More Information
2007 Forum
View other years
2007 Oberstar Forum — Sen. Klobuchar's Speech
New Directions for Our Transportation Infrastructure
Remarks by U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, October 8, 2007
Introduction
It’s an honor to join all of you today. And it’s an honor to be speaking at this forum that is named in recognition of Jim Oberstar. His work is deserving of national recognition.
In the Senate, my committee assignments put me in a unique position to address a wide range of issues related to our state and to transportation. On both the Commerce and the Environment and Public Works Committee, I’ve been able to work on infrastructure projects important to Minnesota. I have been able to work on the Water Resources and Development Act (WRDA). This bill authorizes countless important projects all across our state that help protect our towns from flooding, keep our drinking water safe, and keep our rivers open for commerce.
I-35W Bridge collapse
And in the wake of the I-35W Bridge collapse, within 60 hours of the bridges collapse, the Congress passed and the President signed Public Law 110-56. This provided immediate, essential funds for the recovery effort and it authorized additional funds for bridge reconstruction—totaling $250 million.
Approval of this funding came with remarkable speed and bipartisanship. Grizzled Capitol Hill veterans tell me it was a rare feat—aided by the extraordinary unity among Minnesota’s elected leaders across the political spectrum.
With those initial funds—and thanks to the hard work of many people in this room —the State of Minnesota has increased transit options to serve commuters … set up detours to restore traffic flow … cleared structural debris … and begun laying the general framework for reconstruction.
Last month, the Senate passed the Transportation Appropriations Bill. It includes my Amendment, cosponsored by Senator Coleman, to fund the remaining $195-million balance on the $250 million authorized immediately after the collapse. This $195 million is added to the $55 million in federal funds to which Minnesota already has access for the rebuilding process.
I have every reason to believe that this provision will be included in the Bill when it goes to the President; and, as Jim pointed out, there are already funds available under the Emergency Relief program. But I am concerned about the prospect of a Presidential veto. Minnesotans who are concerned about the bridge funding and who have influence in the White House should be directing their energy toward that end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Ensuring the safety of America’s bridges
When the new bridge is completed, we all hope it will serve as a model of structural integrity and engineering for years to come.
As I said the day after the bridge collapse: In America, a bridge should not fall down; especially not an eight-lane interstate highway; especially not one of the most heavily traveled bridges in the state; and especially not at rush hour in the heart of a major metropolitan area. Unfortunately, it has taken a disaster to put the issue of infrastructure investment squarely on the national agenda—and it’s long overdue.
The sudden failure and collapse of the I-35W Bridge has raised many questions about the condition and safety of roads and bridges throughout the country. Last month, I requested that the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hold hearings to examine the condition of our nation’s transportation infrastructure in general—and the safety of our bridges in particular.
Our first hearing—on September 20—highlighted what everyone in this room already knows: Critical investment in the maintenance and construction of our nation’s transportation infrastructure is imperative. This is especially true for America’s bridges. Nationwide, bridges are deteriorating far faster than we can repair or replace them. There are deficient bridges found in every state across the nation.
Fixing all these bridges doesn’t come cheap. Last year, the U.S. Department of Transportation evaluated the complete picture across the nation when it published its conditions and performance report for 2006. That report concluded that there is a $65 billion backlog of repairs that are needed by American bridges from all levels of government.
The Senate has taken a first step forward toward addressing this funding backlog. A few weeks ago, I cosponsored an amendment that Senator Patty Murray offered to the Senate transportation appropriations bill. This amendment will allow for a historic increase in federal bridge funding—a boost of nearly 20 percent.
Infrastructure investment
The entire Transportation Bill will move America forward by making transportation safer and more efficient. It will improve air travel … expand public transit in urban and rural areas … invest in research and safety … and create more affordable housing. In the Senate, it was approved by a vote of 60 to 33.
I urge President Bush to reconsider his threats to veto the Transportation Bill. Strengthening and maintaining our national infrastructure must be a national priority. At the moment our priorities are not in the right place. We need roll back the tax cuts for the top 1%, post capitol gains, take back oil give-a-ways and put our priorities back in order.
And this means making our transportation infrastructure a higher priority. A robust, well-maintained, up-to-date highway system is vital to the continued expansion of our national economy. It is, in fact, an essential driver of our economic prosperity. As President Kennedy once said: “Building a road or highway isn't pretty; but it's something our economy needs to have.”
Rural economic revival
And nowhere is this truer than in rural America. Here, in Minnesota, the relationship between highways and the economy is most obvious in our rural areas. Transportation is absolutely essential to the viability—and the vitality—of our agriculture-based economy.
Rural Minnesota is now in the midst of an economic revival that promises to grow even stronger. As our nation demands greater energy independence and security, rural Minnesota is poised to benefit enormously with the further development of homegrown renewable energy resources. I believe we need to be prepared to maximize the opportunities offered by this renewable energy revolution. It is only just beginning to emerge, but it promises major economic and technological changes for our state.
Already, the development of wind farms and of ethanol plants has rejuvenated many rural parts of our state. At the same time, these industries are placing new demands on our transportation infrastructure. Take ethanol as an example. Demand for corn in ethanol production has increased dramatically. Ethanol demand has increased corn prices and led to expanded corn production. This is affects grain transportation as corn use shifts from exports and feed use to ethanol production.
For the first six months of 2007, ethanol production in the United States totaled nearly three billion gallons—32 percent higher than the same period last year. Currently, there are 128 ethanol plants nationwide—with total annual production capacity nearing close to seven billion gallons. An additional 85 plants are under construction. Total ethanol production in the U.S. is projected to exceed 13 billion gallons per year by early 2009, if not sooner.
In terms of transportation, this means that an average square mile of land in southern Minnesota which now generates the equivalent of 80 loaded semi trucks per year could soon produce double that—160 loads of grain per year.
As more homegrown energy is produced, rural roads and bridges will have greater demands placed on them. For example:
- The CVEC ethanol plant in Benson now has over 525 fully loaded semi’s hauling either corn or ethanol from their plant every week. This is a 45-million-gallon facility. Their production falls about in the middle of Minnesota’s 16 ethanol plants.
- SMI Hydraulics is a company in rural southwestern Minnesota that manufactures the bases for the wind towers that you see all across southern Minnesota. The heavy trucks that bring the steel to the company put a heavy burden on the roads they travel and are putting their durability to the test.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that truck freight in rural America is going to double by the year 2020.
Rural infrastructure challenges
The continuing trend toward greater reliance on trucking to support these industries raises concern about the wear-and-tear on rural roads and bridges. Many of these roads and bridges were built before this trend was evident. They were certainly not designed for this type of traffic.
Much of the rural road network in the United States was constructed during an era of slower travel and lighter vehicles. Current traffic, which is heavier and wider, has accelerated the rate of deterioration and made these types of roads less serviceable. Anyone who has driven on Highway 14 across southern Minnesota, widely regarded as one of the deadliest roads in America, knows what I am talking about.
In many important grain-producing States (including Minnesota), more than 40 percent of the major highway system is rated as being in less than fair condition. Our transportation system needs to support the development of these industries. So we need to look at the full spectrum of transportation options. That includes railroad. Located as we are in the middle of a large continent, healthy railroads have always been vital to the economy of our region. And I think they still have an essential role in the economic development of Minnesota and our region.
Unfortunately, farmers, energy producers and manufacturers in the Upper Midwest who depend on freight rail service find themselves trapped today in a “back to the future” world—struggling with a problem that has resurfaced from a century ago. At that time, America was confronted by a few giant railroad companies abusing their monopoly power to exploit producers and consumers alike with inflated prices.
In the face of these abuses, the federal government took action—led by no less a figure than President Theodore Roosevelt. Today, America yet again confronts the challenge of reining in the abuses of concentrated power in the American rail industry. A handful of giant companies again control this essential form of transportation.
Improving rail competition
Three decades ago, there were 63 Class I (large) railroads operating in the United States. Today only seven remain, with four of them controlling over 90 percent of all rail freight. As rail competition has all but disappeared, producers and consumers are paying the price, especially in rural areas. Captive shippers, with access to only one rail line, suffer the most.
I have joined with Senator Byron Dorgan, from North Dakota, to introduce bipartisan legislation to level the playing field—by promoting more reasonable, competitive rail prices and by making the Surface Transportation Board more accountable to shippers.
The current system is broken in two major ways. First, rail customers have been paying unfairly high prices to ship their goods to market. One example is cited in a study last year by the U.S. Government Accountability Office. It compared two grain shipping routes from Minot and Sioux Falls to Portland, Oregon. The rail routes carried comparable volumes, but the price from Minot was double that from Sioux Falls. What was the difference? The Minot route was served by just one Class I railroad, while Sioux Falls had two.
According to the study, shippers on the Minot route were paying rates way above the Surface Transportation Board’s own standards, even as the traffic on this route had increased dramatically during the past two decades. This railroad was driving a gravy train through North Dakota and all the way to the bank, thanks to its monopoly power and the absence of federal oversight.
The second problem is that rail customers have been denied a fair and efficient process for challenging rail rates and railroad practices. Shippers must pay steep filing fees of over $100,000 just to get their complaint heard. Then they must pay millions of dollars to litigate their case, which is sure to drag on for years. After all that, the Surface Transportation Board’s decisions almost invariably tilt in favor of the railroads. The bottom line is that the shippers lose … the railroads win … and the system does not work.
To address the first problem, our legislation promotes lower rates for shippers by:
- ending anti-competitive agreements between Class I railroads and short-line rail companies
- requiring large railroads to quote rates to any destination along their rail line
- setting a better standard for determining the reasonableness of rates imposed by monopoly railroads
Our legislation addresses the second problem by creating a fair, workable process for challenging excessive rates in front of the Surface Transportation Board. It removes the large filing fees, adjusts the burden of proof and empowers the agency to take proactive steps to foster competitive pricing.
This legislation avoids trying to impose a heavy government hand on private enterprise. Instead, it seeks to restore healthy competition and a system of reasonable rates—which are absolutely essential if we are going to take full advantage of the new economic opportunities available to rural America.
Broadening transportation options
When it comes to transportation and economic development, it is not just our rural areas that need attention. With more than half of our state’s total population now living in the seven-county Twin Cities metro area, the need for more transportation options has become very clear. Increasing traffic congestion has become a major threat to Minnesota’s quality of life and our prosperity—costing precious time and money for both commuters and businesses.
The bottom line for any business is that you lose money when your people and your products are stuck in traffic. And you also lose the ability to attract top-notch, talented workers if they must contend with aggravating and time-consuming traffic jams.
To combat this threat, we must commit to broadening our transportation options—developing the right mix of multimodal solutions to serve our emerging needs, while maintaining our existing system or roadways. This mix will include High-Occupancy-Vehicle and High-Occupancy-Toll lanes, Rapid Bus Transit and, of course, light rail.
In the Senate, I’m proud to have supported the further development of our light rail system by securing $35 million for the Central Corridor line which will run from Minneapolis … through the University and Midway neighborhoods … to downtown Saint Paul.
I am also proud to support the North-star Commuter Rail project. In the next 25 years, it’s projected that the population of the three fastest-growing counties in the state—Scott, Sherburne and Wright counties—will more than double. These lines—which will travel through two of those fast-growing counties, Sherburne and Wright—will not only save time, money and pollution with fewer drivers on the road.
In recent decades, the Twin Cities metro area has had a remarkable record of economic growth and prosperity—with success based on the achievements of well-established companies as well as the entrepreneurial energy and innovation from newer businesses.
To maintain this impressive pattern of economic development in the Twin Cities region, our metropolitan transportation system must develop as well. We all lose if we continue on the path to an even more congested and sprawling metropolitan area. We all win if we move forward with a full range of transportation solutions to serve our growing economy—whether it’s the concrete highways that carry our cars or the information highways by which we can telecommute to our work.
Conclusion
As I mentioned earlier, I believe that—in Minnesota and throughout our country—we are at just the beginning stages of a new energy and economic revolution. It is a transformation that, in particular, holds great promise for a place like Minnesota with both our abundance of natural resources and our wealth of human talent (with much of it right here at the University of Minnesota).
Transportation will be a key factor in how fast and how well we take advantage of the economic and technological opportunities available to us from a future increasingly based on homegrown renewable energy resources.
But one thing is clear: We will not be able to build this “21st Century Economy” by relying on a 20th century infrastructure that is both rapidly deteriorating and inadequate for our growing needs.
Our nation has faced this challenge before—a half century ago—and we succeeded in building a new modern transportation system for a new modern economy. At the heart of it was the Interstate Highway System.
In his 1963 memoir, Mandate for Change 1953-1956, President Eisenhower famously said that:
More than any single action by the government since the end of the war, this one would change the face of America. Its impact on the American economy—the jobs it would produce in manufacturing and construction, the rural areas it would open up—was beyond calculation.
He was right.
It is our responsibility to restore Eisenhower’s vision of a transportation infrastructure that works for all America.
Thank you.
Sen. Klobuchar delivered these remarks October 8, 2007, at the sixth James L. Oberstar Forum, hosted by the Center for Transportation Studies and held at the University of Minnesota.