even some of the growth rate was slowing before the recession. we are going to this long-term trend of people staying in place, they are not having families that are as big as they were in the past. immigration is slowing down first because of the recession ended in the later part of the decade because of some of the trump administration's policies. we are living longer so we are getting older. we have more and more people paying into the system who are taking the retirement benefits they earned. at the same time we have fewer and fewer people contributing to the programs that administer retirement programs. we are going to be dealing with the effects of the recession from 2008, 2 thousand 9, 2010 as long as you and i are doing this. host: you could find his reporting on the census and other topics if you go to

thehill.com, follow them>> "was" continues. host: jim tymon is the director of the american association of state highway and transportation officials, here to talk about infrastructure needs in this country. that's begin with your group. what is it, and who funds you? guest: i'm with aashto, the american association of state highway and transportation officials. we are a trade organization that represents the interests of state departments of transportation across the country. our directors are the 52-state d.o.t.'s including the district of columbia and puerto rico. host: what do your members see as the need for infrastructure in this country? guest: clearly, we have been under investing in

infrastructure for a number of years now. state and local governments have been stepping up. states have increased their revenue sources for transportation and infrastructure, but it has been 30 years since the federal government last increased the gas tax and increased substantially the amount of money they provide for infrastructure. we are really hopeful that during this congress, the biden administration will get a robust infrastructure package, as well as a reauthorization bill. host: when you say robust, what is the price tag? guest: the president has come out with a nearly $2 trillion package she has put forward. clearly, i think you can make the argument that the level of funding is needed to invest in

our nation's infrastructure. tenant republicans came out with a smaller number last week that was more targeted towards the traditional definition, i would say, of infrastructure. i think we have got bipartisan support to invest in infrastructure. i think that is the important part. you have democrats and republicans in the house and the senate and the white house that are interested in increasing investment in transportation infrastructure. i think that is good for the country. host: let's look at the two different plans. i see the republicans unveiled a more traditional proposal. what they want to do is spend $300 billion on roads and bridges, $65 billion on broadband, public transit would get around $61 billion, airports, $44 billion. and then $35 billion for drinking water and wastewater systems, $20 billion for railways. inland waterways would see about

$17 billion. $13 billion for safety measures. this is from the senate gop infrastructure plan. compare that with what president biden unveiled recently. six under $21 billion for roads, -- $621 billion for roads. money for manufacturing and job training. more broadband access. $400 billion for improved health care for elderly and disabled americans. jim tymon, where is the middle ground between these two? guest: i think there is a middle ground and what you have heard from democrats and republicans and president biden is that this is a great starting point. back then, senate republicans responded with something.

it's good news. it means they want to be at the table and try to find a bipartisan agreement. if a structure has always been a bipartisan issue, and i think there will be a way for them to come together and find a middle ground. host: we are asking reviewers to tell us, what are the info structure needs in your community? republicans, (202) 748-2001. you can also send us a text. you can also send a tweet. @cspanwj is our handle. jim tymon, and it comes to infrastructure, traditional infrastructure, where would you rate bridges, railways, roads? what should come first?

guest: i think it would be hard to pick a mode of transportation that should come first, because we have been under investing across-the-board in our nation's infrastructure. that is one of the reasons i think there is bipartisan support for a broad infrastructure package. we need federal investment in our nation's roads, our nation's bridges. our passenger and freight rail system. you mentioned the senate gop proposal has funding for wastewater and drinking water systems. all of those are areas where you can make a great case that you need to increase investment in our nation's infrastructure. the nation's economy runs on our nation's infrastructure. it provides the lifeline for our economy to thrive. if we are not investing what we need to invest in a, our economy is not going to be as successful

as it really should be. host: what shelley moore capito said from west virginia when the senate republicans unveiled their plan and how it would be paid for. [video] >> i think it is important that you know that some of the ideas we have for pay fors -- this will be fully paid for. that is critical. we need to avoid increasing the debt. we need to shore up any infrastructure related trust fund shortfall. that does not mean raising the gas tax. that means looking at user fees and other users of our infrastructure that up to this point have not or paid very little in terms of the wear and tear they have particularly moved forward on our roads and highways. hybrids and those kinds of things.

we have also heard a lot of talk about things we have talked about in committee. lining out our principles -- dollars have already been appropriated. there are specific ways, and i think senator toomey will talk about this as well, and it gives me the idea of this. that is to repurpose some of the unsent dollars from covid. it is no longer considered an emergency. it can relate to infrastructure. i had an amendment to that effect when we did the covid bill and said, let's repurpose these dollars to infrastructure work, knowing we would have a shortfall in the highway trust fund. the other thing would be to say to cities, counties, and states to open up the availability of covid dollars for them to be able to make matches or pay for infrastructure. so the other thing is to

preserve the tax cuts and jobs act. that will mean retaining the salt deduction and others. other great economy building aspects of that, which we all voted for. that is the perimeters of where we are. host: jim tymon, is this republican plan to pay for it viable? guest: i think there is going to be bipartisan support for portions of those pay fors that senator caputo listed out. but it is important to get a bipartisan framework. let's get the relevant senators and house members from both parties in the room. let's get the white house in a room. let them come up with an option that has bipartisan support. there are pay fours is out there, i think, that both sides can agree with. they need to be able to get in a room and work that out. host: in west virginia coming independent. what is info structure like in

west virginia? what do you need? caller: it is simple. infrastructure is electrical grids, water, fresh water, wastewater, roads, bridges, broadband. it does not have to deal with transsexual studies or social justice. the other point being, the other guests made a point about hydrogen powered vehicles. how do you manufacture hydrogen? it takes massive quantities of electricity to do that. what form of electricity are you going to use to manufacture hydrogen? got nuclear, coal. host: i don't want to go too far down that road. what about his first comment? guest: i think there is support for a very broad definition of what infrastructure includes. i think you saw that with the senate gop proposal. maybe other people have not talked about traditionally --

when the federal government starts to talk about investment in infrastructure, there is bipartisan support for investing in broadband infrastructure. every community has access to broadband so that we would be able to connect with the internet and be able to work, and for kids to be able to go to school. it's what we have been dealing with over the last 14 months. host: a republican caller. welcome to the conversation. caller: thanks for having me. i think your plans need to be tied together. i think you have multiple, multiple issues. one is your employment rate is roughly around 6%. half of them could probably not pass a drug test. in infrastructure, in the green bay area, there are multiple job

openings for skilled labor, whether they be welders, electricians, plumbers, you name it. we don't have them. so more money at it, and all you are going to do is waste it and overheat this economy and make every other good service more expensive. guest: i think he brings up a great point about workforce development. we need to make sure that we do whatever we can to train our workers into the skill sets we are going to need to invest in our nation's infrastructure. we need to make sure we are working with construction communities to identify areas where there are needs, and try to attract those younger people that are looking for jobs into that industry. we do see a shortage and some of those skilled labor categories. we need -- we are going to do our best to attract new people into the workforce, into those

jobs. we need to step up and invest in our nations infrastructure. host: a local question from lori in kent island, maryland. will this help the push for a third span of the chesapeake a bridge? -- chesapeake bay bridge? guest: that could be considered if there is a robust federal infrastructure package. it brings up a great point. from a transportation planning standpoint, project start at the state and local level. it has to be a priority for the locality in which it serves, as well as for the states. for that project, you have to make sure it is a high-priority project for the state of maryland. and if so, it would be able to compete

a robust infrastructure package. he is trying to identify the most 10 impactful reviews in the country and i would think something like a third span for the chesapeake bay bridge could compete. host: allen in yonkers, new york, democratic caller. caller: how are you doing? host: fine. caller: i would like to say how they are going to pay for this. they should pay for this with a bond issue like build america bonds or municipal bonds, and also raise the capital gains a little bit. that should solve all the problems. every state, when they need money for a project, come out with bonds. i live in new york and it is built on muni bonds and i think the government should get involved. host: jim tymon? guest: with interest rates being

as low as they are, we've heard a lot of proposals for the federal government to do more in the bonding area, certainly build america bonds is a successful program reviewed lies in the past. also, there are proposals -- successful program in the past. there are proposals, should the government borrow money as a way to shore up the highway trust fund? we are spending $15 billion, $16 billion more a year in spending then we are collecting from the revenue gas tax, so if we continue funding at our current baseline levels, we will have to come up with an extra $15 billion, $16 billion, $17 billion a year. some in congress think we should take advantage of low interest rates and find a way to bond for those or borrow that money to keep the trust fund solvent.

but -- that deviates from the pay-as-you-go approach we relied on from the last -- for the last 50, 60 years using the gas tax. in the late 2000's we got this imbalance where we are spending more in revenue than we are bringing in, in the transportation area. one of the big debates now, whether we need to look at the federal gas tax and whether that needs to be adjusted to make sure we are paying for all the infrastructure investment we are making today. host: mark, milford, new hampshire, independent. caller: i live here in new england. we have a lot of potholes and our roads and some of our bridges, especially massachusetts and new hampshire, are in dire need of this bill going through. we even had recently over the last two years, i don't know how to pronounce it, but it is like poison in the water in

merrimack, new jersey, a company that poisoned the waterways. i can only imagine how many jobs this would create for americans during this pandemic. before i go a question for your guest, when was the last time our country had a major infrastructure build like this? how long was it? guest: the last time we had a federal stimulus bill in 2008/2009, there was transportation infrastructure funding. when most people think back to the debate around that bill in 2008, one of the leading categories or justification for that bill was investing in roads and bridges and transit systems. in reality, it was less than 10% of the total funding for that bill, went to transportation infrastructure. it is important, as we look at what the president has put on the table last month, is that

the vast majority of the funding that is part of that proposal will go towards infrastructure, will go -- a significant part of it, over half a trillion dollars will go to transportation infrastructure. this will be a great opportunity for the country to step up and invest. from a generational standpoint, more than we've done in the past. host: rick, idaho, republican. what's the infrastructure like? caller: good morning. i've got an idea for everybody. here in idaho, this is about the fuel tax, our octane is 91 octane premium, 89 and 87. we are $3.53 a gallon. if you add the taxes, the octane is 87, 89, and 85. if you add one dollar to idaho's

fuel tax, we are one of the lowest paid states and that will put us at $3.50 a gallon. let's add a two dollar fuel tax to marine diesel for every oceangoing ship that comes in from the country of china. i believe the average is 500 to 1000 ships in 24 hours. if we can build up a fuel tax to marine diesel, that should retain some of the fuel tax that we may be paying. as an idea, and i need to emphasize this, nobody's paying attention to the octane. the reason we have different octane's is air mass density. simply said, it is altitude. at the higher altitude, you have to have a higher octane and it costs more. when you add one dollar to each of those, you will basically put idaho in bankruptcy. it is an idea. another complaint, i will wait for your response. host: all right, rick.

guest: i would say that rick is clearly marvin expert on fuel octane that i am -- more of an expert on fuel octane than i am. his suggestion about taxing marine diesel and specifically on some of those oceangoing vessels coming in from china, there is probably some trade issues associated with that. but again, not nazis -- something i would be necessarily willing to weigh in on. host: tax increases under the biden administration's plan would include corporate tax rates to 28%, taxes on forest source income from u.s. multinational corporations, make it harder for businesses to merge with foreign companies to avoid u.s. taxes, and then pose a 15% minimum tax on income that corporate's report to

shareholders. democratic caller. caller: good morning, c-span. i suppose this may be an abstract idea, but it seems what is bad in my community and just about every community across the country is the question of legislative infrastructure that is damaged, legal infrastructure that is damaged, the obtainment of permits, the flow of money, it seems that those processes need to have an open and easy flow as much as you would mean -- need on broadband. host: talking about regulations? caller: yes, regulations, laws, the congressional process that is making this very bill but you are discussing such a headache. host: jim tymon. guest: he brings up a great point. infrastructure investment has

always been a bipartisan issue. this is a great opportunity for congress and the white house to demonstrate that washington isn't as broken as the country thinks that it is, that they can come together on a bipartisan piece of legislation and get it done for the good of the country. there is a lot of public support to invest in our nation's highways, bridges, waterways, transit system, railroads, airports. this is a safe bet for members of congress worried about signing onto a big bill. this should be a no-brainer for a lot of them. we are hopeful they are able to come together. in the past, they have always found a way to get something like this done. i think it is a win-win. host: when it comes to bipartisanship, what role does democratic senator joe manchin play? guest: there is a great example where you have senator manchin and also senator capita --

buddha -- who will both play a key role in getting this done. the fact that both of them, want to work together to get things done, is a good sign. i would point to most of the other leaders within the transportation community in congress, senator carper from delaware, whoc is senatoraputa's counterpart, has a very good relationship with senator caputa. they are working together on a surface transportation reauthorization bill that they hope to move forward before memorial day, and i hope that those relationships where the senators were able to work together, house members are able to get to know each other and work together, that's important because it makes it less about politics and more about results. i think you see that with some

of the personalities, certainly senator cap[uta and senator manchin. listen to what he had to say about president biden's proposal and the republican proposal. [video clip] >> infrastructure, internet is a new infrastructure and it should be, but you are talking about transit, airports, rail systems, the air, lines as far as electricity, the grid system, all of these things need upgraded. we have to make sure with a new energy system we get it to market. all of this has to be incorporated and that's what we call traditional infrastructure. human infrastructure is something i'm worried about, and all that we've done last year and the covid bill and the american rescue bill, a lot has been done. >> just to be clear, it sounds

like you are supporting a smaller package with what you deem -- >> more targeted. >> would you tackle everything else with 51 votes through the reconciliation process? >> if people would just think about, if we go through the process that we are supposed to, we never used to use filibuster. reconciliation is only used for budget. that's why you have the guard rails with the byrd rule. we have to get back to getting it in the communities, let the community -- committee chairs work it in those jurisdictions. i am chairman of energy and projects would come to me and we would work at, give it back to the majority, and they put it on the floor with an open process, is germane. bob byrd, who was majority leader, used to keep us here friday night, saturday. >> that was a long time ago. host: jim tymon, what did you hear? guest: i heard the senator is

committed to trying to get things done through regular order, and that is important. he speaks to a time where it was more common for people to reach out across the aisle and try to find a partner of the opposite party to be able to work together on. i think that's the way to get this done. i think you've got a handful of members of congress interested in doing that, from the house and senate side. we haven't talked a lot about the house, but be a defazio's chair of the -- pierre defazio's chair and he has partnered up with -- graves in a bipartisan way to try to get something done with infrastructure. there's opportunities for bipartisanship and we are hopeful we will see congress come together and work that way. host: jim, whitesboro, texas, republican. caller: good morning. it would be nice to have a bipartisan.

it is going to be difficult for republicans to support anything that is outrageous. i am sure there is a list of one or two outrageous things that could be thrown out. but you mentioned training or retraining, and you talked about for younger people. what about for those older people that are going to be displaced with the new industries and technology, whatnot? could you spend time on that? guest: sure. especially within the construction industry, people are looking for -- people are willing to go out there and work hard. it doesn't matter what age they are or what profession, or if they are new entrants into the labor force. it is important for us to reach out and to try to recruit folks into this industry, and to make sure that they have the training to do so. mentioned technology, one of the areas i think we are seeing

great strides in thin transportation is how we are utilizing technology -- within transportation is how we are utilizing technology to maintain our infrastructure assets. whether that is utilizing drones to help with bridge inspection or incident management or traffic incidents, or if it is using technology to help us survey facilities and make sure that they are being maintained the way that they should. it is not just your standard construction industry jobs that most folks think of, but also we've got to remember the technology is really starting to play a role in how we build, operate, and maintain our infrastructure. host: richard in palmer, massachusetts, independent. caller: a simple question -- how much is collected in fuel taxes, and how much is actually contracted? guest: so right now, the federal

fuel tax is 18.6 cents a gallon. it is collecting somewhere between 35 billion dollars and $40 billion a year in revenue. we are actually spending probably closer to $50 billion a year, $52 billion a year from the highway trust fund. there's that in balance of about $15 billion a year or so between what we are collecting in revenue and what we are spending. i think that's why there are those in congress calling for us to take a look at how we fund transportation and infrastructure, and start taking a look at other options. host: richard in palmer, massachusetts, independent. caller: i already spoke. thank you. host: do you have a follow-up? caller: no, i would like to thank him for his answer.

when i find is in this area, take someone's forever for roadwork -- it takes forever for roadwork to be completed. i see the road repair signs for 10 years. host: jim tymon, your thoughts? guest: that's something we've been troubling with for the last 10 to 15 years, how can we expedite how these projects get planned, permitted, and built? i think we are making progress. if you look back to the federal transportation bills passed in the early 2000 and again with some of the ones that were done in the last 10 years, we've made some progress trying to find ways to expedite the permitting process to make sure we are able to work concurrently with federal agencies, so that if you have permits you need to get from the fish and wildlife service, you can do that at the same time as you are working

with the army corps of engineers in order to get a bridge project on faster. you don't want to be in a situation where you can't move on to the army corps of engineers until you've already met with and worked out all of the issues that you need to work out with the fish and wildlife service. previous administration instituted a policy for federal one decision where they were trying to consolidate that process so that you can get through the federal permitting process quicker. i think there is some good lessons to be learned from what was put forward in that process, and i think there is an opportunity here as congress works on an infrastructure bill or federal surface transportation bill, to continue to make progress on permitting reform to get the projects done faster. host: joe in ash, north carolina, independent. caller: let me go ahead and comment that you made a good

thing about the trust fund. the treasury has taken $6 billion out of the trust fund. if you take that money, put it back in to the highway trust fund and make the states just earmark it for what has to be done, instead of their general fund, we can cure this problem without keep on raising it. you're the first person on this show that has mentioned truthfully about the trust fund. guest: well, you know, there's a lot of options in terms of how to fix the trust fund. one thing we need to take a look at is how can we find future revenues to support the trust fund? one of the options being looked at as a vehicle miles traveled fee or a mileage-based user fee. a lot of states have been experimenting with this. there are great with organ --

there are great examples out west where they look at how we can implement a fee for mile approach. there are some states here on the east coast along the i-95 corridor that have a regional pilot program that looks at that, on a voluntary basis. we've done great work in the last 10 years or so to look at options to replace the gas tax. as we become more fuel-efficient with our vehicles and look at other energy sources to power vehicles, specifically this movement towards electrification of the fleet, we will need different options. these power programs over the last 10 plus years have been great to demonstrate that this can work. now we need to take the next step and see, what can we do to further implement that idea? i think there is bipartisan

support in congress for taking that next step and build on the successes we've seen at the state level in these pilot programs for vehicle miles traveled fee. host: if viewers want to learn more about infrastructure need, you can go to transportation.org , the website for the american association of state highway and transportation officia or listen the c-span radio app. "washington journal" continues. host: turning our attention to the border surge in migrants from central america, joining us is cynthia arnson, the latin american program director at the wilson center. cynthia arnson, i want to begin with the vice president, kamala harris, who has been tasked to the president to address this issue of migrants coming from central america. here's what she had to say when she met thursday with nation leaders about the migrant surge in the northern triangle. ♪ --[video clip]