this is amendment number 11 offered by mister higgins. related to americans infrastructure. thank you mister chairman. firstly, during the course of this hearing. many colleagues have talked about trying to achieve three or 4% quarterly economic growth to be truthful, virtually every economist believes that future growth in the american economy will be at about two to two and half percent. and the only way that you can achieve 4% growth. assisting over a long time is it with a major investment in infrastructure and the jobs that it would create. the need for new infrastructure is indisputable. we had 54,000 structurally deficient bridges in america. every second of every day seven cars drive on a bridge that is structurally efficient. our sewer systems are old and not functioning properly. we need a major nation building program in america that can only be achieved through infrastructure. unlike tax cuts that never pay for themselves infrastructure does according to the congressional budget office. you get a dollar 60 in return in terms of economic activity. in the jobs again

so long as we are able to do that within the timeframe, mister higgins, did you want to follow up?>> thank you mister chairman, >> one second, the chair recognizes representative higgins from louisiana for the follow-up.>> thank you for allowing me to ask that question. as well as the competence level analysis from the beginning stages within the implementation phase large project it was recommended that the project was updated. according to the report, they concurred with the recommendation, yet no steps were taken to implement. the further analysis indicates if implement it, and updated project may have prevented schedule delays. nasa encounters regarding the costed schedule the cost of schedule, can you elaborate on why the recommendation was purposefully overlooked. >> at the time they did concur as you said, forever the official reasons, they were reluctant to, we recommended they at least do something similar to do the cost scheduled risk analysis and take a deep look, and we will do that ourselves, working with a contractor. since that was rejected by the contractor, then it

wishes to ask second set of questions, as long as we are able to do so within the timeframe, mister higgins, did you want to follow up?>> thank you mister chairman i have one question.>> one second, the chair recognizes representative higgins.>> thank you for allowing me to ask this question, nasa has received multiple wrecks develop costs and schedule estimates as well as perform joint cost and confidence level analysis, the beginning stages of the implementation phase larger projects in december 2012, it was recommended that the project updated, according to the report nasa concurred with the recommendation yet no steps were taken to implement. further analysis to cates if implemented, and updated program may have updated schedule delays. among the challenges that nasa encounters, can you elaborate on why the recommendation was purposefully overlooked? >> at that time, they did confer as you said, i did not have her -- i did not ever have an official reason, they were just reluctant to relook at the cost. a couple of years later we recommended they at least do something similar to do it c