There is already a Jobs Bill Pending!

In the aftermath of the President's announcement of the proposed Jobs Bill, I fear that what appears to be a temporary fix will erode the political will for a real long-term jobs program. The program I am talking about is the long-term reauthorization of the Surface Transportation Bill.

ASCE has been calling for a six-year $500 billion dollar program. To date the Senate has proposed a two-year $109 billion dollar program which has been criticized for exceeding available highway funding by $12 billion dollars. The House has proposed a six-year $235 billion dollar program which matches available highway funding, but results in a 35% reduction from current funding levels.

The Jobs bill is packaged as a $447 billion dollar package. The details are still coming out, but the make up of the bill appears to include $15 billion dollars in housing expenditures, $70 billion dollars in general infrastructure expenditures, $175 billion dollars in employee payroll tax reductions (which will be reduced revenue into social security), $10 billion dollars in employer payroll tax reductions, $62 billion dollars in unemployment insurance extensions, $35 billion dollars in aid to States to prevent teacher layoffs and $25 billion dollars in school infrastructure reconstruction and updates.

I suggest an alternative approach to a jobs bill. The Senate version of the Surface Transportation Reauthorization bill is a two-year $109 billion dollar program that is underfunded by approximately $12 billion dollars. Through the jobs bill, $70 billion dollars of general infrastructure funding has been found. Combining this new found money with the Surface Transportation Bill, let's proposing a fully-funded Surface Transportation Bill.

I can never determine which math makes sense. I appologize in advance if I am being too simplistic, but would appreciate anyone who will clarify this for me. IF the Senate bill is underfunded by $12 billion dollars then the additional $70 billion dollars from the jobs bill should cover the $12 billion dollar short fall for six years. IF the House bill of $235 Billion dollars is a 35% reduction of the current program, simple math would conclude a cost of $317 billion dollars would match existing levels over six years. Adding the $70 billion dollars to the house program would seem to amount to only a 4% reduction from current levels over the six year duration.

If you want to create jobs sending money to states to temporarily postpone teacher layoffs, to extend unemployment benefits, or even to provide payroll tax holidays will not create jobs. These may be necessary, but should not be part of a "Jobs Creation Bill" or a "Stimulus Package". New jobs are created by long-term sustainable programs like the Surface Transportation Bill has been and can continue to be when fully funded dedicated to the maintenance and reconstruction of our infrastructure.Critics could say that these programs have not been successful in the last three years. I would counter that Infrastructure Bills such as the FAA Reauthorization that has been extended now twenty-one times in increments of three to six months should not be characterized as a long term fiunding solution. For each extension aviation clients delayed projects and resulted in impacts to both the consulting and construction communities.

I believe that if the Jobs bill is passed it will erode all political will for the reauthorization of the Surface Transportation Bill and likely the Reauthorization of the FAA Bill. These programs when reauthorized for multiple years will have a true impact on the creation of new jobs.

Please join me in getting this message out to Congress. There are elements of the Jobs bill that should be considered on their own merits, but we need to first prioritize the reauthorization of these other infrastructure bills.