(The following story by Kathryn A. Wolfe appeared on the Congressional Quarterly website on August 19, 2010.)
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Lawmakers are proposing a national freight policy designed to encourage multimodal development and reduce congestion, but the trucking industry says the plan would leave it out in the cold.
Legislation (S 3629) introduced late last month would create a new office at the Transportation Department that would develop a national policy to ease congestion and pollution and improve the safety and efficiency of freight commerce. The bill — sponsored by Sens. Frank R. Lautenberg, D-N.J., and Washington Democrats Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell — would also create a grant program to fund projects that improve freight movement, including multimodal terminals, land ports, freight rail improvements, intelligent transportation systems and improved port access.
But the American Trucking Association says that the bill focuses too much on other modes of transportation to the exclusion of highways, which the group says carry more than 68 percent of U.S. freight. The trucking association notes that few highway projects would be eligible for funding under the proposed grant program.
“What we need is a comprehensive approach to improving freight transportation for all modes that will move our economy forward,” the trucking association said in a statement earlier this month. “This bill does not meet that need.”
Democratic Senate aides involved with the bill seemed surprised by the group’s rebuke, and some speculated that the association’s response might have been different had the group’s longtime top lobbyist, Timothy Lynch, not departed in July for the law firm Morgan Lewis.
“We’re all kind of confused at their very harsh response to it,” said one senior Democratic Senate aide. “I can understand if they have concerns with the bill going forward but I think it’s kind of premature to come out and say they’re absolutely opposed to it.”
Debating the Benefits
A Lautenberg aide said that the bill does not favor one mode of transportation over another, and that the trucking industry’s objections miss the big picture. “These projects do benefit truckers,” the aide said.
“For instance, one of the goals would be to reduce congestion in and out of ports of entry. That would help big time for trucks, if they’re caught up waiting, idling outside of a port or sitting hours upon hours at a bridge.”
In its statement on the bill, the trucking association urged Congress to finish a surface transportation reauthorization that is mired in a dispute over how to pay for all the transportation improvements lawmakers want to fund.
“While we appreciate the recognition that the sponsors of this legislation have given to the importance of freight transportation, the highway reauthorization bill is almost a full year past due, and federal aid funding for highways is on the verge of collapse,” the trade group said. “This legislation does not remedy this growing crisis. We need to enact a responsible, comprehensive reauthorization bill.”
Lautenberg’s aide said what the trucking industry really wants is for the freight policy bill to be a comprehensive surface transportation bill that funds highway projects. “They want funding that’s going to pay for the larger highway bill and this isn’t a highway bill, this is strictly on freight,” the aide said.
Brandon Borgna, the trucking association’s communications manager, said one of the group’s concerns is that the measure has no specified funding source. He said the group is concerned that the bill’s provisions might be funded out of the Highway Trust Fund, leaving less money for highways.
The freight bill is unlikely to move on its own, but it could become part of a surface transportation bill the Senate will eventually begin moving. Environment and Public Works Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., said that she wants to mark up her panel’s portion of that legislation this fall.