in, maybe 3 to 5 cents a year for five
years and then [increases] indexed to the
inflation rate.
QIs it doable?
AThis is a problem of political will and of being honest with the voters. You
have a wide array of stakeholders that say if
you do good things with [reauthorization
legislation], we will support a gas tax
increase. And yet for some reason, this is
the political football. It gets the same gut
reaction as if Congress were to go out and
raise middle class taxes by 25 percent.
