Mr. SHADBURN. We appreciate that, Mr. Chairman; and if there is any further material that your committee would like to have, we would be glad to cooperate in any way we can to furnish it to you. Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, sir. General Prentiss, please. General Prentiss, we know that you are in retirement from the U.S. Army. But as executive vice president of the American Road Builders' Association, you have been not in retirement but in the midst of very meaningful activity. We are delighted that you have come here today representing this organization which has so many facets of industry and interests involved. Will you proceed as you desire? STATEMENT OF MAJ. GEN. LOUIS W. PRENTISS, U.S. ARMY (RETIRED), EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, AMERICAN ROAD BUILDERS' ASSOCIATION General PRENTISS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, members of the committee. My name is Louis W. Prentiss and I am the executive vice president of the American Road Builders' Association, with headquarters here in Washington, D.C. Before commenting on the legislation which is before this committee today, I would like to express our concern regarding H.R. 8853, a bill to authorize a comprehensive study of the future needs of the Federal-aid highway systems, with report to be submitted to the Congress no later than January 1, 1967. We strongly recommend this measure as urgently needed legislation, and hope this committee as well as the Senate will take favorable action at an early date. In this connection I would request permission to submit for the record a resolution recently adopted by the executive committee of the American Road Builders' Association. Senator RANDOLPH. Are you going to read that resolution? General PRENTISS. I don't have it with me. We would like to have it submitted. Senator RANDOLPH. We will have it included at this point in the record as if it were read. You will supply it. General PRENTISS. We will see that a copy is brought up. (The resolution referred to follows:) RESOLUTION 1 (Adopted by the executive committee of the American Road Builders' Association, in Washington, D.C., May 1, 1964) Whereas the future development of our Nation's highways is geared to the highway needs study bill (H.R. 8853) which would give authority and direction to the Secretary of Commerce, in cooperation with the State highway departments, to investigate the Nation's future highway needs and recommend to Congress, not later than January 1, 1967, the scope and nature of Federal aid to highways after the present program is completed in 1972; and Whereas the highway needs study will require at least 3 years to complete, followed by an additional period of time which the Congress will need to consider the findings of the study; and Whereas the last apportionment to be made for the interstate program will be made in 1969 for the year 1971; and Whereas continuity in funds for the Nation's road program must be insured in order that the highway industry can properly and economically plan ahead; and Whereas, early determination of the question of program continuity is also essential in order to maintain our economic growth and to decrease traffic accidents: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the American Road Builders' Association respectfully calls to the attention of the Senate Public Works Committee the urgent need for early Senate action on the highway needs study bill. General PRENTISS. At this point, I want to express my pleasure and appreciation for the position taken by the State highway officials on this H.R. 8853. I want to emphasize the fact that from industry's point of view, we feel it is absolutely essential that plans be made and plans be submitted to the Congress no later than January 1, 1967, as to what is going to happen to the highway program after 1972 so that Congress will have an opportunity during the 1967 session of Congress to take actions, because it is going to be needed if we are not going to have a breakdown in this great system of highway building and highway supply. Industry cannot sit back and wonder what is going to happen in 1972, whether to cut back on their plan, cut back on their production, cut back on their employment. Industry must know, just as the State highway departments must know, because there is work to be done, starting in 1968 and 1969, to insure that this program does go forward as the Congress directs it to do after 1972. Senator FONG. How would it affect industry if things were to stop? How would it affect industry if the whole thing were to stop? General PRENTISS. At the present time, there is a big percentage of the industrial output in the equipment field and in the supply field and in the engineering field that goes into this highway program. Senator METCALF. What percent? General PRENTISS. I don't know exactly. I say a big percent. We shall come to some indication a little later in my paper, when we show the difference between onsite construction man-hours and offsite construction man-hours. You will find, for example, that there is a greater proportion of man-hours offsite to support the program than there is onsite to build the program. Senator FONG. Is it possible to get any kind of a definitive figure? General PRENTISS. I have it in here. I will come to it in just a few minutes. Mr. Chairman, we are most appreciative of this opportunity to appear before your committee in support of your bill S. 2520, providing authorizations for the fiscal years 1966-67 to continue the development of the so-called A-B-C highway systems. It is our studied opinion that at least $1 billion per annum of Federal-aid authorizations are needed to make reasonable progress in overcoming existing deficiencies on the A-B-C systems and maintain a proper balance with the development of the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. The Interstate System and the A-B-C highways will form a coordinated network of highways that will give superior service to the motoring public provided that the two programs are kept in balance. If the A-B-C program is neglected, it will not provide the feeders, connectors, and distributors for the Interstate System which are necessary to permit the interstate to carry 20 percent of the country's total vehicle mileage and deliver maximum benefits in terms of safety; convenience and national defense. As highway travel increases, the hazards of driving on obsolete roads also increase. Last year, 43,000 Americans lost their lives in traffic accidents. The cost of highway accidents-shared by every insured motorist, whether or not he has an accident-came to almost $8 billion. As President Johnson pointed out in a letter to the Secretary of Commerce March 23, we cannot, as a nation, "continue to tolerate this drain on our resources, and, as human beings, we cannot continue to tolerate this terrible pain, suffering, and loss of life." The President recommended to the Secretary of Commerce that the Federal Government begin an accelerated program of encouragement and assistance to State and local governments in developing priority safety programs, giving special attention to hazards on highways with high accident experience. Such a program has been developed by the Bureau of Public Roads and will be implemented by the State highway departments. The State and local governments are being encouraged to concentrate on such safety priority projects as the widening of narrow traffic lanes and bridges; maximum use of modern traffic control devices; the installation of protective devices at railroad crossings; the reconstruction of dangerous intersections; the reconstruction of sections of highway to improve sight distances on curves and hills; and the installation of guardrails, delineators, and highway lighting at hazardous places. Senator RANDOLPH. General Prentiss, I do not want to interrupt, except at this point I think you might clear up for me exactly what you mean by "delineators." I know you think I should know, but I really would like to have it. General PRENTISS. I anticipated that question, Mr. Chairman, this morning, and I did a little brushing up so I would be sure I would not say that a delineator is something like the Ladies' Home Journal, which is what it used to be. A delineator is a mark which indicates a change or turn in direction and is coated with a reflectorized material so as to attract the eye of the motorist. It may be used to invite his attention to a changed condition wherein he must know about it and act in order to prevent damage to himself or the vehicle. Senator RANDOLPH. Does that come before an intersection or at the intersection? General PRENTISS. It possibly would be a reflectorized post at the side of the road indicating a curve to the left or something to the right. It might be a reflectorized marker in the road where there is a shift in the lane for a turn left or a turn right. It delineates the traffic lane. Senator RANDOLPH. Thank you, sir. General PRENTISS. The most substantial form of encouragement the Bureau of Public Roads can offer, of course, is through the approval of Federal-aid participation in safety projects on the A-B-C highways. Many, perhaps most, of the safety priority projects undertaken by the States will be on the A-B-C roads and will be financed in part by the funds authorized by Congress for the A-B-C program. The approval of a $1 billion A-B-C program would facilitate and accelerate the elimination of many of these deathtraps. Reliance on automobile travel has become an integral part of the American way of life. The social and economic effects of highway transportation are far reaching and profound. As the late Commissioner of Public Roads Thomas H. MacDonald commented many years ago: "We were not a wealthy Nation when we began improving our highwaysbut the roads themselves helped us create a new wealth, in business and industry and land values so it was not our wealth that made our highways possible. Rather, it was our highways that made our wealth possible. Increases in wealth are frequently measured by advances in the value of land. Increases in the value of land adjacent to major highway improvements up to 270 percent in 1 year have been documented in various studies by the Bureau of Public Roads. Other measures of the economic benefits of highway construction have given equally impressive results. It is more difficult to place a monetary value on the social effects of better roads, but there can be no doubt that these effects are far reaching and include some benefits which are not usually realized. For example, one study found that families located on hard-surface roads were about four times as likely to maintain membership in churches, civic clubs, and other voluntary organizations as were similar families not located on hard-surface roads. The impact of better highways on health services has had a twostage effect. In the first stage, doctors were among the first users of the automobile. Automobiles permitted them to increase the number of patients that they could call on-from 5 to 7 to 8 to 10 a day. The second stage occurred when the use of the automobile became more general and the practice of making home visits declined and the patients, having achieved increased mobility, made it a general practice to visit the doctor's office. The typical doctor sees from 15 to 35 patients daily, an increase of doctor productivity which can largely be attributed to the use of improved highway transportation. Numerous other social effects have been noted. Highways have improved the mobility of the labor forces, giving workers access to jobs which previously were denied because of the lack of suitable transportation. In Detroit, for example, 1 out of 5 workmen are reported to travel over 10 miles to work. Many so-called farm-to-market roads have become home-to-work roads as a result of industry's decentralization and the dispersal of the labor force into the outer fringes of suburban areas. Improved roads and schoolbuses, making possible the "consolidated" school, have caused the number of rural 1-room schools to decline from about 190,000 to 25,000 during the past 40 years. Other educational improvements due particularly to improved highway transportation are gains in school enrollment and gains in the average attendance of rural pupils. As our college-age population increases, it has become apparent that it would place an intolerable burden on colleges and universities if these institutions had to provide living facilities for all students. Commuting from home to college has become common and will, undoubtedly, become more common as college enrollments increase. The recent action of the University of Maryland-the issuance of a regu lation making students who live within 20 miles of the campus ineligible for dormitory residence-is a sign of the times. Senator RANDOLPH. Off the record. (Discussion off the record.) General PRENTISS. The economic impact of improved roads on areas of chronic economic distress is a matter of special interest at a time when this country's general prosperity is not shared by some localities with special problems. The President's program for the development of the Appalachian region is a case in point. President Johnson recognized the social impact of highways in his recent message to Congress on Appalachia when he recommended the construction of a developmental highway system of 2,350 miles in this area. The problem of providing for the economic rehabilitation of distressed mining areas is a complex one, of course, that cannot be solved simply by building roads. But it is self-evident that the isolation of these centers and the lack of an adequate highway transportation system within the mining areas is a major deterrent to the development of new industries and the exploitation of recreation resources. Highway construction also plays an important role as a generator of employment. As the Bureau of Public Roads reported recently, highway construction this year will provide employment for an estimated 870,000 workers. This includes 370,000 on-site employees, and 500,000 persons in off-site jobs in the production, supply and transportation of highway construction materials and equipment. Senator Fong, that is a figure that I wanted to come to. The ratio there is 370,000 on-site employees to 500,000 off-site employees. An additional 500,000 persons are employed full time by Federal, State, county, and municipal highway agencies to plan, design, supervise, maintain and operate streets and roads. An April 1963 report of a study by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the labor requirements of the highway program includes this state ment: All major parts of the economy are involved directly or indirectly to some degree in the construction of highways, so that such construction activity generates employment throughout the economy. It should be noted that highway construction generates employment not only in all major sectors of the economy but also in all sections of the country. The ABC program, in particular, provides on-site employment in every locality, since the Federal-aid roads traverse every county of the United States. The Bureau of Labor Statistics study found that highway construction generates 216 man-hours of employment per $1,000 of construction contract value, divided as follows: On-site construction____ Off-site: Construction___. Manufacturing. Trade, transportation- Mining Other industries___ Total man-hours (per $1,000 of construction contract value). |