2017 Political Outlook

POLITICAL OUTLOOK

By Michael “Sully” Sullivan, President and CEO, American Council of Engineering Companies of Georgia (ACEC Georgia)

If there’s one constant in politics, it’s change – and 2017 should see more than its share.

In Washington, we have an unconventional President who campaigned on shaking up the status quo. In Congress, Republicans have control of both the House and Senate for the first time in more than a decade and are looking to make good on promises to undo much of the Obama Administration’s policies, including a repeal of the Affordable Care Act (or at least parts of it) and other rules and regulations that they believe are hindering economic growth.

Here in Georgia, we have the same folks in charge, but many newly elected legislators coming in and established leaders already looking ahead to possible races for higher office. In this type of environment, hot button issues – which can earn their champion lots of free media coverage and favor from certain elements of the Republican primary base – can suck up a lot of legislative time and attention. This dynamic will most likely become more of a factor the closer we get to 2018.

FEDERAL OUTLOOK: INFRASTRUCTURE FUNDING IN THE SPOTLIGHT
The importance of infrastructure can hardly be overstated. Roads, bridges, water/wastewater and storm water, airports, dams, rail lines, power and other utilities are the circulatory system of almost every part of our economy. Our society could not function as it does without this critical infrastructure, yet many people take it for granted. We expect bridges to be safe, water faucets and smartphones to work and the lights to come on when we flip the switch. However, much of our nation’s infrastructure challenges center on replacing existing infrastructure that is either unsafe, obsolete or nearing the end of its useful life. It’s difficult for voters to get excited about the politicians who gave them a bunch of underground pipes or new and improved versions of the things they were already taking for granted.

This is why it was so encouraging in 2016 to have both major political party candidates not merely acknowledging the need to invest in our nation’s critical infrastructure, but trying to outdo each other in just how big they were willing to go towards addressing it. Hillary Clinton proposed $500 billion in new investment in infrastructure and now-President Donald Trump doubled that number and promised $1 trillion. Finally, this issue is getting the attention it deserves.

While there was not a lot of specific detail about where the money would come from during the campaign (other than President Trump’s references to public-private partnerships), the promise itself continues to be at the top of the Trump Administration’s list of goals for the first 100 days. Despite Trump advisor Steve Bannon’s suggestion late last year that they should just borrow the money since “interest rates are so low,” a conservative Republican Congress is going to be looking for ways to pay for the investment rather than borrowing. Recent discussions have centered around significant tax code reforms that could provide a source of at least some of the funding. But, suggestions such as “repatriation” (creating a favorable tax code to incent American companies to bring profits earned in other countries back home) don’t come close to the amount needed.

Though questions about how it will be paid for remain unanswered, infrastructure funding remains the only big issue on the Trump administration’s wish list that enjoys strong, bipartisan support – and presents a real opportunity for a new President looking for an early, big win on a major campaign promise.

Georgia’s congressional delegation will play an even more important role in those discussions, due to its increased clout in transportation and infrastructure policy. Representative Rob Woodall (R) was previously Georgia’s only representative on the powerful House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. But he won’t be alone any longer, as Georgia now has three representatives on this important committee. Newly-elected Congressman Drew Ferguson (R) and veteran lawmaker Hank Johnson (D) have also been appointed to join Woodall for the 115th Congress. In addition, Representative Tom Graves (R) will serve on the Transportation Subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, and will obviously play a major role in any funding discussions.

GEORGIA OUTLOOK: TRANSIT’S INCREASING IMPORTANCE
Turning the focus to transportation infrastructure and funding in Georgia: for decades, much of the discussion has centered around roads and bridges. But, as more Fortune 500 companies have relocated to Georgia citing accessibility to a MARTA station as a top factor in their site selection decision, transit has moved to the forefront of legislative discussions. Legislators are starting to understand that a robust transit system is an economic development engine that attracts companies such as State Farm, Mercedes and AthenaHealth who are trying to attract young, high-wage, white-collar workers. It’s also become a tool for revitalizing areas with high-end Transit Oriented Developments (TOD) built around MARTA stations.

The first sign of transit’s increasing importance in the state was the $75 million in capital funding for transit appropriated by the General Assembly in 2015. In 2016, the General Assembly passed legislation that allowed residents of the City of Atlanta to vote on a referendum for a local transit SPLOST, which will generate approximately $2.5 billion in direct funding to be used to expand transit within the city limits. There are also discussions about legislation in the coming year to expand that referendum opportunity to the rest of Fulton and DeKalb Counties, potentially generating an additional $5.5 billion for MARTA expansion.

[dt_quote type=”pullquote” layout=”right” font_size=”h5″ animation=”none” size=”2″]“The Commission will work to make a roadmap for how we integrate transit as one more tool in our transportation portfolio.”[/dt_quote]
Transit’s increased clout is also reflected in Speaker of the Georgia House of Representatives David Ralston’s (R-Blue Ridge) announcement at the Georgia Chamber’s annual Eggs and Issues Breakfast in early January. Speaker Ralston publicized his intention to create a new Georgia Commission on Transit Governance and Funding. The Commission would include appointees by the Speaker, Lt. Governor and Governor who, according to Ralston, “will work to make a roadmap for how we integrate transit as one more tool in our transportation portfolio.” Speaker Ralston stated forcefully that “transit is going to be an important part of our transportation future here in Georgia. We have to recognize transit is not only a part of congestion mitigation, but it’s economic development here in the state.”

The House has also created a new Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee of the Appropriations Committee that will provide more specific focus on transportation funding issues generally.

2017 GEORGIA GENERAL ASSEMBLY LEADERSHIP AND RULES CHANGES
During the first few days of the 2017 session, which was gaveled into order on January 9, new leadership within the General Assembly was announced. With several legislators either leaving the legislature or moving up the leadership ladder in their chamber, a host of new committee chairmen were appointed, including the new chairs of the Senate Transportation Committee – Senator Brandon Beech (R-Alpharetta) – and the House Transportation Committee – Representative Kevin Tanner (R-Dawsonville).

Also early in the session, the Senate amended its Rules to provide that Crossover Day (the date by which a bill has to have been passed by one chamber to be considered by the other) will now be Legislative Day 28, instead of Day 30.

STRUCTURAL ENGINEER LICENSURE LEGISLATION
Georgia structural engineers face a competitive disadvantage when competing for work in other states where structural engineers are licensed. A Georgia structural engineer (who only has the “P.E.” professional engineer designation) might have far more structural engineering experience but be passed over in favor of a less experienced engineer from a state that licenses structural engineers with the “P.E., S.E.” professional engineer, structural engineer designation.

The growing national trend to create the “P.E., S.E.” designation reflects the significant difference in risk to the public health, safety and welfare relative to true structural engineering practice. That greater risk to public safety is why, in 2011, the Georgia Professional Engineers and Land Surveyors Licensing Board (PELS Board) began requiring candidates for the P.E. with background in structures to take the 16-hour structural engineering exam, rather than one of the eight-hour P.E. exams taken by other engineering disciplines. This requirement was in keeping with the licensure standards recommended by the National Council of Examiners for Engineering and Surveying.

In the 2015 legislative session, House Bill 592 (HB 592) was introduced to create a new “P.E., S.E.” license for structural engineers in Georgia. HB 592 also contained a grandfathering provision which would allow any currently licensed professional engineer to obtain the “P.E., S.E.” license by simply submitting a signed affidavit to the PELS Board stating that they are a practicing structural engineer. HB 592 was passed by the House of Representatives in 2016 and ACEC Georgia will seek to introduce a similar bill during the 2017 legislative session.

OTHER ISSUES
Georgia structural engineers face a competitive disadvantage when competing for work in other states where structural engineers are licensed. A Georgia structural engineer (who only has the “P.E.” professional engineer designation) might have far more structural engineering experience but be passed over in favor of a less experienced engineer from a state that licenses structural engineers with the “P.E., S.E.” professional engineer, structural engineer designation.

CONCLUSION
Political Advocacy is one of ACEC Georgia’s three primary purposes and we are here to fight for the interests of the business of engineering under the Gold Dome, as well as in Washington D.C. and before state agencies and local governments here in Georgia. In order to effectively represent the interests of the engineering industry, we need to hear from you. When an issue comes up that affects Georgia’s engineering industry, please don’t hesitate to let us know.