i want to point out in addition to talking to the tea party members i had tea with, or coffee with quite a few of them and i enjoyed it actually and we did get tremendous support. remember senator wyden and hatch are going to decide how this is paid for in their committee. senator gillibrand. >> i can tell you how grateful and that you pull together this distinguished panel of witnesses to discuss the importance of investing in our nation's infrastructure and our transportation systems. this is an issue obviously that unites labor and business because the united states cannot maintain our competitive local edge without a strong network of roads bridges and rail to move people and products safely and efficiently forward. it is as simple as that but with deadlines looming to reauthorize ma [ captioning performed by the national captioning institute ]

captions copyright national cable satellite corp., 2014 ] hy trust fund is projected to become insolvent by the end of the summer. the effect would have severe impacts and my state of new york. new york has 628 federal aid highway projects for 2015 which requires approximately $2 billion for the funding. 40% of these projects are bridges that are in need of construction or repair. without the new funding from the highway trust fund to start these projects next year new york state would have to begin restricting the use of roads and bridges that are no longer safe or can no longer handle the capacity for which they were originally designed. this would result in detours, delays, problems getting things that need to be brought into our

commerce. it means more time and money loss for businesses and families who are just struggling to make it in this tough economy. new york state is by no means alone. this will hurt every single one of her states and ripple your role -- whole transportation system so we can't afford delays by congress. we have to make sure the congress acts now. we risk falling behind other countries that are making these investments and sending businesses and jobs overseas instead of bringing them here and keeping them here where they belong. the long-term consequenconsequen ces of inaction in my view are extremely costly. thank you madam chairwoman for holding this hearing and i look forward to the testimony the witnesses. >> thank you so much senator. now we turn to senator fisher. >> thank you madam chairman and ranking member vitter for holding this hearing. there's no doubt that our roads and bridges are essential to the economic health of our nation.

in nebraska are agricultural industries especially reliant on efficient transportation system to move goods from farm to market. investment in infrastructure is the key to expanding and strengthening commerce and promoting opportunities or business growth. with the highway trust fund again on the brink of insolvency it is clear that it is time for congress to put infrastructure and investment back on a sustainable course. i believe limited government should focus its resources on meeting its core duties. infrastructure including highway maintenance and construction is one of those important responsibilities. as we work on the next highway reauthorization bill i am hopeful that this committee will continue to work toward policy reforms that will ensure that the federal dollars we are investing are devoted to tasks that truly add value to the projects and are not wasted on piling up paperwork that only serves to fulfill bureaucratic

requirements. while map-21 make needed improvements to accelerate tragic delivery there is still much work to be done. i look forward to the hearing today and again thank you. thank you madam chair. >> thank you senator fisher. senator cardin. >> madam chair thank you for conducting this hearing. we have a very distinguished panel before us in his eyes a pleasure. i remember the last time we had mr. donohue and mr. trumka together a similar bill so it's nice to see van tiner panel together both labor and business recognizing the importance of long-term surface transportation reauthorization. i want to stress that madam chair. i think it's critically important that we do a long-term surface transportation reauthorization to give it its ability to our transportation program in this country. we can't plan transportation needs on a one-year or two-year basis. you have to have the five or six your reauthorization bill in

order to do the types of modernized transportation that we have in this country. as many members of this committee appointed out and as our panel have pointed out this will create jobs for our economy not only the direct jobs related to construction of our transportation needs but also establishing the way in which we can attract economic activities in our community that modern transportation provides. it's also important for livability. it took me two hours coming in this morning from baltimore. that is not unusual. the traffic around walter moore and washington, every car we can get off the road into transit believe me helps everyone not just the person who is a much better experience being able to get to work that also allowing the commerce of our highways to be able to move for more efficiently with less cars on

the road. all of that is critically important. i can put a plug-in right now met in chair. we have four major transit projects in maryland that we would like to get funded. obviously without having long-term reauthorization is hard to see those programs before it and i can tell you they are critically important to our national economy to the federal government but also for all of our communities. it's also a matter graham bierman and we have heard that many times before. modernizing our transportation system we provide a much more efficient way to deal with our energy needs and friendlier towards their environment. so why are we doing this? we have got to make the tough decisions. the tough decision has to be made in conjunction with our colleagues on the senate finance committee and all the members. i happen to serve on both committees that we need to have

the revenues necessary to support a long-term surface transportation reauthorization. we have to recognize the realities of the current revenue flow into the transportation trust fund is inadequate as it's based on the gasoline tax in the gasoline tax has been effective in bringing down the volume with regards to the use of gasoline and more efficient engines, alternative ways so we need to look at ways that we can have an adequate source. i've hope we will be open to things such as carbon fees or other ways to get the revenues necessary. i know that transportation is a bipartisan issue. senator inhofe has been one of the great leaders moving forward on infrastructure. senator vitter strongly supports this so let's try to find a way to pick the revenues that are adequate so we can have the transportation reauthorization

that is befitting of the record of this committee and our country. >> senator thank you and you raise a good point. a few of our members to sit on finance which is going to be extremely helpful working with senators wyden and hatch who both have expressed interest in working with us. now i will turn to senator sessions and i want to remind everyone we have four votes, i believe it's four votes at 11:30. >> madam chair thank you for the hearing. it is important to infrastructure situation is finance -- facing a financial challenge in the future and we are all worried about it. i believe it represents a valid legitimate expenditure of federal dollars. a lot of things we do around here are not valid and legitimate federal interest that certain infrastructure projects are. we have the director of office management testified before the committee yesterday. for example today he testified

that last year interest on the debt that we pay out of our revenue that comes in was about $230 billion. he projected last year at the end of 10 years that would rise to 800 $30 billion. this year he says in 10 years from today the annual interest payment will be $890 billion in 2024. this is a stunning diversion of money from unproductive use, from productive use to unproductive use. the result and a big part of the problem is the huge deficits we have been running up in the last few years. we have almost doubled double the deficit in a few years we will have double the deficit since 2007. i know everybody wants to spend money and i know you all have projects you want to spend that

mr. elmendorf told us that we are on an unsustainable path. you will hear the deficits are going down and they will go down for the next two years but after that they start on an uncontrolled steady increase every year and the deficit in the tenth year will be a trillion dollars. so we are in a real difficult place. i would just say to you everybody comes before us with good projects they want to spend money on. those who believe in highway and infrastructure should never forget how you were taken to the cleaners in the stimulus bill. we spent $840 billion on the stimulus bill. only 40 of that winter roads and bridges. it went into every kind of social program and mr. elmendorf told us when it passed that you

will see an increase in gdp in the short-run but over 10 years carrying and another trillion dollars in debt will actually reduce gdp over 10 years. so i would just say to you all colleagues and to the witnesses today we have got a big challenge before us. if we don't watch it we can put us in a position where we have another financial crisis and mr. elmendorf warned us that could happen. we are in a danger area. our debt situation is in the red zone so madam chair the bill we passed last year i think we stayed within reasonable limits in the budget. i know you tried to do that in senator vitter worked hard on and senator inhofe. we were able to maintain a minimal level of funding so i would just say that is an even bigger challenge this year and i look forward to working with

you. >> senator, same here and i happened to be here when we did balance the budget and i think we can do it again if we are smart about it that the important thing about highways is we have that self-sustaining trust fund which is so critical. i have always supported that. that is operational, spend what you take in. we have to be smart about it. i agree with you. of course we have long-term problems we have to do is so it is my pleasure to talk -- call him the ranking member of the subcommittee that's going to work so hard on the senator barrasso. >> thank you dedham chairwoman and ranking member vitter for holding the hearing. i share your commitment to ensure the highway bill program continues. i want to thank our panel for being here today to testify. we can but -- get this business and labor communities at the same table that sends a strong message to all members of congress to the hardees at this program must continue. the highway reauthorization is truly a jobs bill. we need more red white and blue

jobs in states like wyoming california louisiana and across the country. setting up roadblocks on construction projects with red tape doesn't create meaningful jobs that we need around america. for state department of transportation and contractors the highway program is already complicated enough. program that cuts down on burdensome paperwork and puts people back to work. the highway trust fund needs a solution that is reliable and responsible. the question before us is how do we accomplish this in a fiscally responsible manner in order to meet the system's national needs rural states must have flexibility to use federal dollars that serve the national interest. we need to protect the taxpayer and ensure states can continue to ask cute there transportation plans. wyoming like any of our other rural states is a bridge state and it's critical we maintain our nations rich states that moved the float commerce across america. madam chairwoman i hope this

committee will hold mayor more hearings on the implementation of map-21 and is ranking member of the transportation infrastructure subcommittee i look forward to bringing the rural for specter that as we write the next reauthorization bill. thank you for your leadershileadershi p and holding the hearings. >> thank you and thank you for your leadership as well. now a short time so let's get right to it. we are very pleased with this panel and we call on tom donohue to begin. president and ceo. >> thank you very much chairman boxer and ranking member vitter and the distinguished members. as many of you said this morning the reauthorization of map-21 promises to be difficult to fight but it doesn't have to be. in fact there is a broad consensus on a number of fundamental principles. we all agree that our infrastructure system is a

critical national asset that it drives growth, jobs mobility trade and enhance global competitiveness. we all agree that we are running out of money to fund the system. we all agree that the federal government must take a leading role in making sure our infrastructure system contributes to a strong economy. we all agreed we needed to take the bull stable and growing source of revenue for today and an immediate funding solution for tomorrow and a long-term we need an expanded system. when you look at the big picture the simplest most straightforward and most effective way to generate enough revenue is by increasing federal gasoline and diesel taxes. remember it's 19 years or 20 years since we increased the

federal diesel tax. the gas tax and this is what i was going to say has not been increased since 1993. cars are more fuel-efficient and trucks are more fuel-efficient. i know something about that you remember. people are driving less and inflation is eating into purchasing power. as a result the highway trust fund is simply going bankrupt. we are our ready borrowing billions of dollars from the general fund. next year will be a 13 billion-dollar cash shortfall and by 2020 it could be as much as 100 million dollars and even here that's a lot of money. a moderate increase in the gas tax phased in over time would provide the necessary funding, preserving important user pays principle and provide needed stability. how do we do that? >> first let's start by having some courage and showing some leadership. for once let's do what's right,

not what is politically expedient. second let's educate the public and your fellow lawmakers. polls show opposition to gas tax increases are significantly overblown. the san jose university researcher recently found that 58% of the public would support a gas tax increase if they knew where it was going and how it was going to be spent and it was going to be applied to building roads and bridges and transit systems. voters want to know where the money is going and that it's not going to be wasted. far too many people are unaware of the important reforms that eliminated earmarks and pork barrel spending long associated with infrastructure funding. let me say parenthetically occasionally it helped get a vote but with that not here we will have to have some really good arguments. let's also be clear, i often

thought after the committee decides what all of the issues are going to fund than the members up to be able to pick one out before they get to go home but let's get into that another day. let's also be clear about the consequences of decreasing these investments here it means higher costs to goods more congestion and increased accidents as well as reduced mobility and reduce competitiveness. business is absolutely committed to aggressively pursuing this education effort and third let's get busy building political support. on this panel and you have the combined support of business, labor construction shippers regulators and in addition to rockers. yesterday at a meeting with the leaders of the american trucking association and the leaders of the aaa.

they would significantly support a modest and thoughtful increase in the gasoline tax and add that to the people here. this is getting to be a rather supportive group. it's interesting to note that last year six states three with republican governors and three with democratic governors enacted those to increase their overall state fuel taxes. the sky didn't fall and their economies have not collapsed. both republican and democratic presidents have improved modest gas tax increases so it can be done. increasing the gas tax and the fuel tax is the right answer. it is tough but it's doable. let's keep in mind that public honey is only part of this equation. we must increase private investment as well. the private sector is prepared to pump as much as 205th seed billion dollars and a public by the partnerships or p3's of only

certain barriers would be removed. we also must continue to aggressively root out waste in the system which members indicated is underway much of it caused by permitting delays and obstacles as well to make sure funds are spent on genuine priorities. long-term the chambers willing to entertain different proposals for new and additional public funding mechanisms however currently we don't see any way to support any proposal that all emanates the federal role, undermines the user pay principle or unfairly singles out specific industries to foot the bill. very quickly one couple quick thoughts in conclusion. scaling back or eliminating the dedicated source of federal funding means greater congestion higher transportation costs,

more accidents and poorly maintained roads. if we give up on the highway trust fund and rely on the general fund we will never be able to execute long-term capital projects. we would have to cut other programs and engage in more deficit spending and he would have to debate funding every single year. so i believe madam chairwoman that we will lose our national system. none of these approaches supports a growing sustainable source of hunting and we'd need to pass a long-term authorization and the people at this table are ready to help you. thank you very much. >> we greatly appreciate that and it's my honor to introduce mr. richard trumka president of the afl-cio. >> thank you chairman boxer and ranking members that are for having us appear before your committee today. three years ago tom and i appeared before this committee

asking for reauthorization of the surface transportation bill and since then he and i have spent more time than either one of us would like to admit trying to get this done. while we are not quite ready to schedule vacations together yet we really are willing to come together and anxious to come together to get this important issue solved for the good of the country. reauthorization of the surface transportation bill has been the most important jobs legislation that congress considers and it's a very big priority for us. while the economy has improved job creation remains sluggish. the construction sector alone is down 1.6 million jobs from prerecession level. so we not only need jobs but good jobs and it's estimated

that each billion dollars of federal investment in transportation creates 35,000 well-paying jobs. the type of career jobs that can support a family, a child's education a secure retirement in a middle-clmiddle-cl life. these investments not only create jobs bitsberger economic growth ensure our country's long-term economic bubble competitiveness and improve the quality of life of our citizens. now for those in congress still pushing an austerity agenda when it comes to infrastructure let me just say this. if your house has a leaky roof, not fixing it won't save you any money and like the leaky roof, delaying needed infrastructure investments will only cost us more in the long run, not less. i recently traveled to china and

i was stunned that the speed at which their largest competitors were progressing. china has been investing heavily in its infrastructure and the results are pretty dramatic. during my trip to shanghai i visited the deep water board the world's largest and busiest container shipping port. the port like the high-speed trains that took me quick lee and efficiently between china's cities is a key investment in china's effort to upgrade its infrastructure and it helps them keep up with the country's growth of exports. to get to the port i traveled on a six lane bridge. that was 20 miles long. from shanghai to the islands where the port is located and the ridge was completed in two and a half years. 20 miles of six lane bridge over the china sea to an island in two and a half years.

it employed literally thousands of workers. prior to the project nothing was there but a sleepy fishing village with some islands off in the distance. the first phase of the project opened in 2004 and by 2013 china had accomplished its goal of having the worlds largest port. i might say the same thing about high-speed rail. we both the read that we would do high-speed rail of a few years ago. right now the u.s. has not one single mile of high-speed rail and the chinese moved more people than our entire domestic airline industry by high-speed rail right now. so america can do it. we can do it and we can do it better. now i didn't come here to rehash all the data regarding our nation's infrastructure needs. quite frankly the facts have

been reported. they have been studied and they have been discussed to death. the conclusions are always the same. infrastructure investments are vital to job creation, economic growth and global competitiveness. what remains to be determined is whether that information will be acted on. what kind of country we will leave to our children and our grandchildren. the highway trust fund is at a crossroads. failure to act will mean our transportation system will decay further. construction workers will stay on the bench, supply chain and transit workers will lack steady work and their economic and global competitiveness will be diminished. many funding ideas have been proposed but few of them have been acted on. other proposals have limited application and that leaves the

fuel tax or some variation of it as the main source of funding. raising the revenue will not be easy regardless of where it comes from. but to be blunt we can afford to bury our heads in the sand. a bridge that is deficient today will not need any better tomorrow. congress must come together to enact a robust and a long-term authorization. if business and labor can come before you united on this issue, and we are united on this issue, despite our sharp disagreements on a friday of other matters, i think that should tell everybody something until it very loudly. we need to beat the america that can, not the america that can't. we are ready to help in a bipartisan way get that done because it is so absolutely

essential for the well-being of our country and its economy. thank you very much i look forward to your questions. >> thank you very much mr. trumka. our next speaker i want to say congratulations as the new president of the american association of state highway and transportation officials and he is also the secretary of the kentucky transportation cabinet so we are very pleased to meet you mr. hancock traded. >> good morning chairman boxer boxer ranking member vitter and distinguished members of the committee. thank you for the opportunity on behalf of ashto in the state d.o.t. to share her views on the importance of robust federal investment in surface transportation. the potential near-term impacts of the cash shortfall in the highway trust fund and the longer-term impacts associated with uncertainty and instability of the highway interests fun. i have to say i'm encouraged by their marks i've heard this morning. i would like to share two points

with you. first the threat to the states construction industry and the overall economy is real and it's even closer than originally estimated. we could face serious economic disruptions as early as this summer if we delay reimbursements to the states for active projects underway. second unless congress acts to increase the highway trust fund revenues or provide additional funds the states will be unable to obligate any new federal funds in fiscal year 2015. in both cases there will be immediate and wrecked impacts to the states economies with lost jobs and permanently shuttered as this is an there will be substantial additional economic social and environmental costs associated with canceled or delayed projects. if congress does not act the states even with local and private partners simply cannot generate sufficient funds to fill this infrastructure funding gap. the federal highway program for

portions $40 billion a year to the state d.o.t. for roads and bridges. however actual federal dollars are not provided upfront but rather when the work is completed and the state submits a request for reimbursement. reimbursements to the states are made daily. on january 15 u.s. d.o.t. secretary fox announced the highway trust fund highway account is likely to run out of money in august. to prevent insolvency fhwa may stop reimbursing states on a daily basis and begin reimbursing once a week, once every two weeks or even once a month. december slowdown reimbursement as happened in 2008 forcing the states to delay payments to contractors. will congress to care the issue fighters to go with the general funds transferred states are concerned with the impact in the same situation happening again as early as this summer. if a similar scenario this year the contractors who many rely on trumped payments from the state may be unable to pay their

employees subcontractors and suppliers. for some construction businesses and suppliers which survived the recession that are still operating on the slimmest of margins this could simply be the last straw. when ashto testified before this committee last september we thought highway trust fund would stay solvent through the end of fiscal year 2014 but it now appears that congress will have to act before the august congressional recess to ensure that the highway trust fund will have enough funding to reimburse the states for past commitments. as congress considers ways to address the short-term crisis of not being able to pay for projects that are already committed it should also consider a long-term solution that keeps the highway trust fund solvent well into the future. without a long-term solution states may not receive any additional federal highway and transit funding in fiscal year 2015. if new federal highway funding is not available or federal funding is not available in 2015 much-needed highway and transit

projects in virtually every community and every congressional district will either be delayed or canceled outright. these are projects that underpin economic development and improve the quality of life. cutbacks on contract landings will be missed opportunities to pare down the back log and investment needs causing a negative effect on the construction industry exactly when the industry is beginning to rebound after one of the hardest hit segments in the recent recession. there is ample evidence including what you've heard today that shows infrastructure investment is critical for long-term economic growth increase productivity employment household income exports and overall quality of life. congress can address the long-term solvency of the highway trust fund by substantially reducing spending for surface transportation or by boosting revenues or by some combination of the two. we and others have developed a long list of potential revenue options.

we believe that at a minimum we need an approach that will allow us to sustain map-21 investment levels as adjusted for inflation. we believe it's possible to reach his level about placing unreasonable financial burden on the traveling public. without action there will be a devastating economic impacts from the virtual elimination of the federal surface transportation funding in 2015 and there will be further funding reductions in the years beyond. therefore we believe the only solution is to find and implement a viable set of reliable revenue solutions that will prevent this summer's highway account cash shortfall and ensure the long-term solvency of the highway trust fund. aashto looks forward to working with you to address this critical situation and we very much appreciate the opportunity to testify before you today and look forward to your questions. thank you. >> thank you so much and now it's my pleasure to introduce dr. peter ruane a key ally of

ours as we went to the last time the bill. >> madam chairwoman, chairman boxer senators vitter thank you for inviting us to participate in this hearing. i am thankful for your leadership on map-21 as well as the current legislation. one number of loan provides ample evidence of the value of the federal surface transportation program. today trucks carry freight worth more than $11 trillion over the nation's roads every year. more than three-quarters of that truck travel occurs on roads that comprised of federal aid system. without the federal investment in these roads we put tracking mobility and productivity and that $11 trillion in economic activity at risk. we believe one of the federal program's biggest problems is

that government at all levels does a poor job of telling the american public how their federal gas and diesel tax dollars are invested each year. we believe the public would be impressed and widely support this federal program if they knew the full story. i asked her economic team to find out how the public's federal gas tax dollars were put to use in 2012. a year that did not include -- unfortunately it took the freedom of information request and computer analysis of literally millions of data points to provide the project information detailed in our written testimony. here are the highlights. it is high time the public starts hearing about that. in 2012 the federal program helped fund 12,546 capital improvement projects, 7000 some

roads, road safety all focused on the system that moves most of that $11 trillion of economic activity that i just mentioned. of the 12 thousand does not include right-of-way or engineering projects. these are projects in every state that can be identified by name, location was invested. all the public knows is that the system is not nearly as safe as it could he and the waste precious time and car and truck damages or costs every day to two unexpected high percentage of road conditions. ..

aarpa continues to advocate a user fee revenue to support trust fund investments as the most straightforward or congress could find additional resources elsewhere federal budget to stabilize it. shows that would require on average $3.62 billion annually to preserve existing levels of highway and transit investment. by comparison, over a two-year period, the recent bipartisan budget act of 2013, the murray rinne budget deal reallocates resources to increase nondefense

discretionary spending cap by an average ironically of some $16 billion a year. here's where the announcer would say, spoiler alert. that means that as illustrated our testimony,in will that fixing a highway trust und without generating new revenues would require the equivalent of congress passing the president signing a 2013 level murray rinne budget deal every year. every year, just to keep the highway and transit program it is now. that is one painful alternative scenario. thank you very much. >> thank you so much. pleasure to welcome jay timmons, president and ceo of the national association of manufacturers. welcome. >> thank you, chairman boxer, enator, other members of the committee. infrastructure matters greatly to manufacturers.

t matters in every step of the production process. from receiving inputs to shipping our products to markets our customers abroad. manufacturers were vital suppliers to the transit nd road building industry, providing rolling stock engines, concrete, machineries, signs, es, barriers, safety equipment, and other materials. every dollar spent, and i know lot of statistics ere today, they all do matter, every dollar spent in construction generates 39.5 ents for manufacturing, for manufacturers, infrastructure is indeed a competitiveness issue. unfortunately, the nation's 20th century infrastructure, and some of it is, in fact, even not meeting the needs century economy. i hear concerns about the state of our infrastructure from embers constantly and consistently, from the world's

largest multinationals to family maybe ses up and down streets all across our country. aging l recognize the infrastructure is an impediment to the competitiveness and maintain the mantle of economic leadership. partnered as nam the chair noted with building meeshgs future to survey anufacturers about their perspectives on the state of the united re in states. as the chairman referenced, some 70% told us that america's in fair or re is and needs a great deal of improvement. all options to fund it must be on the table. /3 doubt it is positioned to respond to the competitive

demands of a growing economy. hat's important because manufacturers rely on a reliable infrastructure to grow markets abroad. reaching the new markets is not the for manufacturers in united states. roads, bridge, port, and more re in dire need of repair and modernization. on behalf of our more than 12,000 member, the nam urges lawmakers to address the and adopt a multiyear fully funded transportation bill support for infrastructure projects to acilitate trade and create jobs. equally as important, we believe congress must bring the federal fund to an t improved condition of solvency sustainability. the need to keep the trust fund olvent extends far beyond the departments of transportation and road builders. bridges, and oads, transit systems provide great

value and represents our economy competitiveness. manufacturers have been frustrated of late by policy calls for meet our increased investment with growing skepticism. as we've seen with previous infrastructure bills, delays and common extensions are place and sent a message that the united states is not serious about growth and competitiveness. tall order in our political environment so highly charged today, but american need bipartisan leadership to help fix the problem. and frankly we're encouraged by signals we're getting from this committee. we need to move past the debates rolee federal government's in infrastructure. the states alone cannot address deteriorating condition of roads and bridges or remedy the osts associated with traffic congestion. manufacturers are counting on congress to fulfill the responsibility of facilitating commerce in the united states. boxer, no pun intended, but we have a long

oad ahead of us, we appreciate the committee's attention to these important issues. >> thank you, i cannot thank you enough. we're going to place the letter, from the associated equipment distributors. they need immediate action to long-term solvency. the second is the economic importance of maintaining ederal investment in the transportation infrastructure from the international bridge, unnel, and turnpike association. without objection, i'll put those in the record. minutesoing to have six to ask you some questions. my first question is really an because it's just a yes or a no from each of you. not a trick question. be willing to u senators widen and hatch whether on the phone or in

person as soon as possible? >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> yes. >> yes, already have. >> absolutely. >> second round. to do it again. i can't tell you how important it is. they have so much on their plate. they want to be helpful. but i'm not so sure that they've cheduled a hearing because we have the change in the leadership there. so that would be fantastic. would each of you agree that timmons is -- said is right, that we need certainty with a multiyear bill. each of you agree that we need certainty with a multiyear bill? >> yes. absolutely. >> yes. >> unquestionably. >> i agree with myself, yes. folks nd here sometimes don't. so it gets really great. so we're all aware that the

section ravaged many sections of the nation's economy. a emember being with you at where n los angeles construction industry workers were, i mean, so hard-hit and orried about the future for their families. could you describe for us the economic environment your face to help tly put in context the consequences f failing to address the highway trust funds's pending insolvency. >> let me start on the macro and say six years into this so-called recovery, we're rate in an unemployment that was higher than the highest point of the 2001 recession. six years in, we're still igher than it was in that recession. we have 1.6 million construction my testimony in that are going from prerecession levels. we haven't filled them yet. in some areas, unemployment

area. in the 20% we have people working reduced ours, the result of that reduced hours is a strain on etirement plans, health and health care and plans. our workers are struggling. we're losing people because there's no ability to plan ahead and have a future. they're still hurting plenty. that's why we need this bill, be a patchwork or a short-term solution, but a long-term solution so that employers can plan, so that tates can plan, so that we can do long-term projects that the country really absolutely needs have the assurance that the money will be there to complete them. >> thanks for painting that picture. on the business side, you

represent the builders. can you discuss how transportation industry would be projects over new 12,000 projects using 2012 an example, that's how many new 2012, if we und in didn't have that in fiscal year 2015. put a human face on the businesses that you speak for? >> the impact of that scenario would be devastating. unemployment in that sector. down from five or six years ago, double-digit unemployment. the metric that's used often is jobs per billion. we lose that program in fiscal '15, you will literally see hundreds of thousands of workers lose their jobs. will not invest. by the way, that's already happening in the marketplace here a number of states have announced their intention. it was cited in the -- in mike's

states y a couple of have already publicly said that. and so people are not hiring now. they ear already pulling back. height of the construction season coming up in most of the country, they're holding back of the uncertainty of the marketplace right now, what congress is going to do with reauthorization. >> that is extremely alarming that we're seeing this. that's why we're really working hard to move quickly to restore there and why it's so important to work together with the finance committee over here. schuster gressman wants to move as well. turn from mr. hancock, from all of the states that you your new position, how important is it to have

stable, reliable, and funding levels for five years or more? >> madam chairman, it's incredibly. on. rry, thought it was >> it's incredibly important to the states. he states simply cannot functionally plan in an target ent where the changes day-by-day in terms of funding. know, you probably do, it takes years to get a project off ground and to built.ction and be and if funding is a question along the way, it takes even longer. states are really having difficulty with adequately moneyng, knowing when the is coming, knowing when we'll tracking. >> why is this issue so important to the business community that the chamber would of supporting on raising user fees for

transportation. that is unusual. you're explain why driven to do this? >> i don't think it's unusual for the members of the chamber the user e to support fees. the people who run the trucking industry understand. run $400 billion or something like that. 3 million big trucks every night. hey understand if they don't have the facilities to do that in a safe and protective and way, they're behind. the triple a has taken, i think, very enlightened position, recognizing that people are over the place. so as we've heard today from the panel, the business community provides the resources to build the roads, the bridges, the ports. the business community builds them. the business community moves on

them. and if you want to look for the biggest improvement in my -- ion in u.s. efficient is ciency in recent time what we've done in the supply chain, from raw materials to finished products and everything in between, not only capital goods, but also, information, resources. i mean, this is for the business whether you're in the tech end, you're in the service nd, or you're in the capital goods and manufacturing end, if can't do move it, you it. the goods u, it's movement is so critical. we all know what happens when it takes a long time. you. >> thank you, madam chair, thank you all again. opening ested in my statement, we've been hard at work for sometime discussing a move out of this committee as soon as possible.

nd the idea would be to deal with those issues under our jurisdiction in an aggressive that helps rebuild trust in the trust fund and then to really help incent the do the tougheree work on the finance side and be our full partner in completing bill. so, with that process in mind, let me ask a few questions. of all, thank you not -- thank you all, your organization as producing fhwa for very good data which you've abouted to your testimony projects in each state impacted by the trust fund and federal aid. one problem is you'll have to hours and hours

producing that data and it seems data should be readily available through the and to make it transparent and clear what the trust fund does or doesn't do. you agree with that? are there reforms that you think that can be made to make the activity under the trust fund far more transparent? absolutely agree. and it's -- it's really tragic the one would have to use freedom of information act to get such information. >> right. >> they have that information back. i'm not here to, you know, unfairly criticize any government agency. and tell the story. we make a recommendation in our testimony specifically. you recall the effort that was made by the administration, various agencies in telling the story in the stimulus program that there were routine and regular commentary on what was being done on various projects around the country. we say there should be pro

forma, routine. they should be celebrating investments, these 20,000 plus projects every year and telling the public read these resources are going and what they are achieving. most importantly what they're achieving it be so one should not have to, you know, use request to get this information. not to be out there because it is an incredible story so, what the -- what this is accomplishing. >> i certainly agree and we will continue to push that. there is a specific provision in 21. unfortunately faa still ua has not responded to the fix. many debt greater transparency. mr. aaron cox says i'm real concerned about the epa and the new proposed rules with. i think this poses the threat of

a dramatically increased permitting requirements fifth and decrees to flexibility on transportation projects. also concerned that rulemaking may proceed before peer reviewers review it of -- >> we have not actually seen the forward permit will making yet but we are concerned of the. we have been told that it affects roadside ditches as sources of the runoff area to be controlled. most of those were built as the bill terror systems. yes, we are very, very interested in that and looking forward to hearing from the federal high risk. >> great. mr. timmons, thank you for your

testimony. can you expand on a just a bit and it gives us an estimate of a cost at a rented or disadvantaged visa the other nations related to infrastructure and what path we are on regarding that. rapper's image will be a cost disadvantage in terms of global competitiveness. so. >> i don't have a specific number, but i can tell you anecdotally that there is certainly a disadvantage when some of the other folks here have been talking about what our major competitors are doing with regard to infrastructure projects. those projects to allow more goods to make it to market much more efficiently. there is a 20% cost disadvantage for manufacturers in this country versus major trading partners because of several factors, in perspective of her purse structure not one of them faugh go back to a character --

question on the proposed rules from the epa on waterways as well as other factors. anything that detracts or adds to the disadvantaged obviously hurts manufacturing in this country. >> thank you. our final question. actually, one of the first organizations out with your reauthorization priority. thank you for that. i assume you think that means that there's room for improvement reform and greater transparency to build and rebuild trust in the program. can you expand on and mention a couple of your priorities? >> sure. we do believe that there is room to improve, but we felt it was a major step forward and we were very pleased with reforms that we saw says. there are some tweaks that likely will need to be made, but part of the issue is we have not

completely seen double banking's regarding those. we will be eagerly awaiting those and have comments, i'm quite sure. >> we look forward to those. >> thank you, madam chair. >> thank you so much. i believe senator barrasso is next. >> thank you, madam chairman. kind of following upon your previous testimony, talked a little bit in my opening statement about the roadblocks out there in construction projects in terms of red tape which make things more costly, does not create the kind of meaningful jobs we are trying to create. further decelerating project deliveries? >> there are a number of activities that are under way as we speak. we are working federal highway has in every day count program that we are working diligently with them to see brought

forward. also, we have programs, strategic highway research programs that involve projects to get things done faster. many things on the horizon and we see the value in doing business. >> anyone else in the panel want to respond to that? >> full implementation of the reforms. >> said the committee, the congress made some great changes to the legislation as part of the bill. it is just a matter of implementation. they are under way, they could be exhilarated. >> anyone else? >> you talked about in your testimony and the highlight of the 20 mile six lane bridge that took only two years to build from pen to pavement. the vice-president made a statement last week about the going to minority airforce

pretty take somebody they're blindfolded to the morning and they would think they're in a third-world country. i just ask if he could talk a low bid. it would seem to be in the best case scenario to try to do a project like you outline the esau in china so successfully completing in a swift manner. it might take a written years to get the whole process down here. from their experience and travels what can we do in the united states are really accelerate project delivery? >> one thing, we can have long-term predictability in planning. we need a long-term bill so that people can actually plan, start the process, have some confidence that it's going to follow through. if you're talking about private public partnerships and the predictable and go forward.

also, i think it just to say that as a nation we're going to do something. when we decided to get to the moon we got the nation on the flooding. our infrastructure according to the world economic forum has dropped from seventh in the world to 15th in just five years. and it will continue to drop. the american society of civil engineers, we have an average three and a half trillion dollar deficit to get us back to where we need. the dot says that a third of our roads are now in poor or mediocre condition. we need as a nation to say we are going to be the most competitive when it comes to infrastructure and understand that that investment today is going to reap tremendous benefits down the road. i think us coming together,

everyone up paris come together to say that we need and then to have the political will to go forward i think is what we need. it is just in the determination to say that we will do it and then get together and do it. and i applaud the people, the members of this committee because you understand the importance to the country of infrastructure and maintaining infrastructure, whether it is a bridge, road. i urge you to go further and think boulder, start talking of a high-speed rail and other things, a grid system that does not waste electricity, a delivery system where you do not have leaks and seeps that dream gas and water and oil into the environment. all of those things can create jobs and make us competitive. i think that the most important thing is for us to just have a vision and will then make a decision to do it. and we decided to go to the moon nothing can stop this.

the same thing here. if we decide that we will have world-class infrastructure to complete -- to compete in the global economy, i have no doubt, senator, that we can do it and do it the best in the world. >> well, when we decided to go we had a compelling national interest, and we did not have all of the regulators and lawyers and lawsuits that we have today. to go out and build a major project is preceded by permitting and it zoning arguments and lawsuits and by environmental lawsuits and by the way i have a problem with looking critically at the environment, but repetitive lawsuits after lawsuits have been resolved. the reason that we cannot do things as quickly as others, one

of the reasons is because it takes so long to get the conclusion of all of the permits first, zoning, lawsuits, and we're talking years and years and years. and i think that we all went to school, studied, at three parts to our government. he executive, legislative, judicial. we never knew whether we would live in a time that there was one part that was bigger than all the others put together. we never talk about it, and that is the regulatory and mediation part and is absolutely straping this nation's ability to compete >> thank you, chairman. >> thank you, senator. i would turn to senator bozeman. >> thank you, madam share. i do appreciate you and the senator having this.

i think that it is very important. you know, we hear a lot about the partisanship that goes on in congress. in this particular area, this committee when it gets into the environment of issues there are differences of opinion. there is very little difference of opinion in regard to infrastructure. not only here but in the house, and it seems, a look at the panel, it is the same deal. we have the chamber, labor, you know, wind, the road builders. all of you. again, strange bedfellows coming together as we all are talking about the interest. i have concerns about the harsh winter, the fact that the jobs are being affected right now because you simply cannot get work done with these very cold, sustained temperatures begin just cannot do it. pretty soon it sounds like already that the contract thing is an issue.

i know that we head -- this is not hypothetical in the sense that we have had this same situation occur in the past and very definitely people quit writing contracts. again, i am concerned about that. you know, the thing about infrastructure is that the -- e create jobs when you do it, but the real -- you know, the real economic thing comes about after they're belts with the increase in land value, the economic activity it comes about. i would argue that -- and it is sad to hear the statistics, but one of the reasons that we became the economic power house was the vision of the eisenhower administration and congress getting the interstate system put in place. i am committed to doing anything and i can to get this thing done . so one thing i would like to ask mr. hancock, one of the frustrations we have not only with this, states are struggling right now.

and in an effort to try and push more money for infrastructure they're is a tendency at the state level, and this is not true of arkansas, we passed that sales tax which is something that other states need to look at doing in actually have defined projects and things and get those kind of things done. there is a little frustration as he puts more money ought, the state backs out and they get this money so that they can divert to prisons and schools and things that are very, very necessary, but the reality is you do not go forward. you have more of a federal government shouldering the burden. >> i would be more than happy to comment on that. has been hard experience that whenever federal money has come the state has stepped up with issues and made additional moneys available as well in kentucky we have been in will to do a lot of major projects through that mechanism, but the

one thing that i would say, about 40% on average of the money that the states have to work with to build projects is federal funding. of that 45% bid constitutes more of the larger projects that we actually build. so is a critical piece. but the states are doing a lot, and you have seen that in recent days with the number of states enacting new funding mechanisms and so forth. we applaud the states that have done that. we certainly are encouraging everyone to do what they must to find the money necessary to invest in transportation, but it is a difficult parents with the state budgets and so forth. we find a lot of our colleagues that are very interested in spending more on transportation. >> senator, you made a great point about the harsh winter. when it is over and people can go back to work it will be to an infrastructure that is more seriously affected and more work to do.

>> you make a great point. not only can they not do the work now, but with this vision got you know, it is torn to be difficult. there will be a tremendous amount of damage. how long does it take for an average significant road project to get done now? >> minor ten years. >> we did a recent average of seven years. >> you mentioned that the bridge and china. the thing that impressed me was the situation that we had in minnesota, you know, the bridge collapse. nothing was rebuilt in the year. that would have taken easily in today's climate ten years or whenever. instead of the agencies having adversarial attitudes, people working together, you know, the labor wars together, it was just the attitude of we can get this done and get reopened.

we essentially were able to do something there really was quite extraordinary. but i think -- and you all can be a tremendous help in this area. with the limited resources that we have faugh, you know, not to skirt rules or get around them, but to do it, but to just have the agency's duties. we put stuff in the bills before, but really just to make the agency's when they're talking together, doing it together that we need to have the goal as a nation to cut that time in half or whenever goal that we make. that is a very doable thing. and with inflation, the cost increase and things like that it is something that was sent us a tremendous amount of money. thank you. we appreciate you being here. i am committed and the rest of the committee is committed to helping. >> well, i just want to say to

each and every one of you how much i appreciate your testimony today. i know that we are singing from the same boat except when it comes to the environment, which is typical and i understand it. i honestly have to say that this transportation bill in order to get out here is not going to be one big environmental writer. let's be clear because we have to come together. and just as the businesses and the citizens of west virginia if they want a little more regulation on that chemicals bill which is killing business, killing economic development right now according to my colleagues. i just think what we need to do is find a sweet spot. we need to speak up. and we have a lot of reforms. has dr. read pointed out in the last bill. we need to make sure that they're working. and we have to understand that a great deal of the slowdown, senator, is funding.

sometimes the funding does not come through which is why it is so important. so excited because if the idea came from really the los angeles mayor have pointed out that they have the sales tax, but it is going to take in 30 years to build the projects. but we could change that 210 because there is really no risk to be the money is coming, but the federal government can step up and move that money ford. i really appreciate all this. i see that we have a colleague -- do we have time to do another round? bucket. go right ahead. i will finish later. >> i have a couple of conflicts. everything happened at once. i noticed that you called for increases in gasoline tax. it is the position of the chamber of commerce that we will

be raising taxes to increase spending today. >> we have not raise the federal user fee fuel tax in almost 20 years. >> you want to raise taxes on albanians who have to commute to work. you can spend it however you would like to spend it. senator, whether you raise the tax or you seek the funds through some other means of federal expenditure the citizens of alabama are going to pay for it. >> you propose raising the tax. >> yes, sir. >> would it be acceptable to you if we found ways to spending in washington and reduce that to pay for the highway? >> if you actually got the money . the longest singsong in washington in the history of my time here was a waste, fraud, and abuse. we're going to get rid of it and use the money fix. if you actually got the money, ticket out of other budgets and

put it there, i would applaud you. >> are you would support that. >> that is not what you are testifying to in favor. some of my people would probably rather increase the corporate tax rather than the gas tax. >> the corporate tax in this country is far more than we pay anywhere else in the competitive basis, and i think you should ask billy canary that runs the expanded and combined chambers of commerce in alabama whether he could get his members to support a user fee to move their goods and their workers. >> so i guess i understand what you want to say. you want to raise the chamber of commerce testifying that you do not believe it is possible to cut and save the highway program without raising taxes. i just want to get that clear. i think it would be very, very

hard to do that in the next seven months. if you can do it i will vigorously supported. >> i think that is what we should do. there are places that we can save money. i guess i am just wanting to know that we would like to reduce the corporate rate. it is hurting america. asserting mr. trump does employees and is hurting economic development and job creation to have virtually the highest corporate tax rate in the world. >> well, we certainly agree on that. we totally support that. i was teasing you a little that about you supporting somebody else paying taxes, but not you. in 2000 when the employment wake was around 4% the new york times wrote an editorial opposing amnesty for than 6 million illegal workers in the country and said the afl-cio proposals should be rejected. amnesty would undermine the integrity of the country's

immigration law and would depress wages of its lowest bay, native-born workers. the new york times. today the employment rate is 6 percent, and the workplace, the work force participation rate is below is that it has been in 40 years. wages are lower today than they were in 99, yet you've embarked on a bill that not only grants amnesty to 12 million, but also provides green cards to its 40 million new illegal emigrants. >> my friend, why are you talking about immigration? this is a hearing about the highway trust fund. i have never quite seen this type of an attack on various members. i am confused about it. does not helpless. >> i am raising a question. i did not know that we were strictly -- >> well, yes. we are. this is not a committee that

does immigration reform. i could call out reports that show that it is a great boon to our economy. i will not get into that fox. i would please ask you, your question was tough and fair, but this is getting off topic. you could keep your questions to the topic at hand it would mean a lot to this chairman. >> you know, you are such a fair chairman. we will acquiesce, maybe i would submit a letter. mr. trumka could have a chance to respond because he has given a lot of the. >> i would welcome that. i really would fit. i would tell you, there are 6 million people or 12 million people with no rights. driving down the wages of every other american out there fifth. until we fix the system everyone will have less income, less economic growth. i look forward to the -- >> i'm glad we put this off to another day. go right ahead.

>> i have looked at that. this legislation that cleared the senate that you support it would dramatically increase the legal flow, not a significant impact in reducing illegal flow. think it is beyond what the economy can absorb, but that is an issue for a different day. thank you for your testimony. we just have the budget report yesterday. it is sobering. he suggests we could have another fiscal crisis because our debt is reaching almost 90 percent of gdp. gross debt could reach over 100% of gdp. we cannot just tax our way out of it. so that would knock off the growth of we would like to have. madam chairman, again, you have

led effectively on this. and i hope that we can come of with something and strengthens our infrastructure problem in a fiscally responsible way. >> senator, i do hope so. i would say that this committee is going to deal with the reauthorization. we heard from every member through when you weren't doing a very important duties is we need certainty here. this is -- we don't know what the future holds. what i am hopeful is we can get a five or six your bill of year. i've spoken with the senator, and he approves of my saying that it is my intent to have that bill before this committee in april. that is our intent. it will not deal with the funding because that is a matter for the senators and your committee, but it will lay this out, and that is why it is so important that would never -- i have lots of ideas. one of them is to go after

350 billion uncollected taxes every year. i am sure others would not agree, but there are many, many ways that we can get this going. but costs he makes an important point. his got to be real. it has to be certain. and that is why the user fund, however use the fund, whatever it is, whether it is the death tax, the travel that is not intrusive or it is a user fee at the refinery level, all of that would be a dedicated tax going into the fund. and because of our economic situation we need to have this because if you are really worried about deficits and debt which every single one of buses and was so happy that i was your behalf. our members saying, we will not have any more bounce because the debt is disappearing. i was here, and that we can handle that problem. but the highway trust fund is

different. as it was envisioned by a republican president, it has a separate seat, does not cause problems with the deficit. very important, and i think that we should keep the user fee concept because it does give that type of certainty. that decision is going to be made by another committee. they are excited about us doing your part. i cannot speak for every member. i've sat down with most of my colleagues. i have to morgan said down with fox. i am hopeful that we can unite. environmental writers and all the other things and we can just focus on what must be done. i am excited about the challenge no one thought that we could do it last time. i want to say, senator sessions has been a friend to me in this committee. we do not see eye to eye on a lot of things, but we work well together.

i respect his knowledge of the deficit situation, the debt situation as a former member of the budget committee i know that in that committee udc the big picture going down the road. there is nothing in this bill that is going to hurt the deficit, nothing. it will be self sustaining which is absolutely critical. with that i want to thank all of you. report back to me about your conversations. i hope you will. i will ask the senators. i will tell them what you said you were going to call them. i think we can get this done, but only if we stick together. let's find that common ground and not get into arguments about other issues because i think that gets us off track. thank you very much. thank you. >> yes. [inaudible conversations]

>> on the next "washington journal," we look at the economic impact of the keystone pipeline with brigham mccown. we will talk with the host of cycle" about what to expect and president obama second term. energy regulator talks about the u.s. electric gird. -- grid. "washington journal begins at 7:00 a.m. >> when macon was first laid out in 1823, they laid out in nice, square blocks with alternating large, wide boulevards, wider d.c.lenfant's washington boulevards.

laying it they were out, a farmer with a low of cotton on his wagon headed towards the river to market it downstream. sode right through the stake that the engineers had laid out. and the engineer simply wove the angled road into the layout of macon, georgia. weekend, american history tv look behind the history and literary life of macon, georgia. saturday at noon on c-span-2. and sunday at 5:00 p.m. on c-span3. house democrats are holding their annual retreat in cambridge, maryland. party leaders spoke to reporters about the policy areas they are discussing at the conference, including the economy, raising the minimum wage, and extending unemployment insurance. this is 35 minutes.

>> we just had a great welcome from the governor of the great state of maryland, martin o'malley. we had a wonderful presentation by a couple of economists who talked to us about building an economy that works for all americans. that's what we're here to to do for the next two and a half days, talk about how we reward work, how we provide economic security to all americans, how we make sure that the economy of tomorrow works for everyone. not just some, but for everyone. how we return to those days when we really could say to our children, the american dream is before you. quite honestly, these last few days have been good days for americans. yesterday we maintained the full faith and credit of the united states of america and did not cause american families' mortgages to -- mortgage interest rates to go way up. we made sure people can still borrow at a decent rate. today, hundreds of thousands of

americans woke up hearing the president tell them you're getting a raise to $10.10 if you're working at minimum wage. i think we're ready to work. and we want to get out there and do the things that show americans that we're ready to take action, that we're ready to work on their behalf. this should be a year of action. there's no reason why 2014 should be a year of shutdown politics or why don't we just pack up and put it away and say there's no more we can do we can do things like raise the minimum wage, not just for workers, for federal contractors, but for all americans. we can guarantee equal pay for equal work. we can renew emergency unemployment insurance for 1.7 million americans and we can finally fix a badly broken immigration system. we know on the immigration reform front that we have the votes to pass that bill and we believe we have the votes today to pass all those initiatives we just mentioned.

that's why we think this should be a year of work, a year of action. that's why we're here, assembled in maryland to talk about how we as democrats will work with the president for this year of action on behalf of the american public. with that, let me turn to the leader, nancy pelosi. >> thank you very much, mr. chairman, to you and mr. crowley, thank you for providing the auspices for which we can come together to work for an economy that works for all americans. we heard from some experts on -- some economists today, we are in a lively exchange of ideas. and one of the ideas that emerges in all that we hear is that what women -- when women succeed, america succeeds. the reinforcement of the -- of that principle is one that, again, the president reinforced by raising to -- guaranteeing a minimum wage to all people who work for contractors with the

federal government. but on our agenda of when women succeed, america succeeds, and men do too, it's about pay equity and raising the minimum wage, it's about paid sick leave, it's about children learning, parents earning, with quality affordable child care. and also we come a day after the house of representatives passed the debt ceiling. can you imagine -- let me read from the constitution. the 14th amendment declares that the validity of the public debt of the united states of america authorized by law shall not be questioned. the action that we took yesterday reinforces that, honors that statement in the constitution. it's really stunning that 199 republicans voted to default on the full faith and credit of the united states of america.

that is not in furtherance of an economy that works for all americans. in fact, it doesn't work for america at all, whether it's our global standing or whether it is what is happening at kitchen tables across the country. as mr. becerra said, what interest people will pay on their car loans, mortgage payments, college loans, business -- small business loans, should they be small business people. what it means to people's 401k's, the impact of a default on the full faith and credit of the united states of america. to putting all of this, it was a oneness. with a oneness of confidence. confidence in our economy that -- it wants to share prosperity for all americans. confidence in the economy again that works for all americans. we're very excited about the enthusiasm of members. we're hopeful that with the

cooperation between democrats and republicans yesterday on the floor, grateful to the speaker for bringing up the legislation, he knows the consequence of a default. but yet 199 of his colleagues did not share that concern. stunning. and i think no senator voted -- no republican senator -- thank you. no republican senator voted to lift the debt ceiling. every one of them voted to default on the full faith and credit of the united states. it's really important that the public understand what is at stake in these debates. today is president lincoln's birthday, february 2, is when we used to always celebrate it. now it's a whole weekend and a week and the rest. february 12. president lincoln said, public sentiment is everything. the public has to know how they are affected by public policy in washington, d.c. they want america to have a

raise. america deserves a raise. the work ethic is alive and well in our country, we're hearing from economists how the creativity thrives across america and that is what creates jobs for an economy that works for all americans. so we're very excited that a year of action, working with the president, hopefully working in a bipartisan way and in that spirit, i'm pleased to yield to the distinguished democratic whip of the house, the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer. mr. hoyer: thank you, madam leader. chris van hollen and i are very, very pleased to have all of you here. ery pleased to have all of you here, all of our colleagues here fish, and we were proud of our governor this evening as he spoke to our caucus. he focused on the issues that the president focused on. an optimistic way.

a president just a few weeks ago said he was optimistic that he had done better but we were not really needed to be. we still need to invest in growing our economy. he said that he wanted to work together. i would suggest that every time that we have had a bipartisan vote america has been advantage to. whether it was being airbills, unfortunately not in a bipartisan way a great bipartisan votes when we funded government, past the omnibus appropriation bill, replace the devastatingly negative and sequestration under the. so acting in a bipartisan

fashion is a good thing for the country. the president thinks that we need to act. the american public did not send us to the congress of the united states says not to the public business. not to invest. not to vote to make sure they get paid. not as the fall were the cracks. not help the economy by passing comprehensive immigration reforms. and while i'm optimistic that when we act together america will succeed women will do better, all this will be better. we will, in a phrase that i have used so often make it in america that is what americans will do. we want to have a sense that they can make it in america. that is what people came to

america, to make it, to seize the opportunity that is the american dream. i'm optimistic, concerned. he says that is what our leaders said. if we get past this one referring to the extension of the debt limit so america would pay its bills we are done until the election. let us hope that is not true. let us hope that the republicans want to work with the president and with us to make sure that we can make it in america. women do better and america will do better if we invest in our people and grow our economy so that everybody can make it in america. that the yield to my dear colleague and friend, the assistant leader, mr. jim cliburn. >> thank you very much.

madam leader. i think that all of us have the ability by the actions. the minimum wage, federal contractors. >> minimum wage. it extends into areas that we have not touched on. it has been 20 years since we have established a floor for the people who learned salaries for tips. two hours and $0.13. twenty years ago. it has been that way ever since. this executive order raised the debt floor to $4.90. and it covers concessions and

service, contractors which means that these concessions for state government where we have people blind and disabled who do certain services for the state government and contract with the state government. with that service is covered as well. now we believe it is time for the congress to pass the bill. it would immediately lift over for a half million americans above the poverty level. that is what it would do. and i think it is high time that we do that. because, as was said, over 6 percent of the people who are going to benefit from the minimum wage are women.

and one in four had children. and so i think it's important for us to look at one other thing. we hear all this talk about minimum-wage as relates to young workers. the fact of the matter is the average age of minimum-wage employees is 35 years old. and they have the least one show. so this is all about lifting households, women, children above the poverty level. i would hope that the congress, our republican friends would join us in passing the bill raising the minimum wage. with that and would like to yield to the vice chair of our caucus. ..

we're pleased by the actions the president took today in terms of increasing the minimum wage for federal contract workers. we're also pleased that the congress has acted as well as it pertains to the debt limit. there are things we should be happy about and we are happy about them. we also hope that this is a watershed moment, that more will come from this. i'm not holding my breath.

there are 1.7 plus million americans today who find themselves economically stranded. they're in an island surrounded by economic debt. desperately searching for a job and have now been denied an extension of unemployment insurance. what that means to these individuals is that as they continue to look for work, provide for their families, their education, their food, their medicine, their rent, their mortgage, their government is not there because republican caucus refuses to extend unemployment insurance for these individuals and their families. i have a gentleman from new york who has contacted me, asking is there any way we could see forward a bill this week before we broke for our district work period? and i had to tell him, i didn't think it was likely after the senate was unable to pass it. very difficult to tell someone who is so desperate, in fact, looking at the prospects of losing his home and what that means to a family, how devastating that is to a family. my republican colleagues often talk about how pro-family they are. here's an opportunity to send a message to 1.8 million

americans, not democrats, not republicans, not red, blue, green, whatever color. just americans who are desperately trying to make ends meet. send a message. give these people hope that their country believes in them as much as they believe in this country. give them hope and give them the opportunity to take care of their families. a modest amount, not everything, but just something to help make ends meet and pass unemployment insurance extension. with that, i would like to turn it over to our point person on the budget committee, and a marylander as well, chris van hollen. >> thank you, joe. i want to join with steny hoyer and all my colleagues in welcoming you to maryland. as leaders and others have said, we've gotten off to a great start. we're focused on what specific actions we can take to make sure the economy works for all

americans. that was the subject of the discussion we just had, with a number of economists. and certainly if we want the economy to work for everybody, we've got to reform our broken tax code because right now we have a tax code that in too many places is rigged to help very powerful special interests and folks at the very high end of the income scale at the expense of the rest of the country. a case in point are the provisions in the tax code that actually encourage big corporations to ship american jobs overseas. we want to ship american products overseas, not american jobs overseas. another provision in the tax code that encourages big corporations to move their process to tax shelters overseas, rather than having those funds invested here in america, in american jobs. so we're going to continue to push as the president outlined in his state of the union address for a tax code that

works for everybody. not just for powerful special interests. that make sure we encourage investment here in the united states in all sorts of innovation and modernize our infrastructure because that will help put more americans back to work in good paying jobs. we hope our republican colleagues will join us in that effort. and now i want to turn it over to steve israel a good friend who is focused every day on trying to make sure that we build an economy that works for everybody. steve israel. >> thank you, chris. what you've heard from my colleagues, rising wages, pay equity for women, a fair tax code, immigration reform, these are not just topics, these are the fundamental differences in the united states congress right now between democrats and republicans. this is about whose side are you on?

and on every one of those issues, rising wages, pay equity, immigration reform, a fair tax code, we're on the side of the american people. we're going to continue to focus on this dominant theme, whose side are you on? at this conference, over the next nine months, as we focused on this in the past. in california today, i will add, one of our colleagues, gary g. miller, the most vulnerable republican in congress, decided he was on the wrong side and jumped ship because he himself knows that you cannot continue to defend the indefensible, you can nont continue to defend the wrong priority. and the wrong values in front of the american people. thank you very much. >> there was a statement today

with a summary of your remarks to labor that shows you're opposed to president obama's latest trade initiative. what do you oppose and what do you expect to hear from him on friday? >> i don't know -- i think the characterization that you're saying of the statement -- we weren't talking about president obama's trade initiative. we were talking about camp bachus and i said then that camp-bachus in its present form is unacceptable to me. i have worked with many of our colleagues to try to find some common ground but in its present form it is unacceptable. that is not, as you suggested a rejection of the president's trade agenda. it's a rejection of the current form of the camp-baucus. we're the party of john f. kennedy, we're the party of free trade, fair trade, and we believe the global economy is here to stay and we're part of it. as mr. van hollen said, we want

to export products overseas, not transport jobs overseas. we have a tax code right now that rewards businesses that send jobs overseas that has to be reversed to reward businesses that create jobs in the united states. it's all very much a part of an economy that works for all americans. i just want to add to something that my colleagues were saying. what the -- when mr. israel was talking about the difference between democrats and republicans, we see, and what the president said in his speech, we he talked about an opportunity agenda. we have long seen an opportunity gap in our country. we have to do what we can to close that gap. and the difference, one of the differences in our approach is that we understand that the american people are not fully participating in the prosperity

that some are enjoying in our country. not any part of it. we understand the republicans are indifferent. indifferent to those who need a raise in the minimum wage. indifferent to those who need an extension of the unemployment benefits and the list goes on. would any of my colleagues leek to say anything about trade? >> you've been known to give us a likelihood or prediction of things happening in elections. what do you think the likelihood of democrats taking back the house is? >> that's not what we're here to do. we're here this weekend to talk policy. we're here to hopefully find common ground to focus on the economy, to create good-paying jobs, to do so in a bipartisan -- in as bipartisan a way as possible. if the republicans would support an increase in the minimum wage, we'd be thrilled. we'd rather have that legislative success than an issue in the campaign.

so that's not what we're about today. thank you. >> the obamacare signups, it was just announced 3.3 million people have signed up. it's not quite where it's been projected but it's accelerated clearly. what's your reaction to this? what do you think will happen in march? march will clearly be the pivotal month. >> i'm going to yield to the gentleman from maryland, mr. hoyer but are you referencing the affordable care act. >> yes. >> thank you. >> the affordable care act, we worked very hard to enact, i've talked to a lot of you who said what do you think about the affordable care act, i said, it's going to get better every month. by the time we get to the summer, people will say, this is really helping me, my family, my brother, my sister, my neighbors. i think we have evidence of that

in the figures. you mentioned the 3.3 million people. 1.1 million in january alone. young people. this is something that all of you have talked about, we know is very important, young people enrolled at an increased rate, ages 18 to 34 rose 65% over last month. so we think that what is happening is what we thought would happen. the american people are seeing the benefits of the affordable care act, of a marketplace where there's competition, where they get good benefits and lower prices and better access. that was the purpose of the affordable care act. we think that's happening. we think it's going to be a great benefit to the american people and they will see that in the coming months. >> 3.4 million out of over 12.5 million. >> exchange, yes. >> any other questions?

>> is it safe to say most of what you're talking about, the minimum wage, unemployment insurance, there's about zero appetite for those things to come up under the republican controlled house you said you want to put pressure, pressure, pressure, in the mold of the vawa bill. but how -- is there a specific strategy for doing that? do you want obama to do more to pressure them? polls are on your side but boehner has -- >> the american people, as you indicate, the polls are on our side. everything that we're talking about is in the 70%. over 70% of the people think we should have an increase in the minimum wage. over 70% of the people think we should have comprehensive immigration reform. the list goes on. to the use the vawa example, the too hot to handle approach. february 12, public sentiment is everything. the more the american people know about what can be done here the better off we'll be. however, yesterday, we said over and over again, we're not going

to support an increase in the debt ceiling unless it is clean. we are not negotiating the full faith and credit of the united states of america. it took months but yesterday they finally conceded that at least the speaker recognized the harm that would happen to our economy if we didn't proceed and we got a clean -- so -- this is -- we're not going away on these issues. we think -- we passed a minimum wage in the first 100 hours when we had the majority in 2007. president bush signed the bill. so this is not a partisan issue. extending unemployment benefits has been a bipartisan initiative all along system of what we are suggesting are not partisan issues, they're areas where we have had bipartisanship in the past and again, we believe that

the fair thing to do for the american people, understanding their challenges, the minimum wage is not just for minimum wage earners. it lifts the floor for everyone. so that's why people -- those way -- those making much more than the minimum wage understand that it's good for them. not only does it lift the floor, it injects demand into the economy and then creates jobs in that way as well. so it's a stimulus. my colleagues, anyone want to add anything? >> i want to add, surely we're not done. it's the middle of february. >> six weeks -- we have been in session five weeks. and we're done? >> the notion that because the debt ceiling was lifted, all work is done for the rest of the year, i don't think the american people buy that. they can't. there's too much that needs to be done. too many americans are suffering right now. i mentioned 1.8 million who are looking for work and can't find it.

they need help and relief. we talked about people who are earning not enough to -- even a fast food chain store to really take care of their families, they're looking for an increase in the minimum wage. the president addressed that to some degree but the congress needs to do more. the president asked us today, he asked the republicans and "the democrat"s, to pass a minimum wage increase for the american worker. so there are things we do need to do. there's an agenda and a vision we have to move things forward. we want to work with our republican colleagues to make that happen. they have to meet us a little more than halfway to make that happen here in the house of representatives. >> let me also add if i may, i don't think anything that we've discussed here doesn't have a majority in the house of representatives. we're not talking about putting up bills that don't have a chance in heaven to get passed. we're talking about measures that not only have the vast majority of americans supporting

these policies, the majority of members in the house of representatives would vote for these. so what we're simply asking for is a chance to have a vote on these measures. and i think most americans probably would be astonished to know that it's not that congress can't get its work done, it's that there is a concerted effort on the part of the majority, our republican colleagues, to prevent us from putting up obstacles from letting us vote on these measures. we're not insisting that our republican colleagues join us in doing what americans want to us -- want us to do in increasing the minimum wage or providing unemployment insurance for americans who lost their job through no fault of their own on providing equal pay for equal work for women in this country, we're saying, let us vote on it. if the majority exists, excellent. but don't blockade progress in the house of representatives. the house of representatives is the people's house, where we get things done. it should not be the graveyard for good ideas.

>> just to emphasize this, we're not having a theoretical conversation in our caucus meeting. we're talking about very specific actions that congress can take now. so i think we want to emphasize two things. number one, these are ideas and pieces of legislation that are ready to go. they could be acted on today, as javier said if we had a vote and could start changing people's lives for the better tomorrow. we have a minimum wage bill, it's been introduced to increase the wage to $10.10. we have a bipartisan senate immigration bill. we have legislation introduced to make sure that women get equal pay for equal work. we have legislation introduced to make sure that you can earn sick leave so you can take care of family who is in trouble, family members in trouble, and not have to lose your pay. these are concrete actions that could be taken immediately if the speaker of the house would

let us have a vote. that's our preference. he doesn't let us have a vote, we'll make it clear that within a hundred thundershowers of a a new congress where we had a majority, we will do these smesk things, that will have immediate impact in people's lives. i think that's important that the public recognize that these are concrete, practical steps that can be taken, not just some theoretical, partisan dispute. >> last question. mr. hoyer, yesterday you said you shared some concerns expressed by the congressional black caucus on the lack of diversity of judicial appointments coming from the white house. i was wondering if you could expand on that and let us know what kind of appointments you'd like to see moving forward. >> what i said was that i had -- that i was in agreement with the congressional black caucus who said we need diversity on our bench and that the problem in the united states senate was with deferring to each senator

in each state if they did not support diversity, we wouldn't get diversity and they wanted that addressed. i said i agreed with them on that issue. i had an opportunity to talk briefly with senator reid's chief of staff who asked me about my sentiment and i said that. let me defer, however, to jim clyburn of the congressional black caucus who is assistant leader, because he's been involved in those discussions and have him comment. >> yes, i have been involved in those discussions. i think that what our concerns are, if you were to look at the list of possible judges, who have not been acted on, about 13 of them are african-american. and we believe that these are

people who come with sterling credentials, but because of this process, blue slip process that we have, too many senators that are from various states are refusing to return the blue slip and therefore these people are just hanging out in limbo. and so we have asked that these senators take into account the fact that these people, some of them have been out there for two years, waiting on some action and because they were not -- they will not allow their names to move forward, we cannot get them voted on. they would get, as you said, by legislation, these people would be approved if they were allowed to have a vote. it's blatantly unfair for us to have a process that will not

allow the full senate to vote on these nominations. and i thank everybody who expressed concerns about this because this is something we think is very, very important to go over the structure of america. >> is there a list? senators who haven't returned it? >> not right now. >> did somebody just say there are a lot of people out in the cold, literally and figuratively because of the unemployment insurance and raising the minimum wage. we don't want the republicans to be indifferent to them. so far that looks the way they are. let's hope they prove us wrong. but i want to thank all of you for coming out in the cold to be with us here and we hope we can stay in close touch in the next 48 hours or so so you can see

how excited we are about our coming together. thank again, mr. chairman. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> on c-span today, "washington journal" is next. later, vice president joe biden speaks with the party m eeting. in 45 minutes, we will look at the economic impact of the keystone pipeline with brigham mccown. then the co-host of "they cycle" on what to expect in president obama second term. and john milhouse will discuss the disc it -- the security of

the u.s. electric grid. you can join the conversation on facebook and twitter. ♪ morning, everyone on thursday, february 13, 2014. stosty wintet continues to batterrm. congress has left town. before the senate yesterday approved an extension of the government borrowing authority on a partyline vote. after the vote to proceed on the debt extension. finally the top two republican leaders came forward to vote yes and allowed final passage. on the front page of "usa today," comcast has agreed to buy time warner for