that won't show up on the obligation figures. we feed to look more at the obligation. >> florida actually has zero projects under which work has done. maybe he needs to be talking to his d.o.t. the problem isn't with the federal highway administration. it is somehow, they can't get their budget under way. i'm going to turn now to this proposal, the 18 months which the chairman said you were a good soldier on. i have a particular concern with the mta.

the status quo, what are we going to do about cost effectiveness. secondly, i hear some bizarre rumblings that someone has a bright idea for some new cost effective measure. he couldn't explain it. he said omb was working on it. we never managed to get rid of

the exitting process. we have some concerns about that. the case of my agency, sir, first, i can't agree with you that with the policy. senator boxer announced today. july 22, clean bill, no changes in the policy. 18 months.15

>> let me speak to that it is not what the president proposed. >> i have to admit we haven't seen every part of it. >> it includes a live ability component. he wants to see in the 18 month ipish tiff. that would be part of this. yes, it does have an issue related for the cost benefit analysis.

if we brought that to bear, nothing would get built. what the prose is proposing to do is put together a program where we can stand up the ability to choose better projects. he's not saying that was not brought to bear i guess the question becomes since we seem to be so close together in terms of the policy and stream lining, then the only

difference seems to be whether it is 18 months or three years. the aversion is because they don't want to approach the revenue issue. i gave is to the chofe of staff this morning. we've heard we have run up fuel costs% because of speculators. prettytd simple. we take larry summers proposal from 1989. we apply .2% to every speckue la tiff trade in oil and raise $40 billion a year. would the administration agree to a longer term extension, you think? >> i know you can't answer

that. there's another committee we haven't heard from. ways and means. right now, during this time, administration is not -- $450 is trust funded for general fund into transit. of that, because of the way scoring and outlays work, we need to raise the scoring. we have a way thank you, viskeeded my time.

>> you are recognized. the plan after 18 month extension is is to expire. in a two-phase process in an 18-month extension with the first phase. that's one of the things lost in the dialogue. the administration is not asking for the administration to come to a close. as far as they are concerned, work on the authorization should continue through dialogue through the administration, the house and the senate and we should have a meaningful conversation about where we should be standing up in the next 18 months to come to an agreement on the finances. we have a multiyear bill. the economy being where it is.

the administration is not comfortable talking about administrations at this time. that is why the increase is meant for 2010 they are strongly of the view that they should not be of any remark. that is the proposal on the longer-term bill and the residence everybody age to promote it.

>> that does not indicate the economically affected area. making sure that is the state giving priorities to those areas that are distressed? offer the governors are simfully am owe indicating fund $for political purposes. what we are seeking to do is to have as many of those projects in the economically distressed

areas. an overlay on where are those projects. our division administrators are using that process. we have seen in a number of states. i referred earlier to michigan. it is giving us some sense that the act adhered to as part of the economic recovery funding. >> now does your agency have any kind of mecknixening moving

through the pipeline. i don't think we are going to see a lot of moneyç sitting around. we are moving quickly to get people to work. i see the transportation outlays has provided on this

map, the allocation provided to each state. are the numbers here set in stone with the excemption of there is a discretionary income of the law. the funding that the secretary will make the selection on participating in reviewing the proposals coming in, that is the one program very flexible and will be able to be used in a have ryist different ways.

if funds are not ute liesed if funds are freed up and put. i'm getting confused i do things in the order of seniority. so ms. richardson. thank you mr. chairman and congresswoman edwards. i'd like to attest that i've had an opportunity to go to

three events particularly with aviation of these recovery dollars in that sense, i've seen great progress and want to commend you. further you say and is a lifeline for americans having been hard hit by the recession. then on page 4, you talk about every newwçp project we obligat

is a signal for states i read automatic of your presentations and i would say it was a little light. do you have any information on what new contracts were established? what new people were hired. not just to the companies that already have major contracts and already working to put them on the overtime. it was to give new p.m. the opportunity to come in. jo all of the money is to be put to new projects. that's not what i zd you. are new contractors coming in? are new p.m. getting jobs? >> i don't have data on that. what i can tell you is that

significant effort for us is to work with the state department's of transportation to ensure that companies of all size and all varieties benefit from the recovery. for example, the d.b.e. provisions from the law. we have been aggressive from the beginning to provide guidance on those provisions, to provide education and to ensure that the goals that exist under era are the same goal that's exist on the federal a program. >> i'm sorry, sir, i have 2:00. do you have specific results of what happened on those dates >> would you provide them. specifically what your date

d.o.t., what they've reached out to. are there more new people working and so on. the questions i already asked. further building on the distressed areas, you may you have a tool mapping technology to identify the eda using information on the income and unemployment rate and count level. >> that would include, i would assume the percentages of all the areas of how that mapping is going? jo sure. those would be -- when you have that report and i asked you pretty much from a tracking perspective if you could revide the actual results. that would be important as well. that's it. i yield back the balance of my time. thank you. >> ms. he have receipts.

>> thank you mr. chairman. the question is whether the jobs created reflect the need for the state. by a comfortable 7.27 unemployment state that is comfortable but even high for us there are higher pockets where we have minority and other contractors who i don't believe havefully enjoyed the benefit of the recovery funt that's have come into our state. i would like to hear from the administration and from the

department of transportation. i want maryland in that list to know whose goten those contracts and where are the jobs created and does that really represent where the biggest pocket of unemployment are in our various states. i'm thinking from a state that has relatively low unemployment by comparison. they are not necesarily targeted to where unemployment is. when we take seriously is the transit to the unemployment

issues. we will be getting a new discussion and program. >> our businesses with appreciate a contract. this is particular true for the state. perhaps you could speak. >> mr. chairman, we have kind of left you alone for a while but now you are it. i wonder when you are aware.

they are talking about the district and the quad city to chicago, passenger rail and quad cities west to iowa silty. we have worked very hard on this. do you know much about this. is it something you have already looked at? >> certainly. we do know a little bit about it. we have been helping you and the staff. looking at what could be done

now and getting no illinois to make that happen. that is part of what we are looking at for the $8 billion side of what will happen. perhaps. and what is happening for the $8 million. we do understand the need of it and the interest of it. we are working with them. jo my understanding is that both states are going to do a duel application. >> do you know much about this. >> you could help me out a lot

if you just give me some millions. >> the biggest thing we have urged is that there be a high level of reginal cooperation and making sure that the iowa d.o.t. and illinois d.o.t. working closely on the april gation would be beneficial.

we may get lucky and be able to land. i want to thank you all for being here today. >> i will proceed with another round of questions and yield to myself so much time as i may consume. i'm confused about the 18-month proposal outside of the funding for the regular apportion programs and our major transit district for the most part of the vast amount of mantnens.

if we set an 18-month parameter, how are we going to set the project for 18 months-five years? we ran into this during the last authorization and saw a dramatic drop off in the project, particularly larger, longer term projects because of the uncertain ilt created how is the state going to plan the project if they are only planned 18 months of funding. i believe the states would be faith in the administration. >> my state and many states are

constrained by state constitution and other responsibilities saying gee, the government will make good on, it didn't work during the last authorization. why will it work now when states are in much worse shape and their position is unsure. if the fund gs was available under 18 months, it is fot at all restribblingted. right. it's going to take three years to complete. we can outlay a third of that maybe 18 months.

do you think they might just pull back like they did the last time. >> the exceptions were in a matter of weeks. it is different. thank you. i don't think you've answered it. >> i think jeff's point is we will taken. i was working in congress when they were doing thoseó?j short-term extensions. the center piece of that proposal is the bank rupsi not

long this after. let's just not alarm the public. they don't go into bank rup, they go into a cash flow insufficientish yen si. >> i'm well aware of that. to begin shipping away at the infaw structure benefit. it's basically continuing this year's level of expenditures. the increased level in 2010. >> that antisipate the general fund. >> where is the general fund going to come from?

i guess you've said several things today that are a bit surprising. i'll get to a question. there would be some sort of cost benefit that we have heard. and according to second lehood. it is assumed in your remarks. we have taken revenues off the table. i would like to know what are the offsets and wha when are we going to see the cost benefit analysis. since we need to be insecurity with you, it would be useful to begin the dwoy log and see what