Surface Transportation and FAA get billions in extension deal. Maritime funding is still out in the cold. DOT and Marad? Absent as usual from the docks.
Amidst the giddy euphoria of the highway spending bill extension that also boosts FAA funding for a slightly shorter period, it is clearly business as usual inside the beltway. Even as the House approved the continuation of highway and aviation spending for a few more months, the federal government still has big plans to pump almost $50 billion into high speed rail that no one seems to want. Beyond seemingly good news that Congress will continue to fund these infrastructure projects, the ongoing, benign neglect of the domestic waterfront continues unabated. That this happens without much fanfare goes directly to the heart of the matter.
In less than three years, a new class of Panamax vessels will begin delivering cargoes to the United States, via an expanded – wider and deeper – Panama Canal. Whether or not those vessels will arrive “full and down” will largely be up to us. At this point, aside from one or two ports already engaged in or planning dredging and deepening projects, a wide scale transformation of the U.S. waterfront seems unlikely. Moreover, providing adequate depths for these new superships is only one part of the equation; the aging wharfs along U.S. waterways may not be ready for a larger class of vessel, either.
Inland Infrastructure
Michael Toohey, President and CEO of Waterways Council, Inc. (WCI), reminded me recently (in the September 2011 edition of MarineNews, actually) that the Department of Transportation and its maritime modal arm, the U.S. Maritime Administration, have little to do with the domestic waterfront. Toohey insists, “In fairness to Secretary LaHood, we need to recognize that inland navigation infrastructure investment is not a part of the portfolio of the U.S. Department of Transportation. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers supports the inland navigation mission. Just as a Member of Congress cares (only) about his or her Congressional District, so too does the Department of Transportation care about Highways, Transit, Rail, Aviation, and Pipelines. Waterways are a vital component of national transportation, but they do not get the attention they deserve because of this absence from the responsibilities of the U.S. DOT. Thus, we must look to the Congress to provide the resources needed for reliable, efficient systems of waterways.” That’s pretty good advice. It is also dismal news for any of us hoping to also make significant improvement to the nation’s transportation mode that moves fully 98 percent of all freight.
The most recent $25.6 billion spending bill will allow continuation of surface transportation programs, on the back of about $23 billion from the Highway Trust Fund. The Highway Trust Fund, which is underwritten primarily by a federal fuel tax on gasoline and diesel fuel, has its own problems. Nevertheless, Congress seems to find no problems with authorizing billions to pour concrete despite the fact that a markedly reduced driving footprint by American drivers during the past three years has left the fund on the brink of insolvency. Lost in that reality is the need to take the cars and trucks OFF those roads and put them onto the waterways. Less traffic means less pollution, less wear-and-tear and a smoother commute (and quicker freight deliveries) for those vehicles left on the road. What’s not to like?
DOT’s Marad: is it necessary?
If, as Mr. Toohey says, the inland part of the waterways equation is beyond the scope of DOT, and we also know that only the tiniest fraction of ARRA stimulus funds are being spent on the docks, then you have to ponder the wisdom of continuing to fund Marad within the DOT. Sure, they help manage a few docks projects – at least one of which is the target of a federal investigation – but what else do they get done? Those pesky ghost ships are a headache and let’s not forget the Maritime Security Program (MSP). That said, a quick check of their budget for FY-2011 reveals a request for $352 million for their various missions, none of which apparently have anything to do with the DOT mission of maintaining transportation infrastructure. In the meantime, the State of Florida (and others) is holding bake sales to fund the dredging of Miami harbor.
Let’s put that $352 million to work for the taxpayers. That’s plenty of money with which to dredge two harbors on all three coasts to 60 feet, if necessary. From there, we kickstart the often talked about (Administrator Matsuda has this speech memorized, I think – not funded, of course – but memorized) America’s Marine Highway and begin to build domestic, U.S.-flagged shuttle tonnage for feeder service up and down the coasts to niche ports. It isn’t rocket science.
With the trucks now off the Interstate highways and associated wear-and-tear reduced by as much as 50 percent, we begin to see real economy of scale for the government. And, that reoccurring $352 million nut? We continue to put it to work on the waterfront, where it belongs, and not in some drafty office building in Washington. David Matsuda last year characterized the Maritime Administration as an organization with no regulatory teeth. He finished that thought by saying that Marad was a “cheerleader” of sorts. Well into the 4th quarter, and trailing badly on the scoreboard, it is also clear that all the cheerleading in the world from Marad isn’t going to get it done on the waterfront. You know it, I know it and so does WCI’s Michael Toohey. – MarPro.
* * *
Joseph Keefe is the lead commentator of MaritimeProfessional.com. Additionally, he is Editor of both Maritime Professional and MarineNews print magazines. He can be reached at jkeefe@maritimeprofessional.com or at Keefe@marinelink.com. MaritimeProfessional.com is the largest business networking site devoted to the marine industry. Each day thousands of industry professionals around the world log on to network, connect, and communicate.