Federal Aid System and in modes other than highways. It would appear that this provision, coupled with other proposals in the program, simply constitutes a multi-million dollar federal pork barrel. It is noteworthy that your recommended program includes a cutback in the funding of the Interstate System-the one system to which the Federal Government should give the highest priority. We most respectfully, but most emphatically, urge that you give reconsideration to the program which you have recently announced. If it is your determination that transportation priorities in this country have changed, that there is no longer a need for highway improvements at their present rate of development, and that greater emphasis must be given to other forms of transportation, then we suggest that you give serious consideration to recommending the reduction of the special federal taxes imposed upon highway users. That is the last that can be done in fairness to the millions of motorists who pay those special highway taxes and who trust they will be equitably administered. Sincerely, THOMAS L. LOWE, 1972 HIGHWAY LEGISLATION TUESDAY, MARCH 28, 1972 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ROADS OF THE COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS, Washington, D.C. The Subcommittee on Roads met at 10:07 a.m., in room 2253, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. John C. Kluczynski, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding. Mr. KLUCZYNSKI. The hearings will come to order. This morning the subcommittee will continue its hearings on 1972 Highway Legislation. We may have problems today because of the water pollution bill on the floor. We, therefore, request that the witness be as brief as possible, consistent with getting your point across. We will start with the first witness, and the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Indiana, Mr. Zion, to introduce the first witness. Mr. ZION. Mr. Chairman, our witnesses this morning are your kind of people. They believe in building safe, dependable highways to cut down on this carnage we have experienced for the past few years, and they recognize the best attack against the 50,000 loss of life each year is to have safe, dependable highways, because experience has shown that per passenger mile there have been half as many facilities on the Interstate System as on some of the old fashioned highways. These people are knowledgeable; they are dedicated, they spent their life in the pursuit of good, modern, safe, dependable transportation. So they share with you a desire to get on with this highway construction program. They believe that the best way to have a viable economy in the State of Indiana, as indeed in the Nation, is to provide good transportation from one end of the State to the other. So, Mr. Chairman, I am particularly pleased and proud to introduce these gentlemen to you today. Mr. Ruel W. Steele is the chairman of the Indiana State Highway Commission, and accompanying him is State representative Steve L. Ferguson from Bloomington, who is a representative in the State legislature. Mr. KLUCZYNSKI. Gentlemen, you have been introduced by a great fellow, and a good friend of mine, a member of this committee. and a real, real good Congressman. So it is a pleasure to hear these first witnesses. 79-423 O 72 48 STATEMENT OF RUEL W. STEELE, CHAIRMAN, INDIANA STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION; ACCOMPANIED BY STEVE L. FERGUSON, STATE REPRESENTATIVE FROM BLOOMINGTON, IND.; R. H. HARRELL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, INDIANA STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION; AND NELSON STEINKAMP, CHIEF ENGINEER, INDIANA HIGHWAY COMMISSION Mr. STEELE. Mr. Chairman, my name is Ruel W. Steele. I am chairman of the Indiana State Highway Commission, and as such, it is a privilege to have the opportunity to be here and testify before your committee. I want to thank Congressman Zion and the other Congressmen from Indiana who have been so kind in arranging this for us. We have been asked by your able counsel, if we could, to try to keep our testimony within 30 minutes. We will make every effort to do this. The commission, in turn, is responsible to the people of Indiana for the construction, maintenance, and improvement of more than 11,600 miles of highways in the State system. I also take note of the fact that you have heard testimony from a number of highway organizations and that, as members of the Subcommittee on Roads, you are fully cognizant of the vital. continuing contribution that modern roads and streets have made to America's growth and economic well-being. For this reason, I will limit most of my remarks to the Federalaid program as it has specifically affected Indiana's highway development in recent years, along with some observations and conclusions which I share with many other State highway administrators as to how this program can be improved to better serve the needs of the public. I am here in part to impress upon you, and through you to Congress, the importance of the continued integrity of the Federal Highway Trust Fund. As we are well aware, several proposals are being advanced which would divert trust fund moneys for other purposes, although the title itself was selected to let all know that the funds are protected and dedicated solely to highways, as a trust fund. It appears on the face of it to be a contradiction to even speak of diverting "Trust Fund" revenue. Currently, trust fund moneys are not being diverted, but withheld, cutback, and fragmented. We in Indiana have suffered a great loss in Federal highway funds, as shown by one of the charts which I have brought with me. I would like to refer to exhibit A, and you will note from that that we have, from 55 percent of the total pie of Federal funds, gone back to 41 percent Federal participation. This chart shows the amount of Federal funds made available during three 4-calendar-year periods, starting in 1961. It indicates that, in the last 4-year period, we suffered an 11-percent reduction in Federal funds. At the same time, Indiana taxpayers were greatly increasing their highway-user contributions and tax payments. Indiana motorists contribute approximately $150 million annually to the Federal Highway Trust Fund, and at present receive only about $75 million a year in return each year. In other words, we get back one-half of what we put in. And it appears to be getting worse. Three years ago the Indiana State Highway Commission was receiving $25 million per quarter, and this was at the start of this administration. This has now been reduced to $10.22 million a quarter for normal or regular project obligations. Realizing a great need and demand for improved highways, the Indiana General Assembly in 1969 increased the State motor vehicle fuel tax by 333 percent. They specifically earmarked this added revenue for the modernization of more than 150 miles of so-called "killer highways" in our primary system, and for construction and major improvements of arterial roads and streets in the county, city, and town systems. As you will note by the chart, however, these increased State funds have just filled the gap-replacing, so to speak, the loss suffered from Federal cutbacks. This is why we feel that the people of Indiana are being penalized. Modern, improved roads and streets are constantly costing our citizens more and more money, not only because of inflation, but because of the current Federal-aid distribution policy. The fact that less Federal tax money is available does not mean that the need for better, safer roads and streets is also diminishing. Vehicle registrations are growing at a rate of about 4 percent a year, and this will continue as far into the future as we are now able to see. As long as the United States remains a free society, as long as people are permitted to determine their own mode of transportation, they will require and demand the individual, flexible mobility of the motor vehicle. In short, there are no really adequate substitutes today for roads and streets. This is not to say that we should not be attempting to develop practical alternate modes of transportation. But to do so at the expense of the highway program does not make much sense. It ignores reality. Curtailing the highway program can only compound our transportation problems, not help solve them. Our taxpayers have a tremendous investment in their roads and streets, and we have a responsibility to protect the investment. We have completed 830 miles of Interstate Highways in Indiana, for example, at a cost of just over $1 billion. As illustrated by the next chart (exhibit B), it is estimated that another $320 million will be required to complete the system. Although less than 10 percent of our Interstate mileage has yet to be put under contract, this portion will cost 25 percent of the total effort. And, for the most part, the right-of-way has already been acquired. With some exceptions, this remaining mileage is all in urban areas the metropolitan areas of Indianapolis, Evansville, Cincinnati, and Louisville. I might also point out, with reference to urban transportation needs, that part of the problems today may have been brought on |