I would also like to welcome State Representative Joan Bray of St. Louis, who is Missouri Chairwoman of the Transportation Committee of the National Conference of State Legislators; Mayor Kenneth L. Barr, of Fort Worth, Texas, who is Vice Chairman of the Transportation Committee for the U.S. Conference of Mayors; Mayor Robert T. Bartlett, of Monrovia, California on behalf of the National League of Cities, who is Chair of the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Services. On Panel III, I would like to thank Taylor Bowlden, of Highway Users and Roy Kienitz with the Surface Transportation Policy Project.
The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, or TEA-21 as it is known, was accomplished through a long negotiation process involving many of the panelists today. Although I was not a member of the United States Senate last year, I was involved through the National Governors' Association to a modest extent. But I must say, if it were not for the leadership of others on this committee like Senators Chafee, Warner and Baucus, I do not believe that TEA-2 1 would have become a reality.
This is especially true as it relates to the Revenue Aligned Budget Authority (RABA), or firewalls, whereby today everything that goes into the Highway Trust Fund is spent for its intended purpose.
I am pleased with the final results of TEA-2 1. There is now balance among the fifty states, because TEA-21 ensured equitable funding formulas. In fact, because of the changes in TEA-2 1 to more equitably distribute Highway Trust Funds, Ohio will receive a 23% increase in funding as compared to ISTEA.
Our subcommittee goal is to ensure that this legislation is being implemented properly with appropriate oversight involving the Administration, state and local governments and the user community. We are starting off our hearing series today with a general overview of TEA-2 1 implementation.
On April 29th, we will hold our second hearing on Streamlining and Project Delivery. At that hearing, we will have various interested parties testifying on their views on implementation of TEA-2 1 section 1309 Environmental Streamlining. The Administration will then testify on May 20th reacting to testimony given on April 29th and their ``TEA-2 1 Planning and Environmental Provisions: Options for Discussion'' paper.
One other goal that I feel is imperative_we have to start looking at the big picture. I believe that we need to work together on a more comprehensive approach; so that the right hand knows what the left hand is doing. It is imperative that we coordinate our efforts between the Agencies, Congress, the States and localities and the user community to maximize the benefits of TEA-21.
TEA-21 builds upon the foundation achieved in ISTEA (the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act) ensuring that there is shared decision making between the Federal, State and local governments based upon public participation in the planning process.
I remain strongly committed as the new Subcommittee Chairman to the structure set up by my colleagues in TEA-21. I will work particularly hard to ensure that our state and local governments, who know best what their individual priorities are, continue to contribute positively in setting our transportation priorities.
And while the Administration proposed in its budget submission to reopen TEA-2 1, I can say frankly that I do not intend to do so, nor do I believe that anyone on my subcommittee or the full committee has any interest in doing so. We should continue with the guarantees administered and maintained by the formula rules established in TEA-21.
Finally, let me just say that Senator Inhofe and I are deeply troubled about the ramifications of a recent federal court case that could make highway projects across the country in-eligible for federal funds. This court decision overturns a well-established EPA rule that allowed projects to move forward even if a state's transportation plan subsequently failed to meet clean air goals.
We sent a letter to EPA Administrator Carol Browner this week requesting that the EPA appeal this court decision. We do not believe it is wise to put into doubt the ability of transportation planners to proceed with much-needed projects, particularly if the government is allowed to change the rules along the way. If this court decision stands, highway projects will come to a standstill as will the economic benefit associated with new highway construction because these projects will no longer be in compliance.
I appreciate the witnesses appearing before this subcommittee today, and I look forward to hearing their testimony.