By Cliff Montgomery – Aug. 4th, 2009
The Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 is an economic stimulus plan intended to re-start America’sfaltering economy. But in allocating the Recovery Act’s highway infrastructure funds, TransportationDepartment heads so far have failed to “develop clear guidance on identifying and giving priority toeconomically distressed areas,” according to a recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO).
Katherine Siggerud, the Department of Transportation’s Managing Director for Physical Infrastructure Issues,on July 31st delivered testimony regarding President Obama’s Recovery Act before the House Transportationand Infrastructure Committee.
Below The American Spark offers quotes from the GAO’s introduction of Siggerud’s instructive testimony:
“The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act) included more than $48 billion for theDepartment of Transportation’s (DOT) investment in transportation infrastructure, including highways, rail, andtransit.
“This testimony—based on GAO report GAO-09-829, issued on July 8, 2009 and updated with more recent data,in response to a mandate under the Recovery Act—addresses (1) the uses of Recovery Act transportationfunding including the types of projects states have funded, (2) the steps states have taken to meet the act’srequirements, and (3) GAO’s other work on transportation funding under the Recovery Act.”
“A substantial portion of Recovery Act highway funds have been obligated, with most funded projects focusing onpavement improvements. In March 2009, $26.7 billion was apportioned to 50 states and the District for highwayinfrastructure and other eligible projects. As of July 17, 2009, $16.8 billion of the apportioned funds had beenobligated for over 5,700 projects nationwide.
“About half of the funds has been obligated for pavement improvements such as reconstructing or rehabilitatingroads – 17 percent has been obligated for pavement-widening projects, and about 12 percent has been obligatedfor bridge projects. Remaining funds were obligated for the construction of new roads and safety projects, amongother things.
“States have generally complied with the act’s three major requirements on the use of transportation funds:
(1) Fifty percent of funds must be obligated within 120 days of apportionment. All states have met thisrequirement.
(2) Priority for funding must be given to projects that can be completed within 3 years and are located ineconomically distressed areas, as defined by the Public Works and Economic Development Act.
“Officials from almost all of the states included in GAO’s review said they considered project readiness, including the 3-year completion requirement, when making project selections. However, due to the need to select projects and obligate funds quickly, many states first selected projects based on other factors and only later identified whether these projects fulfilled the economically distressed area requirement.
“Additionally, some states identified economically distressed areas using data or criteria not specified in the Public Works or Recovery Act. In each of these cases, states told us that DOT’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) approved the use of alternative criteria but it is not clear under what authority it did so as FHWA did not consult with or seek the approval of the Department of Commerce.
(3) State spending on transportation projects must be maintained at the level the state had planned to spend asof the day the Recovery Act was enacted. With one exception, the states have certified that they will maintain theirlevel of spending.
“GAO will continue to monitor states’ use of Recovery Act funds for transportation programs and their compliancewith program rules. In the next report, in September 2009, GAO plans to provide information on the use ofRecovery Act funds for transit programs and for highway programs.
“GAO [recommends] that the Secretary of Transportation develop clear guidance on identifying and givingpriority to economically distressed areas. DOT agreed with this recommendation and is consulting with theDepartment of Commerce to develop additional guidance on criteria to classify distressed areas for RecoveryAct funding.”
