Green Infrastructure Getting A Green Light

How can you tell if your airfield runway is “green?” This month the Institute for Sustainable Infrastructure released Envision, a new yardstick for measuring and providing third party certification for sustainable infrastructure projects. Use of Envision is supported by the American Council of Engineering Companies, the American Society of Civil Engineers and the American Public Works Association. The new rating system employs points to evaluate five categories of 60 discreet criteria for evaluating the environmental impact of infrastructure construction.

Hoping to become the LEED of infrastructure projects, Envision offers a framework for engineers, owners, developers and policymakers to objectively determine the lifetime impacts of new infrastructure construction. “The infrastructure platform is begging for a rating tool that will balance development and environmental concerns and return on investment,” according to American Council of Engineering Companies President and CEO David Raymond.

Green infrastructure policies are already being adopted by local governments in some regions, notably by the District of Columbia Department of Transportation for the Nannie Helen Burroughs Avenue Green Streets Project; the City of Boston Complete Streets Project; and Chicago’s Green Streetlights installation. Beltsville, Maryland based Low Impact Development Center Executive Director Neil Weinstein describes Envison as a tool for concentrating on the “triple bottom line” cost benefit analysis of infrastructure construction’s economic, social and environmental impacts. “we’re really starting to look at infrastructure, and the way that we develop it is quite different,” Weinstein remarked. Paul Zofnass, of the Harvard Graduate School of Design, and one of the collaborators in Envision’s creation, summarizes the need for the new measurement tool: “There has never been a government that has survived if they could not provide their society, their people, their civilization with adequate and improved infrastructure.”

Ohio Searches For New Roadbuilding Revenue Sources

Ohio’s Department of Transportation Director Jerry Wray announced that, in light of Congressional failure to do anything at all about long term reauthorization of the federal Highway Trust Fund for the last three years, his agency is considering indexing Ohio Turnpike tolls to inflation, or leasing the  241 mile long highway to private operators, as potential means of generating funds for the state’s raidbuilding and other infrastructure construction needs. In his keynote address to the Toledo Metropolitan Area Council of Governments on March 31, 2012, Wray blamed Congressional inaction on the twin problems of declining fuel tax revenues and state and local long term planning needs for  unfrastructure construction budget pressures in his state.

Besides toll indexing and leasing the Turnpike to a concessionaire, Wray mentioned commercialization of rest areas, bridges and interchanges as an additional revenue source which could provide between $100 million and $200 million annually. With the road construction bidding season opening this month, the Ohio situation is merely the most recent fallout from Congressional foot dragging on long term highway trust fund reauthorization legislation.

Mayor Emmanuel Announces Chicago Infrastructure Trust

With the think tank promoted concept of revenue stream repayment to private investors in government infrastructure construction projects languishing in legislative limbo in Washington DC and Springfield, Chicago’s newly elected Mayor Rahm Emmanuel has stuck out his neck with the announcement of formation of a Chicago Infrastructure Trust to attract private funding for city building energy retrofits, a rapid ride bus system, and extension of the southern end of the CTA red line light rail service.  Local officials of Citibank and JP Morgan Asset Management have expressed “preliminary non-binding interest” in ivesting in the Trust.

Emmanuel made the announcement in a speech to Carpenter Union trainees at an appresticeship shop March 1, 2012. Acknowledging the ongoing declines in federal and state funding for infrastructure construction, Emmanuel told the aspiring union carpenters “Our needs are growing. I can either look at that challenge, and stare at it hoping it gets better, or do something about it.” Whether the “non-binding interest” by private investors will materialze into real dollars invested remains to be seen.

Highway Trust Fund Battle Lines Reemerge – More Potholes On The Way

Shortly after his first State of the Union message, President Obama proposed a $550 billion six year reauthorization of the federal Highway Trust Fund. It didn’t pass Congress. Many industry experts labeled that proposal as woefully inadequate to meet even present infrastructure construction, repair and maintenance needs. Since then infrastructure construction funding in the federal budget has been accomplished by a series of interim appropriation extensions, a few months at a time.

Earlier this week two bills emerged from Congressional committees which would provide more or less long term appropriations for the Highway Trust Fund, though at levels far beneath the amounts Obama initially proposed, despite the fact American infrastructure continues to fall deeper and deeeper into disrepair as state and local government budgets are strained by declining revenues and burgeoning human sustenance needs.

Chairman John Mica’s (R. Fla) House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee reported out the 847 page HR 7, dubbed the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act of 2012, which includes appropriations of $138.5 billion for the Highway Trust Fund over the next for years or about $34.6 billion each year: a mere 37.8% of the amount President Obama couldn’t get through a Democratic Congress. Chairman Max Baucus’ (D. Mont.) Senate Finance Committee reported out the 632 page SB 1813, entitled the Highway Investment, Job Creation and Economic Growth Act of 2012,  which includes appropriations totalling $83.3 billion over only the next 2 years, or about $41.6 billion each year, a somewhat more ambitious 45.4% of President Obama’s initial annual request.

Both pieces of legislation are peppered with various anti-pork and anti-earmark provisions, which could well steal the spotlight from the awesome decreases in spending levels. Conservative think tanks are already assaulting the meagre provisions of funds for hiking trails, bicycle paths and scenic preservation construction – work often subbed out to minority and woman owned small businesses to meet the 10% small business set aside requirements in both measures. This is less an assault on highway beautification than it is an attack on minority and women construction business set asides. These public opinion campaigns, couched as “living within our means” policy, are in reality ambushes laid against the progress in the construction industry which public funding set asides have enabled women and minority owned businesses to achieve.

Whatever the ultimate conference committee version of Highway Trust Fund reauthorization may look like, I predict it will be a long time coming, and be woefully underfunded. Meanwhile, with the wintertime freeze/thaw cycle in full swing, we will be seeing more and more potholes on our streets and highways while Congress endlessly debates these measures.

Politics Is Strangling Infrastructure Bank Legislation

Early last September, the Obama White House proposed a Federal Infrastructure Bank, which the construction industry hoped would bring a much needed infusion of private capital into more “shovel ready” projects, and help in starting a resurgence of the severely depressed construction sector of the American economy. Well, the shovels are still ready, but the infrastructure bank concept, like so many legislative initiatives for creating jobs, is mired in the politics of spending cuts and debt reduction.

The Obama Administration’s original proposal was creation of a permanent federal infrastructure bank, which would use grants, loans and loan guarantees to attract state and local funding, and private investment, to revenue generating transportation infrastructure construction projects. According to the September 9, 2010 White House press release, the proposed infrastructure bank would be:

“…an important departure from the federal government’s traditional way of spending on infrastructure through earmarks and formula based grants that are allocated more by geography and politics than demonstrated value. Instead, the Bank will base its investment decisions on clear analytical measures of performance, competing projects against each other to determine which will produce the greatest return for American taxpayers.”

Of course, that overt threat to end Congressional earmarks against the Highway Trust Fund probably assured the death of the infrastructure bank proposal from the Obama Administration. As a result, Obama’s February 14, 2011 budget message phrased the concept a little more elegantly:

“A cornerstone of the I-Bank’s approach will be a rigorous project comparison method that transparently measures which projects offer the biggest value to taxpayers and our economy. This marks a substantial departure from the practice of funding projects based on more narrow considerations.”

So, unlike the Obama Better Buildings Initiative, which has never even been introduced in the form of legislation, the infrastructure bank concept has at least left the starting blocks, in the form of SB 652, the BUILD Act, and SB 936, the AIIF Act. Neither piece of proposed legislation has even made it over the first hurdle, though.

Unfortunately, Senator Kerry's 57 page Building and Upgrading Infrastructure for Long-Term Development Act, Senate Bill 652, is bottled up since March 17 in the Senate Finance Committee, while Senator Rockefeller's 67 page American Infrastructure Investment Fund Act, Senate Bill 936, is bottled up since May 10 in the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee. Neither proposal is going anywhere, in my estimation, until two conditions are met: 1) our political leaders finish their cat fight over increasing the debt limit and reducing federal spending; and 2) someone proposes to support the federal highway trust fund with a source of infrastructure funding revenue as an addition to, or an alternative to, the current motor fuel tax.

The breakdown last week of the debt limit negotiations, and the Republican refusal to consider any new taxes, likely sound the death knell to both SB 652 and SB 936. In the absence of a massive letter writing campaign from construction businesses in favor of one or both of these proposals, there isn't going to be an Infrastructure Bank set up any time soon. If you would like to see an Infrastructure Bank get moving, write to your own Senators, and to members of the Senate Commerce Committee and members of the Senate Finance Committee in support of it.

New Mexico Clean Power Hub Adopting Superconductor Pipelines

New Mexico governor Bill Richardson is announcing today that the Tres Amigas SuperStation hub, the first connection among all three United States major power grids, will use superconduction technology to transfer and balance the transfer of gigawatts of electric power from one region of the nation to the other two. The United States electric power transmission infrastructure is divided into three main grids, or interconnections: the Eastern, Western and Texas Interconnections. There are a few locations where two of the three can share power across their geographical boundaries, but there is nowhere yet that a sharing arrangement among all three exists.

That is about to change. Tres Amigas SuperStation, to be built on 22.5 square miles of land near Clovis, New Mexico, is one place having easy access to power from all three interconnections. The project is designed to use a triangular arrangement of underground direct current superconducting electric power "pipelines" to enable all three regional grids to share and balance power transmission. Such an interchange is required to make it possible for clean hydroelectric, wind, and solar power generated in less populated areas of our country to be efficiently sold in more populated locations. The successful implementation of any of the cap and trade proposals now pending in Congress will require the existence of the Tres Amigas Superstation, or something like it.

Tres Amigas has already received the right to lease the 22.5 square miles from the New Mexico State Land Office, and is in the process of filing for FERC permission to operate as a merchant transfer entity, allowing Tres Amigas to charge a fee for power transfers across its hub.

Chicago Infrastructure Construction Kicks In, Demonstrating Indirect Patronage At Its Finest

Chicagoans waiting for the effects of the economic stimulus to be seen in our town were treated to a sweet beginning Friday, though it was soured somewhat by the fact that our construction season is already halfway over. Mayor Richard M. Daley and his security detail drove as far north and west as you can go and still be inside Chicago's city limits, to the scene of a road construction project extending along Milwaukee Avenue from Montrose to Gale Avenue in the Jefferson Park neighborhood, where he met with the entourage of Fifth District Congressman Michael Quigley to announce commencement of Chicago's five year, $8.4 billion city wide capital construction program.

Funded by a mixture of federal stimulus appropriations, state highway appropriations [yes, there are state highways inside the city] city bond issues and tax increment financings, this year's share of the cash will amount to about $1.7 billion for five libraries, numerous bridges, 550 blocks of street and alley resurfacing, and 150 blocks of sidewalk replacement. The total program of $8.4 billion will also include $3.9 billion for construction at O'Hare and Midway airports.

Daley selected Quigley's Fifth District as the scene of the announcement for a host of reasons: the Milwaukee Avenue project he stood in front of will put $11.3 million into the Jefferson Park neighborhood this year; Daley was also able to tout next year's $20 million in street work at the nearby six corners intersection; and Quigley's constituents are in default on more than a quarter of their home mortgages due to job losses and other financial problems. Both politicians praised the fact that the projects will not only put people back to work and make much needed infrastructure improvements in the city, but also benefit the local business community by improving local travel and parking, putting the neighborhood businesses in a better competitive position.

"Infrastructure is good for the economy and good for jobs," Daley said. "All these improvements basically strengthen economic development, jobs here in the city, and it helps businesses, especially now with so many of our residents struggling financially." Quigley echoed Mayor Daley's sentiments: "They're putting food on the table, they're improving our infrastructure, and they're making a long term economic impact for all these businesses."

Projects announced for this year include: bridge repairs at Jackson Boulevard and the Chicago River, Halsted Street and the Chicago River, and Lawrence Avenue over the Kennedy Expressway; library construction at the West Town Branch, 1615 West Chicago Avenue, Greater Grand Crossing Branch at 1008 East 73d Street, and West Humboldt Park Branch at 727 North Kedzie. Daley's political genius can be seen in the fact that these projects - jobs for community residents, new bricks, mortar and asphalt pavement on display for all citizens to see - are as usual scattered geographically among the city's 50 wards. Contracts for those listed projects where the work will not be done directly by City of Chicago Department of Transportation crews will go to bid with provisions requiring the successful bidder to employ a certain percentage of its work force from among residents of zip codes in the very wards where the work will be done. The jobs won't come from the Daley machine, but they come from the policies of Daley's Public Building Commission requiring contractors to hire local workers - and this indirect patronage is not lost on the aldermen whose wards receive the Commission's blessing for major construction work.

Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood Predicts Highway Reauthorization This Session

In a speech Thursday to at the National Press Club, LaHood predicted that House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar will pursue a "very aggressive schedule" on surface transportation reauthorization legislation immediately following the Memorial Day break, and that a bill will pass both houses this session. He also said "This administration will not be promoting an increase in the gas tax," but would not predict how the multi year measure would be funded.

Chicago Area Stimulus Grants for Commuter Station Construction Announced

The Chicago area's commuter rail network, METRA, announced it is receiving $140.9 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act appropriations. While the bulk of the funds will go towards upgrading of rolling stock, the agency has allocated the following amounts for infrastructure construction: $43.6 million for bridge replacement; $5 million for restoration of the Winnetka commuter station; $1 million to add parking at the Pingree Road commuter station; $1.8 million for parking at the Elburn commuter station; $2.4 million for rehabilitation of commuter station platforms at Joliet and Lockport; $6.8 million, plus a separate additional $4.9 million from a Congressman Rush earmark, for a new commuter station at 35th street on the Rock Island line, to serve the White Sox baseball park; $7 million for signal upgrades; and $1 million for renovation of the commuter station at the Golf Road stop.

Water Infrastructure Reauthorization Moves to Senate Floor

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee voted 17-2 to report to the floor S 1005, the legislation reauthorizing $20 billion for the Clean Water State Revolving Fund and $14.7 billion for the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund , to fund approximately 1,700 water infrastructure projects per year through 2014. The bill includes Davis Bacon prevailing wage requirements.

Highway Trust Fund Reauthorization Tussles Continue

Emblematic of the difficulties facing any timely reauthorization of the federal highway trust fund, Senate Commerce Chairman Jay Rockefeller and Commerce Surface Transportation Subcommittee Chairman Frank Lautenberg have introduced a bill calling for yearly reductions in per capita auto miles driven, reduction of tailpipe CO2 emissions 40% by 2030, and increasing off highway freight by 10% by 2020. American Trucking Association Senior Vice President Tim Lynch responded that "A simple Act of Congress cannot overturn the entire United States distribution and supply chain network that depends on the trucking industry to move 70% of the nation's freight." Fuel efficiency by rail and water would mean job losses for truck drivers.

Meanwhile, over in the house, several Congressmen have argued that including support for pet projects in the highway trust fund reauthorization bill does not violate their pledge to abstain from earmarks. Unlike typical annual appropriations bills, the highway reauthorization legislation comes up for consideration only every fifth year, increasing the pressure on Congressmen to bring home the bacon.

Surface Transportation Reauthorization Stalls As Revenues Plummet

While Congressional leaders agree that the $450 to $500 billion six year reauthorization of federal surface transportation funding is just what the economy needs to create jobs, major disagreements over where to get the money and how to spend it could doom all hope of getting reauthorization passed into law before the current funding expires September 30 this year. Receipts from fuel taxes to the federal highway trust fund continue to tumble as fuel prices stabilize at half last year's levels and people drive less. House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel and Highways and Transit Subcommittee Chairman Peter DeFazio both oppose any increase in fuel taxes, and House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar is backing off his advocacy of raising fuel taxes as well as imposing new taxes on vehicle miles driven.

Senate efforts toward reauthorizing legislation lag even further behind schedule, with Senator Mark Warner suggesting Monday at an infrastructure conference sponsored by the Department of Transportation and the Department of Commerce that "I'm not sure you are going to see a full transportation bill put out this year." Meanwhile, Texas Congressman Kevin Brady, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell of Transportation For America are all pushing for major overhaul of the way highways and transit are funded. Congressman Brady proposes sunsetting the highway trust fund in 2011 while holding a national summit to develop new infrastructure plans.

Whatever construction funding was appropriated in the stimulus legislation may be all the cash the transportation sector of the construction economy will be seeing for a very long time.

Transportation Infrastructure Spending Hangs In The Balance

Meetings of the House/Senate Conference Committee on the budget resolution officially began this afternoon at 1:00 p.m. Washington, D. C. time. Staffers from both houses have been working on the details of the bill over the last two weeks, and legislative leaders hope to bring it to the floor of both houses later this week. The Senate version lags way behind the House version in every year 2010 through 2014 with respect to the spending Senators expect to authorize for road, bridge, railway, transit and waterway construction projects. The Senate version of the resolution cuts down the spending authority provided in the House bill by $12.9 billion for 2010, by $13.7 billion for 2011, by $14.1 billion for 2012, by $15.1 billion for 2013 and by $16.1 billion for 2014. These cuts represent a total slashing of over $72.1 billion from surface transport construction over the next five years.

All the media focus so far has been about the political fuss over whether or not the final resolution should include "reconciliation instructions" regarding health care and education funding, which would reduce the number of votes required for passage of health care and education appropriations in the Senate from 60 votes to 51 votes. There is no work out of the staff members or the Congressmen or Senators themselves regarding the fate of the transportation infrastructure numbers. Hopefully the news will be good once the final document is released to the public. Overall, the expectation is that final numbers will be $10 billion less than the administration wants. Hopefully none of that will come out of the construction budget.

No matter which way the debate falls out in the Conference Committee, the budgeted funds will fall far short of the $1.3 trillion in projected transportation infrastructure construction needs over the next six years. According to the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and the American Public Transportation Association, the traveling public should have $166 billion a year in highway construction and $59 billion a year in mass transit construction during the six year period from 2010 to 2016.

Is Now The Time For Infrastructure Budget Cuts?

In a speech today at the Department of Transportation in Washington, D.C., President Obama stood next to Vice President Biden and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and spoke about the early successes of infrastructure appropriations in stimulating the economy towards recovery. Highlighting award of the 2,000th infrastructure project awarded with the $48.1 billion in funding provided in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the president noted that "[T]hese projects are getting approved more quickly than we thought ... and because these projects are costing less than we thought, we can utter a sentence rarely heard in recent years: This government effort is coming in ahead of schedule and under budget."

Transportation Department officials say that competition for stimulus projects is driving down costs by 15% to 20% of total cost estimates on major infrastructure projects. So, if this sort of spending is buying taxpayers more bang for the buck, at the same time it is creating and saving jobs and stimulating the economy, why does the U. S. Senate want to cut the House proposed five year budget for infrastructure improvements by one and a half times the amount of money which was appropriated in the stimulus bill?

In the budget resolutions now pending in conference committee, the Senate version lags way behind the House version in every year 2010 through 2014 with respect to the spending Senators expect to authorize for road, bridge, railway, transit and waterway construction projects. The Senate version of the resolution cuts down the infrastructure spending authority provided in the House bill by $12.9 billion for 2010, by $13.7 billion for 2011, by $14.1 billion for 2012, by $15.1 billion for 2013 and by $16.1 billion for 2014. These cuts represent a total slashing of over $72.1 billion from surface transport construction over the next five years.

Hopefully President Obama's speech today was just the beginning of administration efforts to preserve the budget levels of infrastructure spending included in the House resolution once the conference committee sends a final version to the floor of both houses for approval. Call your Senators and ask them what they intend to buy with the $72.1 billion they have slashed from construction spending, and whether whatever it is will do as much to create jobs and stimulate the economy as infrastructure construction will do. When they can't give you any satisfactory answer, mention that restoring spending levels to match the House version of the resolution would be a good way to make sure our country continues the economic gains the stimulus package was designed to initiate.

Senate Budget Resolution Stiffs Transport Infrastructure

Congressional Budget Committees have finally filled in the numbers in the 2010 budget resolutions, and sent the bills to the floors of the respective houses for debate. Although budget resolutions lack the detailed breakdown of spending that appears in appropriation bills with their attached earmarks, we can see in the differences between the House and Senate budget resolution proposals a dangerous trend for heavy civil construction over the next five years.

Both committee resolution proposals have essentially the same numbers for 2009 spending authority and actual outlays, since they include the appropriations already made in the stimulus legislation. However, the Senate version lags way behind the House version in every year 2010 through 2014 with respect to the spending Senators expect to authorize for road, bridge, railway, transit and waterway construction projects. The Senate version of the resolution cuts down the spending authority provided in the House bill by $12.9 billion for 2010, by $13.7 billion for 2011, by $14.1 billion for 2012, by $15.1 billion for 2013 and by $16.1 billion for 2014. These cuts represent a total slashing of over $72.1 billion from surface transport construction over the next five years.

Of course, as the legislative process works its way forward, the final result will likely fall somewhere between the present House and Senate versions, but it is frightening that more than $72 billion in construction appropriations is now at risk in the legislative arena.

Part of the reason for this is the way revenue has traditionally been raised to fund these transportation construction projects. In the last half century, road, transit, rail and waterway construction was primarily funded by cents per gallon taxes on the fuels burned by cars, busses, trucks, trains, ships and tugboats. For a long time, gallons of fuel burned was functionally equivalent to miles of road, rail, or water traveled, and the tax was a fair way of supporting infrastructure construction for transportation. Additional taxes, such as prorated truck license fees and highway tolls on express superhighways, also provided money for construction, maintenance and repair of transport infrastructure.

As fuel efficiency advanced, pushed by economic factors as well as government mandates, however, fuel taxes raised less and less money per mile traveled for infrastructure, and our transportation facilities began to suffer the effects of deferred maintenance. Now we face an era of shrinking revenues at the same time we have to do something about the accumulated maintenance and construction deficit.

Some congressional leaders and certain state governors have proposed taxing drivers on the basis of miles traveled, rather than just raising fuel taxes, as a way out of this mess. However, a whole new layer of bureaucracy would be required to assess and collect such a mileage tax, and public opposition to the idea is strong. President Obama at one point suggested the idea of breaking the "trust" status of the highway trust fund and instead funding transport infrastructure construction and maintenance out of general revenue, but so far that concept has not gained any traction. The fact remains that unless a new revenue source is found for supporting our transport infrastructure spending, increasing fuel efficiency and increasing the use of hybrid and electric cars will starve our road, waterway and rail systems to death. Any suggestions?

Half A Trillion Dollars Needed For Surface Transportation Construction

According to the testimony of two experts who testified yesterday before the House Budget Committee, the next five years will require an investment of half a trillion dollars to meet the country's expanding needs for surface transportation infrastructure construction. This is good news for the construction industry if Congress can find a way to fund the appropriations.

Robert Atkinson, chairman of the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission, and Debra Miller, of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, both told the committee that they estimate investments of at least $545 billion from 2010 through 2015 will be required to meet the long neglected needs of highway and mass transit construction and repair. This is about double the amount invested in the last five year period.

This year the federal highway trust fund, which consists of fuel and road use tax revenues designated for transportation infrastructure construction, required an $8 billion augmentation from general revenues simply to pay for work which was already under contract by state and federal highway and transit agencies.

Miller and Atkinson proposed increasing the gasoline tax by ten cents per gallon, and the diesel fuel tax by 15 cents a gallon, plus as doubling of truck road use taxes, to fund the massive new investment in roads, bridges and mass transit. They also discussed using part of the revenue from the proposed carbon emission cap and trade tax, and a new tax on vehicle miles traveled, to help raise the needed funds. Of course, howls and groans opposing new fuel taxes could be heard from Congressmen on the committee, who must run for reelection every two years, when the experts started speaking about fuel tax increases.

Transportation Funding Battle Looms

President Obama's budget proposals include a run at taking year to year control over the amount of money set aside in the federal budget for infrastructure construction, in the form of eliminating the multi-year budget authority of Congress over the highway and aviation trust funds comprised of fuel tax revenues and traditionally set aside for road and airport construction use.

Obama's budget would dump this revenue back into the general funds and return annual budget and appropriations proposing authority of this cash to the White House. Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle oppose these changes, especially since increasing energy conservation is expected to deplete these trust funds in the near future, requiring even greater effort to keep our infrastructure modern and well maintained.

Stimulus Bill Goes To Conference

Tuesday afternoon, February 10, the Senate passed the Nelson-Collins version of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act by a vote of 61-37. As expected, Senators Collins, Snowe and Specter crossed the aisle to support the measure. The Congressional Budget Office prices the Senate version at $838.2 billion, somewhat more than both the House version costs, at $819 billion, and the cap Collins, Snowe and Specter say they will accept in a final bill, at $800 billion.

House and Senate conferees to be named will meet as soon as possible in efforts to hammer out the differences between the two versions of this legislation, in hopes of presenting an agreed bill on the floor of both houses Friday for a final vote, before the recess scheduled to begin Saturday.

The most contentious issues to be faced by the conference committee are:

SPENDING:

School construction funds of $20.1 billion, completely gutted in the Senate.

State fiscal stabilization appropriations which the Senate cut severely.

TAXES

Alternative Minimum tax patch added by the Senate.

Full repeal of the 3% tax on government contractors.

The Senate added "golf cart" tax credit.

OTHER

E-verify requirement.

H-1B visa ban for TARP recipients.

Buy American requirements.

Broadband open access requirements.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer have both promised to keep Congress in session until a bill is sent over to the Oval Office for signature. Meanwhile, President Obama takes Air Force One from one economically depressed community to another, stumping in support of quick passage of the package.

If you are interested in perusing the text of the 778 page Senate version of this legislation, you can find a link to it at the lower right hand corner of the front page of my website:
James G. McConnell - Home.

Nobody Is Talking About This

What happened behind the closed doors of that Senate caucus room last week to provoke three particular, desperately needed Republican Senators to cross the aisle and pledge their votes in favor of the Nelson-Collins compromise version of the Senate's stimulus bill? Buried deep in the middle of the measure, under Title VI, Homeland Security, is a $450 million appropriation for construction of land side facilities in support of a new Coast Guard icebreaker. The legislation does not specify, but I'm willing to wager dollars to doughnuts that this new seaport will be built somewhere along the rocky coast of Maine [Senators Collins and Snowe], and though there is nothing in this bill for construction of the icebreaker vessel itself, my money says it will be built in the Philadelphia shipyard [Senator Specter]. So much for President Obama's "no earmarks" pledge.

As for the ultimate outcome of politics as the art of the possible, we will have to await the conference committee version of the bill later this week, but it seems certain that no matter what other tweaking the conferees may do to the particulars of the measure, the Coast Guard is going to be getting a new icebreaker based in Maine.

If you are interested in the changes made to the House version of the appropriations by the Nelson-Collins compromise, this link will take you to Senator Nelson's detailed spreadsheet: http://bennelson.senate.gov/documents/Nelson-Collins Stimulus Final.xls

Senate Debates Stimulus - House Prepares For Conference

While floor debate on President Obama's economic stimulus measure proceeds amendment by amendment in the Senate, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer announced today that the House will be in session Monday to begin work on a joint House/Senate Conference Committee version of the legislation. Speaker Pelosi says the bill is still on track to reach the Oval Office before Valentine's Day.

Senators Ben Nelson of Nebraska and Susan Collins of Maine will be offering a bipartisan amendment aimed at stripping non-stimulative appropriations out of the spending side of the bill, such as Interior Department and Agriculture Department new computers, along with funds for HIV screening, wildlife management and NASA. As it stood late Wednesday afternoon February 3, the cost of the Senate version of the measure exceeded $900 billion. The major additions approved thus far have been an $11 billion tax credit for car purchasers, and $6.5 billion for National Institutes of Health research projects.

Senators Patty Murray and Diane Feinstein are preparing another attempt to increase spending for construction by $13 billion for highways, $7 billion for water and sewer construction, and $5 billion for transit construction, to be offset by cuts in other programs.

Senator Charles Schumer wants an even bigger increase for transit funding, of $6.5 billion rather than the $5 billion Feinstein and Murray will propose.

Domestic steel mills are fighting to keep the "buy American" requirements for construction steel in the measure, while other interest are assuring trading partners the protectionist requirements will not exceed those already in existence in general Congressional appropriation measures.

Senator Johnny Isakson of Georgia will offer a proposal to double the home buyer tax credit from $7,500 up to $15,000, and remove the restriction to first time buyers, at a cost of $20 billion.

President Obama, at a White House meeting Wednesday afternoon, urged key Senators not to "make the perfect the enemy of the essential" in finalizing the measure, and remarked that the recession will turn into "a catastrophe" if legislation is not on his desk before Presidents' Day.