>> thank you. mr. chairman, i want to mention the fact that beech grove station facility, if it wasn't for the chairman and working with the members in that area, we are talking about doing a major downsizing and sending the people to delaware. now, you know, that we've got the funds, fixing up that facility and so we did have a job and i really think that's the way it should work. >> yes, ma'am. >> thank you very much and i yield back the balance of my time. >> mr. boozman, unido tyme. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. paniati, in your testimony you said that the maintenance of effort by the states was proving to be a challenge. how will dot ensure recovery acts money that they are getting to supplement rather than use it

to supplant expenditures that are going to be done anyway? >> what we've done with the maintenance of effort, this is a provision that the state dot's were not used to. so in their first response to providing the certification and the maintenance of effort, when we received those we received a variety of responses. some with contingencies on them and other qualifications that we did not feel complied with the law. the secretary made a determination to go back out and offer additional guidance to each of the states, and a request for them to reevaluate and resubmit their certification. we received in forming certifications back from all but one state, and just recently we issued guidance to our state divisions to go and sit down with each of the state dot's to review with the state how they computed the numbers that are in the certification to make sure we're comfortable with the

competition. we will be getting regular reports from each date on the maintenance of effort as time goes by. and our goal is to ensure an equitable and level playing field that when we get to the point of august redistribution in 2011, which is the outcome that we are able to say whether a state has met their maintenance of effort or not, and determine whether they will share in the august redistribution or not. >> very good. i appreciate you. i know you are working very, very hard, you know, to get the money out to make sure that it's spent in the appropriate way. in my district, i think every member's district, in fact, i think in every elected official right now, it everyone needs to think how can i create jobs, how can i protect pension plans, things like that. in the commission that was done where people worked so hard, the

challenge was, you know, they told us that the average road project was eight to 10 years. now something like that. so i know that it's a tremendous challenge. in the start of your testimony, you talked about creating or saving jobs. right now that the unemployment is continued to creep and is at a very, very serious, serious situation. how do you differentiate, what is creating your saving? >> right now we are focused on getting people to work without really focusing on the differentiation. we are really focused on how may people are at work on federal aid highway projects. our most recent information, which was through may, indicated that it may we had 6000 full-time equivalent jobs under way. that represented a 400% increase over the data from march and april. these are good paying jobs.

$35 an hour average wage as compared to $15.50 in the general economy. but i think the thing that really gives us comfort that a lot more are coming is the fact that we know we have 1500 projects that are underway, that that's about a third of the money that's been obligate gaited today. and that will create some 50000 jobs. in those jobs are going to be ramping up very quickly as we get deeper into the summer months and construction on those projects ramps up even more. >> thank you. one more thing. mr. babbitt, the recovery bill provided faa with a $2 million to hire additional staff to work grants and provide grant oversight. how is that going? have you spent the money? have we wrapped up in that regard? >> yes, sir. i can get you greater detail, but we have begun deploying that. we are looking at several things. one of which is, you know,

they're some sophisticated ways that you can look at higher risk projects and, you know, analyze at risk for better oversight. and so that's where we have put some of the money. my understanding is we have about half of it in gaged already, and looking to the point arrest of it as these projects go forward. but i can get you very detailed information on the exact projects and the exact allocation. >> that would be hopeful. thank you, mr. chairman. >> mr. boozman, your question about jobs created, and job saved, that is an accounting that we will specifically receive in the next 30 day report. we thought initially that in this second report that the berries motormen ministrations would be able to report on those job figures, but it turned out to be a little more difficult to gather the information because of the lag in time in reporting

and. but this little flash drive is now at work. the information will be available, in our july hearing we will get those figures and we will make sure that your point which is also mine concern is adequately answered. >> very good, mr. chairman. i think that is a challenge. you know, to get good information in that regard. and in the other challenge as i asked to make sure that the projects that are being done are not projects that would have already been slated to get done that are additional projects. >> the recovery act language from our committee was very specific data recovery act funds which are 100% funding should be in addition to the program of projects the state had committed to undertake prior to enactment of the recovery act. we surveyed all state dot's

indie sambar and again in january. the simmer of 2008 and january of this year. for a listing of projects that the state dot said would meet the qualification designed, engineered, completed right away acquire down to final design engineering, and all that is lacking is the money. and they gave us, gave our committee, chaired on both sides, that information. bentley said all right, now the governor must sign off on two documents. the document of the program of projects to be carried out under the 8020 program and the want to be carried out under the 100% recovery act funds. and the same with the transit agencies. because we don't want job substitution. we don't want project substitutions. this is going to be net new jobs created. and in our reporting, we are watching very carefully and will have more complete information

or more advanced information in our next reporting period. we are very alert to that issue. we also want to know, and i have heard from some members, there's a some state in which projects are being equitably distributed. we want to know that as well. >> mr. mayne? >> thank you, very much. thank you, mr. chairman. i appreciate your leadership with this committee and what you are doing and i'm pleased to let you know, the governor mentioned this wednesday that maine has committed 100% of the bridge and highways so those other states were complaining about the cumbersome paperwork i'm sure would be willing to take that money and put to good use in the state of maine. i have a question for vester

paniati. >> if i can interrupt the gym and. that is a provision of the act by the way. that if states don't use their funds in the 90 days, they don't obligate the money they don't have it on their contract they lose it to states that are ready. i just want to reinforce that. >> we are ready to go. my question to mr. paniati, and i will quote your comments which i am very pleased to see your testimony and how enthusiastic that you are on the recovery, reinvestment act, that you mentioned that the act is unprecedented effort to jumpstart our economy, create and save millions of jobs and put a down payment on addressing long neglected challenges so our country can thrive in the 21st century. you also went on to say, and i quote, the recovery act has energized working people and companies of all sizes in a lifeline of americans who work

in construction, have been especially hard hit by the recession. overall, the administration estimates the highway portion alone of the recovery act will eventually create or sustain close to 3000 jobs by 2012. throughout her testimony you really talk about the recovery act, how important it is. i guess, and they believe that you really mean what you say in your testimony. i guess my question then is if, in fact, that you are so enthusiastic and how great the recovery act and what it's doing for our country, have you or the secretary talked to the economic advisory council on why if this is so great, why are they encouraging congress to hold off on the highway bill for another 18 months? >> i have not talked to the council and the economic

advisers on that. i am sure that the secretary has. you know, we obviously have a very close and near-term challenge with the highway trust fund. that we have a fund that if action is not taken, our current projections indicate why the end of august or early september, we will not be able to sustain the payments in the normal manner. so obviously action is important and needed soon. i think the secretary in the administration believe that it is important in taking that action to take a comprehensive and affordable look working the administrative working closely with the members here in developing that approach for reauthorization. and that taking the time in 18 months to deal with both the initial prices and he felt that copperheads approach is the most appropriate way to proceed. >> mr. chairman, if i might

continue. follow-up on this hearing. i know we're talking about the jobs and what the recovery act has been doing for this great country. i'd like to know if you can provide at a later time with the inaction of dealing with the authorization bill what negative effect that's going to have on the economy, because it definitely will have a negative effect. looking at a positive statement on the money and jobs, this recovery act is doing. so the inaction and lack of leadership on behalf of the administration when you look at authorization. i would like to know the negative effect that is going to have, the longer we put off enacting the authorization. so i know you can't answer that question today, but i want to know what negative effect that it will have if we delay action, especially the 18 months that you are talking about. so if you can provide that to

the committee, appreciate it. without, mr. chairman, i want to thank you once again and the ranking member for your proactive way that you are dealing with our infrastructure, needs, and his country and i look forward to working with you as we move forward not only on economic recovery act, but also moving forward on the really progressive highway operation to let you in the ranking member. with that idea back, mr. chairman. >> thank you very much, mr. michaud, for those comments and that it very important question which, if mr. paniati and the administration can't answer it, we have an awful lot of other folks who can. the key element to keep in mind is as the recovery act stimulus winds down next summer or fall,

the trust fund will be at its lowest ebb. and there will be no reauthorization under the administration proposal. and the effective stimulus will be gone, and the existing law under their plan would stay in effect, and that means funding and a substantial lower-level than was authorized in the 2005 bill. and the economy will suffer very severe job losses. as well as not enjoy the benefit of the 6 million jobs to be created over six years of our committee bill. >> mr. chairman, could i speak to that for a minute because the transit program is also authorized under that program and i think it's important to point out, the president is focused on economic recovery, and probably the greatest danger looming could really start to economic recovery is as jeff pointed out the eminent bankruptcy of the trust fund.

that's not going to happen in october. that's going to happen this augers. >> the last week of august. >> and what the president has put forward as a plan to get us past that crisis. deputy secretary was required yesterday to send a letter out to every state dot warning them of the bankruptcy in late august. you know, under the prior administration, those letters did not go out. state dot is working in unaware. if we want to worry about the state slowing their spending, we need to think about the impact of this letter. and that's why as part of the same program the president has put forward an 18 month extension that also brings with it $20 billion to get us over the hump. now, in fairness to the president's budget for 2010 has an uptick in funding for transit and an uptick funding for highways. albeit, morphed from the general fund and the trust fund in order to deal with the near-term problem. but it is not a should we do not see ourselves falling off a cliff in october.

the budget provides increased funds both for highways and transit beginning in october. like i said more from the general fund that is customarily been the case. and he is putting forth a program to put us over the crisis in august which is the near-term crisis we all need to worry about. >> we understand that you're a good soldier. >> thank you. >> i already talked about that this morning to another group. we understand very well at the end of august there will be $2.3 billion in requests from the states for vouchers to be filled, not stimulus program under the regular 80-20 program and there will be 1.6 ilion dollars in revenues to pay those -- and wish to pay those bills. there will be a $600 million shortfall. we understand that. we understand that growth by september 11, the request will

remain at 2.3 billion the revenue available of the trust fund, will be disbursed by treasury, it will be 1.6 million. it will be even less than at the end of august. i understand that. that's why we moved yesterday in this committee. on a new authorization. that's why we will be moving in july with the ways and means committee on the funding mechanism. that's why mr. defazio, mr. mica, mr. duncan and i and all the committees on both sides have been working on a new program, not just for the next two months. not just for the end of this fiscal year. not just for filling the hole in the trust fund. but for six years to create 6 million jobs. and we've had no outrage from the administration, no participation, no discussion. and i am personally offended by

that. >> thank you, mr. chairman. it goes without saying that you have, i think i can speak for the entire committee, you have the support of the entire committee on not only your efforts, and as we have said many times there is no doubt where we need to go. i think it's important to make that clear. i also want to commend the german from maine because i think he brought up a very, very important point. i don't want to be the one who throws a bucket of cold water. even though that's pretty evident on not the first. but with the exception of the money spending on the stimulus money on transportation, the stimulus has been a flop. don't take my word for it. look around you. just look around you. on employment rate, can point to present. can anybody tell me that that's a good thing or be happy with that? under the presidents own

economic advisers, their numbers, unemployment again is higher now than if congress hadn't taken absolutely no action. not my numbers. the presidents own economic advisers numbers. june 14, the vice president himself on meet the press said everyone guessed wrong on the impact of the economic stimulus. the exception to that i think is money being spent on infrastructure. again, part of the reason probably is because only 7% or less of the money went or transportation infrastructure. i may have my differences with the chairman of this committee, but i admire him because of the time he was fighting for more funding for infrastructure. and there is no doubt i think in most of our minds that that would have had a great impact, a very positive impact. and that that would have created a lot of more jobs, friendly, for a lot less money. but we are where we are. i bring that up till, by the

way, with a letter or without a letter, i think the state dot's new weather situation was with all due respect. at least sorted it. i appreciate the letter, i think it's good. but i don't think it's rediscovering the mediterranean. so with that in mind, i do want to tell you that i drop the bill. i'm sponsoring a bill that i have already filed which basically would rescind the non-transportation american recovery funds and put them in the trust funds, and the highways trust fund. it would create jobs and prepare this country for long economic stability. it would deal with the short-term deficit also a longer-term deficit. i just want to bring that out there because there is an area that we all agree on. that's something we have to deal. and that's something that is working and i want to thank all of you for the job you are doing on that. but more importantly, mr. chairman, i need to thank you

because again we may have some differences, but you have been steadfast on not only fighting for more money for transportation infrastructure, but also doing everything in your power through this committee to make sure that the money is well spent. that's why we are here today. and again, we may have our differences from time to time, but i want to make sure that everybody understands this committee is united and i just want to thank you, sir, for your efforts. not only on fighting for the funny, not only on working on a bill that you have worked on date in, day out, and you have listened to everybody on this committee. every single member of this committee, but also making sure that the money that has already gone out there is well spent. and obviously in this day and age, particular when the situation is so difficult because people continue to lose their jobs because it's more important more than ever. i want to thank you again. >> i'm very grateful to the gym

and for his thoughtful comments. it is and will continue to be the principle of this committee and chairman to hear everybody and listen to everybody and stay on course. >> it's very clear to all of us on this committee that literally the money spent on infrastructure is concrete. and it creates jobs. that's one of the major jobs of the recovery fund, and some of you did include in the testimony the job of retention aspect of your programs. my question to all of you is how can we be assured that those numbers are indeed accurate? do you have mechanisms in place i take it that the numbers are reported to you by the grantees? do you just rely upon them, or do you have some other way to ensure that we in fact, that those jobs are in fact being retained or created? and my second question is whether we are meeting my goals

with regard to the job retention and creation aspects of the recovery act. >> from the federal highway administration perspective, we created what we call razz recovery act data system which is a system by which the data starts with a contractor who is employing the workers. that data is then reported to the state. the state compiles the data from individual contractors or division office, which we haven't each state is working closely with the state dot in reviewing the employment data that is provided to the federal highway administration and loaded into this recovery act database. so it is compiled across the country from all of the states centrally. at that point we look at the number of jobs that are being reported to identify any issues or anomalies, does it look like anything is, you know, doesn't match up with what we would

expect given the amount of dollars being spent. and that is the data that is then included in recovery.gov and in reports that are delivered to congress. so we feel like we have a very systematic process of collecting the data and oversight of that data through the federal highway administration staff. >> and for the other administrators, do you have mechanisms in place so that you feel a short these numbers are accurate? >> and the federal transit at ministration we have a process that is somewhat similar. i have to admit it's not as robust as mr. paniati's. in the early going, we are putting emphasis on getting our funds obligated because as chairman oberstar pointed out, we have an obligation deadline with 50% of the funds to over 300, about 297 grantees needed to be obligated by september 1, or those funds are lapsed into other grantees. we are collecting jobs data from

our grantees. we will be doing a more robust collection once we know that we're over that obligation hurtle. >> at f. r. a it's a slightly more different animal because it is what our only grantees and track. so i guess to some extent at this point it makes our job a little easier but yes, in fact, we have regular reporting from amtrak as part of our oversight we do verify these numbers. >> from the federal aviation administration, we are using a metric number that i gave you today and provided in my testimony are based on a metric of the national economic council as a divisor. and once the grants are reported and underway, we will collect the data and have accurate, but the numbers i gave you today were forecast on a metric. >> and are we meeting our job retention goals with the recovery fund money, would you say? >> i think it's early to tell.

i think we are seeing positive progress as you reported earlier. we are seeing tremendous increase in march and april to may. we see the number of projects that are underway has increased dramatically, and in those projects are really just beginning. construction now, as construction season gets in high gear. so i expect another dramatic increase as we get into july and august, september, the prime construction months. so it's hard to say, you know, japan exactly where we are. i think all the indicators are that we are headed in a positive direction from a job creation standpoint. >> i would just add, we had federal transit also believe we are on track. we just had a law change regarding the recovery act signed by the president yesterday that may serve to retain even more jobs. the president signed supplemental appropriations bill yesterday that include a provision to allow 10% of the formula funds to our grantees to be used for operating costs. that is a midstream change in the purpose, but what it will serve to do is we do have a

situation where we've got transit agencies that are taking receipt of capital funds that are simultaneously having to lay off employees, and we are hopeful that that added expansion will allow them to retain those employees and then keep them about the business rather than curtail bus route and laying off bus drivers to put them to work. >> that make sense. thank you. i believe my time that. thank you very much. >> on your side, ms. miller? >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, and i appreciate all of you, your testimony. i'm sorry i missed most of her testimony. i was at another meeting but i do think it's very important that we continue to monitor the progress of what is happening with the stimulus funds. i would like to draw your attention to an ap article that was all over the place around the beginning of may, many of you probably read it. and i subsequent wrote a letter to the chairman and the ranking member pointing out, and the articles that stimulus watch,

early age leads out. and i like to think of myself at looking at things, but as a full traffic you cannot believe how bad things are in the state of michigan. so i'm going to be a little parochial in my questioning here because we do have the dubious extension of having the highest unemployment month after month after month. and there is no end in sight for us. so i just want to make sure we're getting some attention there. in fact, this article mentioned, it said 50% more per person in areas with the lowest unemployment than areas with the highest. they actually mention one of my counties, ifi can't i represent. one is a county of lapeer that has about almost 20% unemployment now. they weren't getting anything. so i guess i would just like to ask you, i think you made some corrections, i don't know exactly where michigan is right now. but just generally, knowing with the kind of unemployment that we have and that we are so far behind with that, could anybody comment? i don't know if any of you read

the article, but where are you now? >> i can say that one of the provisions in the economic recovery act is to give priority to economically distressed areas, and that is something we are working very closely with the state department of transportation on. we have provided them with some tools that they can use to overlay their project selection on the economically distressed areas to see how well they are matching up. and we are running a lot of oversight to see not only the process they are using to what the outcome is. i do know that the information i just got recently is in michigan 70%, 77% of the money thus far that has been authorized has been authorized for projects in the economically distressed areas in michigan. so i do think we are saying the spirit of the legislation being adhered to and that state devotees are in fact trying to move the money to the most economically distressed areas within their states. .