>> no end in site. we arená%)("@ @ $#@ @ rrrr"%g >> because of the work of this committee and others we could not match the stimulus because we said we don't have any money. believe me i and a stand the

concept but these are extraordinary times. some of our states could not have afforded the match. our governor just one week ago said we will forgo about three-quarters of $1 billion in projects that is money that has already been appropriated for michigan because we don't have the match. i don't know if i am asking for a response but i certainly want to mention because we have a delegation meeting yesterday with our governor and from our perspective, we already paid the money at the gas pump now we will lose all of the federal highway money because we do not have the match as we go forward the next couple years but if there was some way we could get a waiver from the match we're not asking for another dollar we just simply wanted the money, not only are we a donor

state it appears we will lose almost $800 million, this is the first round of cuts and i am sure more is coming because we don't have the match. i am getting pretty good guy groveling just for our fair share of money that we already paid it is not actually it will go to states that are doing better than we are because they can afford the match. does anyone have any comment? it has our total attention in michigan. >> congresswoman just from that one comment from our perspective as the guidance that we have issued no match will be required. >> for the stimulus? >> yes. >> your time has expired. >> as i said earlier i will take my time now. i guess there is a couple of questions how we properly measure the impact of the

stimulus package. there is a statement made by the ranking member the finding is trickling out too slowly because excessive regulations and i will ask for a quick response in terms of the records that are kept here where half of the highway money had to be used within 120 days of a portion may aunt -- apportionment my understanding 43 states and the district have complied. does not sound like we have a red tape problem do we mr. tea nine? >> no. as of last friday all 50 states met the test. >> bell managed to meet the deadline to get it obligated? >> as of the latest data 15 states have obligated more

than 80% so the states are moving with great speed to obligate the funds. >> it does not sound like we have a red tape problem. >> baidu nazi one. mr. rogoff? >> we have a slightly longer period we have until september 1st but we see ourselves on track record we we're just over 21% with some of the largest systems which represent a larger part of the money are of figures were the urbanized area were well north of 20% for the so-called real mod program with one-third of the money already obligated. we will be obligated ingersoll-rand -- very little if any money. >> so red tape is not a problem we have more than half

of the money obligated, some states at 100% but then we have served the question of outlay. these are both reimbursed after they have extended their owns days their own funds? >> mr. defazio it is different the highway program is a pure reimbursement program and in transit depends on what type of expenditure that we do frankly the transit agencies are not on a situation sitting on cash where they can awaits reimbursement. but i would point* out of a great member have single their using what is prix award authority that enables them, basically a statement for those that say we are spending money now. that will not show up on the obligation figures. >> i guess i. to the fact we

need to look more at the obligation then with the states and their progress i can understand the ranking member is frustrated because florida has zero projects under which work has begun. so maybe he needs to be talking to the dot because the problem is not with their -- with mr. paniati or the fha somehow they cannot get their budgets under way. i will now turn mr. rogoff to the proposal, the 18 months which you so ably were a good soldier on. i have a particular concern with fda. we have a measure which congress has twice passed legislation to direct the fda first three initially change the law then we pass

legislation to direct fda how they are scored into which projects go and never e merge and we feel strongly house and senate the measures are not being followed. two questions since the president is proposing a status quo continuation of the bush era policies across the board for 18 months, what will we do about the cost effectiveness? and then i hear bizarre rumblings from the secretary that someone has a bright idea for some new cost effectiveness measure that would be applied to all transit and highway projects whenever that might be they could not explain that concerns me because we have never managed to get rid of tease of and get the fta to follow the law with the existing process in the agency now we're hearing that is the

one policy change they want to add another bureaucratic step in the process but not reform anything else. we have some concerns about that. how we do solve that in your agency? >> in my case, a first i can agree with the what the president is proposing is more bush era policy. >> excuse me senator boxer announced today, july 22nd today, july 22nd, a clean bill, and no changes in policy, just money for 18 months. so you cannot, that means, yes, you do have some administrative leeway and you were going through that process but the dramatic changes is we have had an opportunity to review our bill and how your agency and the other agencies and the department of transportation operate which would be dramatically changed and we think we can go 14 years two

major delivery to maybe three under our proposal? you do not have the leeway to do that and as i and a stand at nobody has okay to do away with the cost effectiveness question. >> yes. >> let me speak to that. i cannot speak to what senator boxer proposed but it is not what the president has proposed. when you look at what do you have reported out of your subcommittee although we have not seen every thought of it there is remarkable confluence of policy issues with the president 81 proposal includes a livability component he wants to see in the 80 month extension and the metropolitan mobility initiative which you also have been your bill and as it does have the issue related to cost-benefit analysis but the proposal is not a mere of the transit new starts process. no one is a mystery shin is content with how things are

going with the new store process paragraph we brought that process as it was done under the last the administration to bear on projects nothing would give bill. >> that is right. >> no one is proposing to do that. he is proposing a program where we can stand up for the ability for states to choose better projects. but that may not necessarily be brought to bear. >> but we have said we have looked at our bill and we are preparing major reforms in how the process goes forward and our projects are selected with new criteria that meets the concerns of livability, a greenhouse guest reductions and a whole host of things and you're saying you what the policy changes so the question becomes since we seem to be so close together in terms of the policy, streamlining and the changes we want to make and we are in agreement the only difference seems to be if it is 18 months or six years and

i understand the a burst into the longer term because they do not want to approach the revenue issue i am approaching a sample issue is a gave it to ways and means and we have heard we run up fuel costs, oil, 50% or it has doubled, 100% because the speculator is. pretty simple burglary take larry summers proposal from 1989 about taxing these sorts of transactions and up '08 a o.2% point* o '02% to every speculative trade and raise 40 billion per year if we are in the agreement of the policies and we can find a way to raise the money with the administration agreed to a longer-term extension? i know you cannot answer that. >> is focus getting past the bankruptcy in august. >> doing it in 18 months

period with reform we do see a lot of confluence between your subcommittee product and our principles but there is another committee we have not heard from, ways and means and how the $500 million bill would get paid for and during this economic time the administration. >> 450 is in the trust fund for the general fund into transit and of that because of the way scoring works we need to raise an additional $140 billion i have always we can raise 240 so we will have 50 leftover which to included in the 500 so then 50 left over for health care or whatever. i have exceeded my time are there any other republicans? >> mr. rogoff what is the

administration's plan after the 18th month expressed -- expansion would expire? >> it is looking at a two phase process the 18 point* expansion is the first phase that is what has been lost in the dialogue the administration is not asking for the authorization process to come to a ) thus far as we are concerned, work on a long-term reauthorization should continue through dialogue between the administration, house, senate, and we should have a meaningful conversation about what we should be doing in the next 18 months so we can do longer-term extension and come to agreement on the finances. we can have a multi-year bill with a financing mechanism with the economy where it is the administration is not comfortable talking about

revenues at this time that is why the president's budget of 2010 has an increase for highways, transit, albeit more from the general fund. you asked about the specifics but in addition to the metropolitan access program which is the concept captured in this bill there is a livability component that also bears resemblance to some of the things being done in this bill. there strongly of the view their not it should be any earmarks during this period and the $20 billion that is needed to bail out not just the highway account but the mass-transit account will be responsibly paid four. that is the administration's proposal while the work together on a long-term bill and the revenue sources to pay for it. >> the recovery act requires to give priority to projects that are in economically

distressed areas. is there a system you have implemented to make sure that is the case? that the states are giving priorities to those areas? or the governors or state legislators are allocating funds for political purposes? >> i will let mr. paniati take that. >> is a provision and specific with the highway funds. it is one of several factors that need to be considered with projects. we obviously have to have projects that are ready to go, moved to the environmental process and planning process and move to construction. we are seeking to have as many projects as possible we located in economically distressed areas but we have developed a mechanism by which we can look at within any given state where the economically distressed areas and the overlay of for the

projects within those areas. our division offices are working closely in reviewing this process the state is using for selecting projects as well as the outcome which is how many projects are how much money is going to be economically distressed areas? right now we are beginning to get your permission but we have seen in a number of states we have seen 77% of the funding that has been obligated today in michigan using an economically distressed areas. we're seeing similar figures in mississippi, idaho. gives us a sense the provisions are being adhered to the nbc money flowed to economically distressed areas as part of the economic recovery pending. >> your agency have any mechanism to make sure the monies that are obligated to

use expediently to actually put it to good use or cues rather than simply obligate the money and have it sit there? >> . >> projects that are selected our projects ready to go so we see those move very quickly from obligation to advertisement, award, under way. that is why we have 5,000 projects that have been approved to date already 1500 of those are under way. we're saying projects move very quickly you through the pipeline the state dot is committed to having that happen as well as the local governments i do not think we will see a lot of money sitting around. we have projects moving very quickly to get people to work. >> i see the outlay on the map have certain money allocated to each state.

are the numbers here set in stone or is there wiggle room for you to move from one state to another on the high wayside their proportion so there is a far less so there is no discretion with the exception there is a discretionary program 1.5 billion dollars of discretionary funding that the secretary will make the selections on that is being worked in the multi mode manner representatives from each modes are participating in that process to establish the criteria for the grant program and will participate in reviewing the proposals that come and so but is the one program that is flexible and can be used in a variety of different ways. >> we do have provisions where if funds

are not used which to say they are not obligated, certainly intransigent and i believe with highways, if they are not utilized obligated by the deadlines then they are reallocated two players that are prepared to use the money so in that regard we are not locked into the distribution list to see on your map. the funds are freed up from those that have not been put to use. >> . >> i am sorry i am getting confused. is she next? i do things in the order of which they arrive. but i guess we're going in order of seniority so ms. richards and? >> thank you, mr. chairman and congresswoman. first of all, i would like to test before the committee i have had the opportunity to go to three events particularly with aviation and i want to

attest to the fact that it is happening both at lax, a compton airport and recently with secretary napolitano at the san francisco airport so i have seen great process and want to commend you. mr. tea 912 build on what mr. cao was asking with questions in your report you say through the efficient implementation of the recovery act project comment that plays a key role creating jobs putting people back to work and keeping families from home 1/4 -- foreclosure produce a the american recovery and reinvestment act has energized working people and companies and a lifeline for americans who work in construction and have been especially hard hit by the recession. on page number four, talk with every new project we obligates it is a signal for states to advertise contracts and

contractors to begin projects like steel and asphalt and concrete. i have read all of your presentations and it was a little light providing affirmation in that area. do have any information what new contracts were established, what new people were hired? because that was part of the focus of the recovery not just to the companies that already had major contracts with people working up to now put them on over time it was new people to have the opportunity to come in. >> all of the money is being newt -- being used on new projects. >> i am sorry, that is not what i asked you. it is not new projects but are new contractors coming in, our new people getting jobs? >> i do not have data on that. i can tell you a significant effort for us is to work with

the state dot to make sure companies of all sizes and all varieties benefit from the recovery. so the this be 13 prohibitions in the lobby have been very aggressive from the beginning in reaching now to stay deity to provide guidance on the dbe provisions, educational the provisions, and sure the dbe goals that exist are the same goals that exist under the regular federal aid program, states have been very aggressive in holding a variety of our reach an workshop sessions to try and bring in a broader range a contractor. >> i have two minutes. i am sorry. do have specific results of what has happened? and do have the numbers? >> i do not have numbers. >> could you provide them? specifically what your state dot and to they have reached out to, what happen the

results, are more new people working? and the questions i have already asked for go further building upon the economically distressed areas on page five you say you have the tool to utilize the geographic intimation system mapping technology to identify on a per capita income and unemployment rate at the county level they do supply that information to this committee? and that would include the percentages of all of the areas and how that mapping is done? >> yes. >> when you have that report i ask from a tracking perspective if you could provide the actual results would be important as well. that is it. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you, mr. chairman. >> . >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to follow-up on the

question because it has been a huge concern in my state of merrill lynch we have managed to get out a lot of contracts we have a lot of projects in the pipeline but the question is, whether the jobs that are created and the distribution of those contracts with around our state really reflect where the need is for the jobs even though our state enjoys by other state standards a comfortable 7.two percent unemployment rate and we are grateful for that, it is high for us and there are pockets of our state in particular the district that i represent outside of columbia of that has higher pockets where we have minority and other contractors to i don't believe have fully enjoyed the benefit of the recovery funds that have come into our state. like to hear from the of fenestration t-shirt administration from the dot

directly by states but i want maryland in the last to know who has done the contracts where were the jobs created where do people come from and does that represent where the biggest pockets of unemployment are in our various states? i and speaking just from a state that has a relatively low unemployment by comparison >> i will kick off but in the federal transit instance our formula dollars or not just $4 million sent to states but urbanized areas and therefore also the rural areas but targeted to where the people are, and the transit providers but not necessarily targeted to unemployment by you raise another issue that we take very seriously that is the of rage to disadvantaged businesses. thethe be 13 requirements that

has gone to the recovery act in my agency and the other boats, we have had eight different outreach sessions. we have a great deal of information to know that is applying and we will get a new update shortly. we get those every six months as relates to dbe participation in the program. >> i appreciate that reach but our businesses would appreciate a contract by want to know more about the contracts and i think that is more particularly true and perhaps mr. paniati you can speak to this? >> we have left toulon but now you are it. i wonder if you are aware of a lot of members have been talking today about projects and the district's chicago, a

passenger rail and the quad cities west to iowa city, my understanding this would create 800 jobs, and $22 million and estimated 170,000 riders on appendicular project for about we worked very hard on this congressman braley and myself do you know, much about this? that you folks can help us with or that you have already taken a look at if you could help me out? >> #1 we do know a little about it and we have been helping you per our staff has been out there working on a regular basis both in the cause cities and into iowa to look at what can be done now and of course, to get into iowa we have to get into

illinois to make that happen. part of what we're looking at $48 billion side which will happen which the fra provided and the administrator would want to comment on this there is a requirement that now there is an application made by the state of illinois or by iowa to receive the funds and they need to be competed for with a concept which is happening with the a million dollars and if they are really ready to go or not. we do understand the need and the interest and we are working with them. >> my understanding is both states will do a dual application do you know, much about this or can you help me out? >> you could tell me about if you give me 23 point*

$2 million. >> that would certainly be inappropriate for me to comment on the merits of any particular application at the time. the guidance is out and there will be a pre-application period that will allow us to review and give assistance and guidance to the various dot to make sure they are under the appropriate track with the guidance that is most beneficial. of the biggest thing we have urged is there be a high level of regional cooperation to make sure the iowa dot and illinois a deity work closely together on that application would be very beneficial. >> lastly you're staff has been very cooperative and i appreciate that. they have done a wonderful job helping now and it is a great project for our area that has been hit economically hard and i am