AAMVA Blog

Rip Van Cashin

2012-02-14T13:38:09Z

By Cian Cashin, Senior Manager, Government Affairs, AAMVA

It’s been a while, and like the old Rip Van Winkle of lore, I woke from the relative quiet of the holidays with a start, looked around me, and realized a lot had changed between December of 2011 and January of 2012. So with the myriad issues that have been keeping me away from communicating them with our loyal readership, I think it best if we just jump right into the reinvigorated energy surrounding Capitol Hill these days – energy that’s not just dedicated to the pace of the Republican primary events.

Foremost amongst the surprises of the New Year was the Congressional intent to start pushing a surface transportation reauthorization prior to the most recent extension expiring on March 31^st. For those of you doing a double take, you are not alone. When the news reached AAMVA of this aggressive timeframe, I thought it likely to be political posturing from just one chamber of Congress, who often uses such tactics to point the finger at the other chamber when divided by party control – but this is apparently not the case at all. Both chambers have jumped towards tackling some substantive measure prior to the President’s Day recess. In my opinion, this action is likely spurred by the horrendous public polling figures on the general acceptance of our representative government’s work on Capitol Hill. In an effort to retain their jobs, and to ensure the public they are not “broken” as many pundits have recently opined, the Congress returned to the transportation reauthorization measure as something that was non-divisive and that could be leveraged as a necessary piece of legislation that carries the all-important association of “creating jobs” prior to elections. The two measures, as noted in previous blogs on the subject, had been so far apart in every aspect that the thought of negotiation on such wide-ranging bills seemed implausible and unrealistic. Welcome to the New Year, and the new push to get things done. In the past weeks, the House has outlined a timeframe and begun drafting measures that could, theoretically, start building the foundation for a true measure to work its way through both chambers. At this point, those measures are being closely guarded by Congressional staff, and are not available to the public by general download (even the hard copies being circulated on the Hill are subject to watermarking and other security measures.) That being said, there are essentially two very big obstacles to address in beginning the collaborative process. Both chambers must agree on the timeframe of the bill (everything from 2 years in the Senate to 6 in the House had previously been on the table) and determine a viable funding mechanism for the bill to ensure the programs outlaid receive the funding they need. Most notably on this subject is the ensured solvency of the Highway Trust Fund. Many experts feel that numbers soon to be released by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) will help legislators look at just how much additional revenue must be produced in order to keep our nation’s safety and infrastructure programs running smoothly – and those numbers outlining just how threadbare the Trust Fund remains are expected in the coming week. These are not going to be easy arguments to placate in just a few months. They strike at the heart of both parties, with the House recommending a tie-in between expanded oil and gas drilling in federal waters and public lands with a funding mechanism that runs contrary to traditional Democratic environmental and green energy concerns. However, that being said, there is much to take from the consensual agreement that the Congress must pass an infrastructure and highway safety measure. This general agreement, and the agreement that it must be done soon has not been a hallmark of this Congress. If they actually both publicly agree on moving an issue – it is very likely that it will move. So in the coming weeks, be prepared to see a glut of information on its progress and comparison as it fans its way through Congress like a violent forest fire. While it’s easy to hope for its passage, even something as seemingly non-divisive as the surface transportation reauthorization will carry hard-line party ideals to the brink and make for a very interesting and compressed few weeks on Capitol Hill.

AAMVA's TWIR In Your Ear - February 10, 2012

2012-02-10T21:19:04Z

License Plate Design and its Impact on ALPRs

2012-02-10T13:57:11Z

Sheila Prior
Director, Regions III & IV, Member Support

I spent the last couple of days with AAMVA’s Automated License Plate Reader Working Group who met in Phoenix to edit a draft version of a best practices document. The group includes a myriad of experts from motor vehicle agencies, law enforcement entities, license plate vendors, toll authorities and ALPR manufacturers, each of whom brought their unique perspective to the table. It was fascinating to learn a little bit about how ALPRs work. It’s much more complicated than I had ever thought about. They first have to detect the vehicle, then locate the plate image, then separate the background from the license plate number, extract the number, determine the jurisdiction, and finally hand-off the number to back end systems. All of this requires a bunch of engineering expertise and is without a doubt fairly complicated. The fact that an ALPR can read hundreds of plate numbers in a fairly short timeframe makes this a technology that will continue to increase in use, by law enforcement and others. We learned about some of the challenges ALPRs face including “noisy” backgrounds, poorly designed fonts, weather conditions, encroaching symbols and designs, and much more. Stacked characters and the use of non-alphanumerics and determining whether they are or are not, part of the official license plate number poses additional challenges. Some unofficial math shows there are more than 6,000 different license plate designs in the U.S. and Canada. And it’s a well known fact that the number of specialty plates increases exponentially every year. Until this week, I never gave a thought to the fact that every time a new plate design is issued, the ALPR manufacturers must go through their machinations to enable the technology to function with the new plate. It is these concerns that resulted in the formation of the working group to develop best practices for the design and manufacture of license plates. The results of their efforts will be available within the next year and after watching the group at work for a couple of days, I’ve no doubt the final product will be something the jurisdictions will want to pay attention to.

AAMVA's TWIR In Your Ear - February 3, 2012

2012-02-03T21:18:47Z

And You Thought You Had a Lot of Leftovers…

2011-11-30T18:44:47Z

By Cian Cashin

With the crumbs of Thanksgiving swept away, Congress returns to “work.” Our legislators have a lot more than crumbs left on their plates, however. The same glut of legislative work that was on their platters before the holiday remains – uncured, unkempt, and embodies a political catastrophe to conclude before the end of the year. Before the recess, the Senate had provided an inconclusive and vague volley at reauthorizing surface transportation programs (MAP-21). The House had made initial indications that they too were interested in addressing their surface transportation proposal prior to the end of the year. Congressional aides have since indicated that the hopes of accomplishing this are rapidly dwindling. The slow pace of action on MAP-21 has all but stopped due to the fact that the legislation remained contingent on finding a solution for the $12 billion revenue gap in the bill. No solution has come forward, and the bill continues to languish after Committee approval due to the fact that it still needs approval from numerous other Committees (including Banking and Finance) prior to floor consideration. The current extension (PL 112-30) keeps surface transportation programs running through March. Considering how many other measures the nation needs in terms of economic relief, action on reauthorization measures prior to passage of the spending bills is unlikely. The Congress simply has too much left on its plate.

The debate over the feasibility and merit of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s (FMCSA) rules dictating the hours of service that truckers can legally drive without resting continues this week. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee held a hearing this week to bolster the notion that the rules would place serious economic restrictions on transportation companies and private haulers during busy financial seasons such as the holidays – augmenting statements by the American Trucking Associations that the rule would serve as an impediment not only to truckers and companies, but ultimately to keeping consumer prices low in times of economic duress. The rule has met with numerous challenges. Safety advocates brought suit against the rule in 2008 when the draft rule reduced the maximum allowable driving hours within an on-duty day from 11 to 10. Regulators were supposed to have the rule in place in July, but extended the comment period in April after the release of new studies on fatigue mitigation. As the debate continues, safety advocates, and those representing the business and economic interests of the industry remain at extensive ends of the spectrum with little narrowing of the ideological divide.

Dueling Banjos -- A Capitol Hill Update

2011-11-17T21:45:25Z

By Cian Cashin, Senior Manager, Government Affairs, AAMVA

They’re really going to try it. Or at least they’re making a consolidated effort at getting out some version of a highway reauthorization measure in both chambers.

In my mind, it’s more a case of dueling banjos. As we’ve noted, the Senate has introduced its two year highway reauthorization measure – MAP-21. There’s obviously much to be desired from that legislation, including the funding levels, but not to be outdone, House Speaker Boehner tentatively approached the microphone this week to announce he too is going to squeeze in his surface transportation bill before year’s end. Really? With the deficit reduction committee talks coming to a standstill, 9 more appropriations measures to get done in the next month, and apparently little to no collaboration occurring between both sides – I’d really like to see how such huge considerations will be accomplished. I suppose stranger things have happened. With little details about the legislation, Speaker Boehner, House Transportation and Infrastructure chairman Mica, and Republican leaders announced a tandem bill that would address surface transportation reauthorization measures that would get Americans back to work on repairing infrastructure while simultaneously expanding American resources for energy exploration. Without even getting into the details, the previous sentence alone should immediately narrow the bill’s prospects of getting broad support in the Senate. All I can say on the obviously competing measures is that I wish them luck. Maybe both measures really just serve as a placeholder and party rallying point for the weeks ahead – a political give and take without much substance.

For those of you sick of choking on emissions, you’ll be happy to hear the Obama administration has moved forward with a proposed final rule setting stricter vehicle fuel economy standards. The new standards would require automakers to produce vehicles by 2025 that will achieve a fleet-wide average of 54.5 miles per gallon. While ambitious and great for the environment, automakers have balked – and given their recent stock quotes, it’s easy to see why. However, it’s gained broad support for being one of the initial steps in reducing our dependence on foreign energy sources, albeit by squarely putting the impetus for reducing that reliance on the people that make the goods rather than by placing responsibility on the consumer.

I can’t say I didn’t see it coming, but with all the “buses” being thrown around the Hill these days, it’s easy to lose sight of exactly what’s happening with the appropriations measures. With time running out on solidifying FY 12 spending bills, only one “minibus” has made progress. The conference report (112-284) on the Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-Science, and Transportation appropriations measure (HR 2112) is in its final stages. That only leaves nine more spending bills to go. With concerns over how they will be packaged, order they will be addressed, and numerous other details, top House appropriators are more amenable to putting the final nine into a single package for consideration. In the words of House Appropriations Chairman Harold Rogers (R-KY) Congress “will have to put together a rest of the bus.” Apparently they’re still looking for a catchy name. Submit your picks before Christmas.

Finally, and not least important, the above mentioned conference report on HR 2112 (the only packaged and moved minibus) is expected to contain an extension of the current stopgap continuing resolution through December 16^th. The current continuing resolution expires on midnight November 18^th, making agreement almost assured (or they would likely have announced another vehicle). That being said, there’s still plenty of time to change tactics…leaving scant hours to avoid a partial government shutdown seems to be the recent MO. That being said, extending operations to December 16^th means the rest of the appropriations measures will likely need to be considered in some form or another in the next month.

A Tale Full of Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing -- A Capitol Hill Update

2011-11-10T20:52:12Z

By Cian Cashin

I’d like to thank our President and CEO Neil Schuster for providing the perfect Shakespeare quote to summarize some of the legislative activity of the week. What will likely take me paragraphs to summarize, can be condensed into the sage words of Macbeth rather nicely.

This week, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee finally passed their version of a two-year surface transportation reauthorization (S 1813) by a unanimous vote of 18-0. This legislation, known as “Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act,” or MAP-21, would authorize approximately $85 billion over fiscal years 2012 and 2013 for federal highway programs. Before approval, the Committee also adopted nearly 20 amendments without objection, including one that would limit performance measures set by the Transportation Department. One of the stumbling blocks on gaining bipartisan approval before now had been the issue of dedicated funding for “transportation enhancements.” Funding for these enhancements would mandate use for items such as bicycle and pedestrian paths and landscaping. Republicans rightly argued that such funding would be better placed on repairing the nation’s crumbling infrastructure. Democrats, tipping their hats, made concessions on this point, and have assured Senator Coburn that if he dropped his objections to facilitate passage of the measure, the bill would be modified to allow States to spend the enhancement money on projects such as high-occupancy vehicle lanes or other congestion reduction activities that increase the efficiency of the existing road network. He was also assured that the bill would no longer allow spending of enhancement funds for transportation museums – a topic that received much negative attention during floor debates.

Again, the biggest impediment for the legislation remains its divergence from the six-year proposal being offered in the Senate. Not only do the bills differ in time frames, but they also differ dramatically in pricing and content. The Senate version has not yet solved the problem of filling the $12 billion gap between the funds generated for the Highway Trust Fund from current taxes and authorized spending levels. Without that funding, many of the Republicans who currently support the proposal will tuck tail and run. Across the Capitol, House Transportation and Infrastructure Chair John Mica, has indicated that he has the better chance of moving his bill, and that in conference, his proposal is the more sound. Mica, whose six-year bill totals approximately $200 billion, has been slowly trying to identify enough offsets to pay for the bill. And while jobs are essential in an election year, the majority of the Congress, regardless of party affiliation is desperate not to move anything unless it has the appropriate price tag and necessary offsets. Without paying for it, nothing will move. As another possible funding mechanism for the Mica measure, House Speaker John Boehner suggested the idea of funding a transportation infrastructure bill by tying it to measures that would expand domestic oil and gas drilling. The new royalties would supplant the existing Highway Trust Fund.

That’s a lot of information, but returning to our quote, let’s take a step back and really evaluate what we’re looking at. We’re looking at measures that couldn’t be further apart from every angle. They don’t agree on timeframes, they don’t agree on content, and they certainly don’t agree on how they will be funded. Any proposals for funding are despised by the ruling party of the opposite chamber. Opening public lands for drilling is a non-starter for Senate Democrats, and the Senate has yet to even mention their proposal for paying for a two year measure. That’s a lot to digest before the end of the session. Heck, that’s a lot to digest for a full year. If I were a betting man (and it’s always dangerous to put these things in writing) I’d break out my calendar and count on another series of continuing resolutions.

What ever happened to the Super Committee? That Committee that was tasked with coming up with at least $1.2 trillion dollars in savings? We all thought they had been making progress, public reports were good…and then, in the blink of an eye, they returned to closed door meetings and gruff responses on progress. Things are not looking good for their recommendations. It’s rumored that debate over the Republican proposal to cut spending and generate tax revenue without increasing taxes was largely rebuffed by Democrats. Figuratively throwing their hands in the air, they’ve now looked to their counterparts and asked, “What’s your bright idea?” While Committee Democrats called the latest GOP plan insufficient, hope seems to remain. They have noted that the GOP suggestion for higher tax revenue has opened the door for a possible agreement to be used in future proposals. While concrete proposals are still being formulated, the necessity of their purview has actually made both parties relinquish long-held platform beliefs in the name of a common cause. Who would have thought such a possibility existed in Congress?

AAMVA Standing Committees Come Together

2011-11-10T16:59:27Z

We just wrapped up three days of meetings with the members of our standing committees to work on plans for the coming year. There was a lot of great back and forth in both the combined meetings and break outs for each of the three standing committees - Driver, Vehicle, and Enforcement. We talked about the missions and goals for each of the standing commitees and also took a look at how those committees and related discipline groups may be restructured and reorganized to be more effective.

The standing committees and AAMVA staff also worked together to develop a lot of great ideas for sessions to include at our upcoming Spring Workshop and Law Institute. The Workshop’s been set for March 12-14 in New Orleans - get out those calendars and make sure you save the date!

All in all, we got a lot great work acomplished at the Combined Standing Committees Meeting and we hope to put some of the plans we developed into action to make AAMVA a stronger association.

Take a look at some of what went on at the meeting straight from standing committee members! You can also watch it on AAMVA's YouTube Channel.

What Does “Jobs” Mean? -- A Capitol Hill Update

2011-11-02T17:01:01Z

By Cian Cashin, Senior Manager, Government Affairs

And by this, I don’t mean our recently departed technological guru, I mean concrete, getting Americans back to work…JOBS. The answer, apparently, would depend on who you ask. This week, Senate Republicans offered a counter proposal to the Senate Democrats $60 billion infrastructure proposal the Senate is expected to debate this week. The Senate Democratic proposal would essentially be “part two” of the Obama jobs package. Senate Dems have taken the first procedural steps to move the legislation (S 1769) by filing a motion to limit debate on the second component of Obama’s larger job creation proposal (S 1549). The Republicans have countered with general comments that they would like to utilize House Transportation Infrastructure Chairman John Mica’s proposed transportation reauthorization measure as the vehicle for their “jobs” proposal. While both would obviously invest in infrastructure as a way to get people back to work while simultaneously repairing the nation’s crumbling infrastructure, the stand alone legislation would obviously provide a more ideal mode of debate than taking on the comprehensive long-term highway reauthorization. With Republicans already offering a counterproposal, we can assume pre-election rhetoric may bar the way for bipartisan investment in the nation’s infrastructure as long as it carries the “jobs” moniker and both parties have their differing approaches.

In concrete events, the Senate has passed an amended version of the fiscal 2012 “minibus” appropriations package this week. It now moves to a conference with the House that could start as early as this week. This legislation (HR 2112) passed by a roll call vote of 69-30 and combined the Agriculture, Commerce-Justice-Science, and Transportation-HUD spending bills for fiscal 2012. One stumbling block during consideration of amendments was the mandatory set-aside of 10 percent of the Department of Transportation’s program funding obligated for “transportation enhancements.” These could include such things as landscaping, historic preservation and bicycle paths…which many called inessential given the state of the nation’s tunnel and bridges which are in desperate need of dedicated repair funds.

Finally, lawmakers have indicated that they would like to use a recently released safety report on “curbside carriers” as ammunition in bolstering regulation of the commercial busing industry. While particular to the newer and smaller intercity passenger bus operations that often leave from one location and ferry passengers back and forth from nondescript locations, the report could provide segue to increased FMCSA oversight of all bus and motorcoach carrier operations.

On The Clock -- A Capitol Hill Update

2011-10-31T18:50:54Z

By Cian Cashin

Four weeks from today, the “Super Committee” is expected to present its recommendations on how to come up with $1.2 trillion in federal government savings. While much of their work has been being conducted behind closed doors for the past few weeks, there have been rumors that all has not gone exactly smoothly for the Committee. While the Committee held its fourth public hearing this week and publicly indicated that work was progressing well, many are stating that there have been increasingly divisive disagreements as the Committee solidifies their proposals. And while all of this is extremely hypothetical given their propensity for working behind closed doors of late, many analysts agree on a few important points. The first is that there are conflicting views on the level of spending the Super Committee will propose. Some have indicated that their initial proposal will be to extend beyond their purview and provide for $3 trillion in saving over the next decade. Others believe the timeframe for coming up with such consensus limits their ability to draw consensus and they will essentially be forced into specific cuts more aligned with their initial charge of $1.2 trillion. Also complicating progress is the fact that there had been talk of including a “jobs” component to the recommendations. This has largely been done away with as any incorporated addition would necessitate even greater offsets to be discussed and agreed to by the Committee. Finally, the Super Committee has precluded any discussion on a wholesale revision to the tax code as a way to realize savings and adjustments. Although many of the Presidential hopefuls have issued plans indicating their own hopes that this will serve as a panacea for the nation’s economic woes, the Super Committee has likely run out of time for consideration and specific analysis of the proposals on a large scale. That being said, it is also rumored that they will make specific recommendations on options for tax reform and direct the Senate Finance Committee and House Ways and Means Committees to draft the details on accomplishing reform on specific tax policies with notation on how the examples could assist economic adjustments. With time quickly expiring on their commission, the committee will certainly have their hands full in the coming weeks.

Senate Democrats this week have indicated that they will turn their attempts at clearing portions of the President’s jobs proposal towards transportation initiatives in the coming weeks. Knowing that they will face increasing obstacles from their House counterparts as the election approaches, the Senate Democrats are instead focusing their efforts on those aspects of the President’s jobs plans that are broadly popular and seemingly practical. Transportation remains one of those. Separating these aspects out from the broader jobs proposal and requesting individual votes on the issue will not only increase its chances for passage, but will also put politicians on record against topical issues that received positive public support. The bill is largely tied to rebuilding and repairing the nation’s crumbling infrastructure and may serve as a way for the Senate Democrats to pit the Republican theories about simultaneously supporting the effort to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure against their reluctance to raise new revenue or taxes. The proposal intends to offset associated costs by an increase on those whose income exceeds $1 million. The bill will likely face strong opposition in both chambers as it has been compared to an earlier bill that was part of the President’s jobs proposals that would have saved teacher, police, firefighter and emergency responder jobs (which was refuted by a 50-50 vote).

In a largely symbolic move, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee has indicated it will address its two-year surface transportation measure, MAP-21, November 9^th. While that markup may be scheduled, the Senate and House proposals are light years apart in every aspect. The legislation is likely to serve as the legislative equivalent of someone shrugging their shoulders and saying, “we tried.” It may also serve as election fodder for finger pointing between the leadership of the two chambers.

AAMVA Meets with New Zealand Transport Agency's CIO

2011-10-25T20:21:41Z

By Mike Calvin

Today, Philippe Guiot, Ian Grossman, Kevin Lewis and I met with Mr. Craig Soutar, Chief Information Officer with the New Zealand Transport Agency who was visiting the Washington area. We shared information about AAMVA in general as well as more specific information on our IT Division, driver and vehicle programs and social media programs within AAMVA and our member jurisdictions.

During the last month, we have met with federal government and motor vehicle representatives from four different countries – Mexico, Sweden, South Korea and New Zealand. The meetings have been extremely successful in providing us the opportunity to gather and share information on common issues that pertain to safety on our roadways and security throughout our country.

From L to R: Kevin Lewis, Ian Grossman, Craig Soutar, Mike Calvin and Philippe Guiot

Who Owns My Face? -- A Capitol Hill Update

2011-10-21T17:34:57Z

By Cian Cashin

This week Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to provide a report to the Committee on the growing use of facial recognition technology and outline what that means for consumers. We all know the need for inclusion of certain biometric security measures on the license, but can his request have implications for the collection and use of data by the public sector? Most of his concerns lie around the collection and use of this data by private online technology companies such as Google, Facebook and Apple, who have reportedly experimented with facial recognition components in their consumer products in a manner that raises serious privacy concerns. The thought on the issue is that if this data starts to serve as a widely collected verification measure in general terms, its use as a reliable component of identity security becomes diluted if the proper security protocols around both collection and use of that data jeopardize its use for those that rely on the information as a key component of identity protections. The intent of his letter is to fully explore the capabilities of the technology and ensure the appropriate privacy protections are in place as the Commerce Committee begins to explore privacy legislation. My two cents on this are that if collection is done on the front end of consumer applications by private companies to tie data and consumer information to a face, that entire identity profile becomes a portfolio of information that needs to be safeguarded by the standards given personally identifiable information (PII). Linking data to stored facial recognition patterns is inherently dangerous unless a strong investment is made to ensure its safe. The nexus between something granting access to PII and the information behind the face itself is something that needs attention and focus as privacy protection legislation continues to evolve in the fight against identity theft.

In other developments, the Senate’s progress on the first of numerous smaller fiscal 2012 spending packages (HR 2112) bodes well for avoiding a single catchall omnibus measure. HR 2112 originated as a single appropriations measure for Agriculture, but has since grown to incorporate FY 12 spending for Commerce, Justice, Science (the bill formerly known as S 1572) and the FY 12 Transportation-HUD spending measure (S 1596) – to create the first of several proposed “minibuses.” The current continuing resolution (PL 112-36) will keep the government running through November 18 – but whispers indicate many legislators believe another stopgap measure may be needed to avert a shutdown. Again timing becomes crucial as legislators proceed, and the rhetoric around the catastrophic effects these short-term spending bills have had on the nation’s economy is continue to escalate.

Are We Setting Ourselves Up for Another Round of “Hurry Up and Wait?” --- A Capitol Hill Update

2011-10-05T19:37:38Z

By Cian Cashin, Senior Manager, AAMVA Government Affairs

The tone seems right. Then again, that could be because these days our federal policymakers seem to think a week is an eternity. This week Congress bought themselves another month to determine the best route to successfully navigate a way to reach agreement on the divisive issue of long-term government spending. After quick clearance in the House by a vote of 352-66, the short-term spending bill (HR 2608) was signed by the President, keeping government operations running through November 18^th. As mentioned last week, the chambers came to agreement over the stumbling block of providing $2.65 billion rather than the House-proposed $3.65 billion in disaster aid programs. With both parties indicating that they will remain vigilant of the $1.043 trillion ceiling agreed to in the debt limit law (PL 112-25), dispute over funding levels for the individual agencies could become contentious. That being said…

Senate Majority Leader Reid has announced his intention to bring at least three spending bills to the floor this month. Specifically, he is hoping to move the Agriculture, Transportation-HUD, and Commerce-Justice-Science appropriations bills. All three of these measures were approved with GOP support by the Senate Appropriations Committee last month. Of the three, only Agriculture has been passed by the House. Transportation-HUD has not been marked up in the House Appropriations Committee and the Commerce-Justice-Science measure has been ready for full floor consideration since July, but hasn’t budged.

My personal take on these somewhat uneventful updates is that while there is a general consensus that both chambers would like to have their spending bills in order prior to the Thanksgiving holiday, there remain some very serious obstacles to getting this done in an efficient manner. Congress is not oblivious to the fact that these series of short-term spending bills are having an effect on the perception of the general public. They understand that it is now affecting not only them, but their constituency’s ability to get the job done. Adding in the discontent relative to job status and the general track record of the economy over the past few months – and many members are eager to show that they can avoid the continuous threat of a government shutdown. Too many are reliant on their decisions to right the political ship prior to November. While this is all well and good from a political standpoint, there are numerous issues to contend with in any single one of these appropriations measures. First, any gamesmanship to avoid the agreement on the debt-limit agreement without providing the appropriate offsets will cause chaos in moving the stand-alone measures quickly. Adding to the difficulty is that many of these measures provide the perfect venue for debating larger policies. For instance, the Labor-HHS-Education measure (S 1599) includes the opportunity for both parties to debate foreign aid, the labor laws, and the health care overhaul – any one of which could take years. Much of the spending bills ability to move will come from the party collaboration, bipartisan agreements and settling the terms for rules governing debate prior to their consideration. While some members seem optimistic and the elements for movement seem to be aligning, the divisive policy measures included in this set of appropriations measures is somewhat troublesome given that last week the threat of shutdown lingered over the relatively innocuous issue of emergency disaster relief funding. We all want that. How many of us are in total agreement on health care reform? Environmental regulation? Labor governance and oversight? Yikes.

Meeting the Korean National Police

2011-10-05T14:18:41Z

Updates from Geoff Slagle at the ISO meeting in Seoul, South Korea:

Finished our discussions this morning in a sister working group for standards relating to test methods and then met with the Korean National Police & the Korean Road Traffic Authority. We were given a tour of one of Seoul’s driver licensing sites. This would be comparable to a MVA where people would go for DL/ID application, knowledge testing, skills test (both closed & open road), and receive actual license (instant issuance). Very interesting operation – good focus on service (typical throughout the country)…in addition to our questions to them they had a keen interest in how our members deal with new drivers and the various models used in graduated licensing. Great experience!

Updates from Seoul

2011-10-05T14:14:37Z

From Geoff Slagle, on the second day of the ISO meeting:

Day 2 of our WG10 meetings have seen some spirited discussion regarding the security mechanisms being used in ePassports and the next generation DL/IDs. After many years of being interested in adoption of the ISO standard, the EU will officially vote to adopt the 18013 standard as part of its latest directives – with a primary reason being the excellent work that has been done on integrated circuit technology (chip). We also welcomed another country to the table, Malaysia. Malaysia issues a national ID that carries on it multiple applications – in addition to its primary function as an ID includes: driver license; health care; passport for localized travel (similar to North America’s enhanced DL); ePurse/wallet; transit; and ATM. Citizens can apply as early as age 12 and then are required to have the card by age 18. We continued our work on the revision to the security feature requirements and also discussed card service life challenges. Tomorrow will be a wrap up of our WG10 committee work and then meetings with the Korean National Police and their driver licensing authority.

Adventures in Korea at the ISO Meeting

2011-10-05T14:09:55Z

AAMVA's Geoff Slagle and Mike Calvin have travelled to Seoul, South Korea for a meeting of the ISO committee (ISO/IEC JTC1/SC17 WG10) responsible for driver licensing standardization, on an international scale. Other ISO committees responsible for passports, smart cards, and other plastic card application standards are also in attendance. WG10 is responsible for the development and maintenance of four different standards relating to driver licensing (18013 series). The group is currently working on a revision to the first standard it developed (part 1) and is rewriting and updating both the security feature requirements as well as the card durability aspects of the standard. WG10 has eight countries in attendance with five of the eight delegations having motor vehicle administrators (MVA) or representatives of MVAs present at the meeting. Take a look at WG10 below!

First row, left to right: Dr. Seung Ho Tak (Korea); Young-Sun Yoo (Korea); Patrice Plessis (France); Loffie Jordaan (USA); Andre Uuldriks (Netherlands); Geoff Slagle (USA); Arjan Geluk (Netherlands); Dr. Guido Frank (Germany); Gerrit Fischer (South Africa); Brian Beech (USA); Mike Calvin (USA); Keith Mayhew (UK) --Second row, left to right: Dr. Min-Huei Kim (Korea); Norhiro Naritomi (Japan); Yoshi Yorimoto (Japan); Takahiko Sakai (Japan)

Quiet But Effective: AAMVA and CCMTA Go to Mexico City

2011-09-30T17:22:54Z

By Neil Schuster, AAMVA President & CEO

I was pleased this week to join an AAMVA and CCMTA delegation to the World Road Congress in Mexico City. Our group consisted of AAMVA Chair Mike Robertson, CCMTA President Ward Keith, Chuck O’Donnell, Mike Calvin, and Rodolfo Giacoman and Alain Arnaud with TML Information Services, Inc. We sat in on several road safety sessions during the Congress, which attracts thousands of delegates from all over the world, and we visited a number of country pavilions in the exhibition, including stops at the Canada and US pavilions.

The primary reason for attending, however, was to meet with our colleagues from Mexico, and it was a very worthwhile effort. We had productive discussions with DGAF officials including Miguel Elizalde, Director General DGAF (who spoke to AAMVA at one of our conferences about a year ago), Salvador Monroy, Beatriz Robles and other DGAF staff, to discuss our continued efforts to develop an ongoing a working relationship involving all motor vehicle agencies in North America. Several Mexican state representatives also took part in our discussions, which focused on creating the proper framework to facilitate future collaboration, information sharing and problem solving.

We learned about Mexico’s national road safety strategy, adopted to coincide with the United Nations global Decade of Action on Road Safety (2011 – 2020), and Mexican state efforts to create road safety action plans to support the federal program. The federal program places a strong emphasis on user behavior and post-crash medical attention, and many Mexican states face the same challenges we see at the jurisdictional level in Canada and the US. For example, an official from the state of Jalisco noted that high-priority issues include address alcohol use while driving, speeding, motorcycle helmet use, and seat belt use.

One speaker at the Congress noted that worldwide, few road deaths occur in vehicles – most fatalities involve pedestrians and bicyclists, or vehicles that run off the road. I’m not sure if that holds true for the US and Canada, but it certainly made me think that when we discuss driver distraction and driving under the influence, we might want to expand the conversation to include pedestrian distraction and perhaps impaired pedestrians and bicyclists.

Mexico City is home to at least 21 million people (all of whom, it seemed, decide to travel to the Congress Center at 8:00 am every day), and we had a chance to experience first-hand the impact of traffic congestion in such a large, dense urban area. I may never complain about Washington, DC traffic again.

Several of our folks remarked that, given the chaotic traffic, it is surprising we rarely if ever saw an accident and hardly ever heard a car horn. Mobility in Mexico City seems to be quiet but effective. Our efforts could be defined in the same way – without a lot of fanfare, we are quietly making progress to better connect professionals in Canada, Mexico and the US to help improve road safety throughout North America. Motivated professionals from all three countries, doing serious work and forging solid friendships and working relationships along the way.

What Recess? (A Capitol Hill Update)

2011-09-28T15:28:57Z

By Cian Cashin, Senior Manager, AAMVA Government Affairs

Even during an expected slow week on Capitol Hill, our legislators find a way to make it interesting. Earlier in the week, while the House had adjourned for a week-long recess, the Senate passed by voice vote a clean one-week continuing resolution using the House-passed Homeland Security measure (HR 2017) as the mechanism. This latest, in a long string of continuing resolutions, would fund the government at the limit set by the debt limit law (PL 112-25) through October 4^th and eliminated the stumbling block of Democrat-requested supplemental disaster relief aid and their accompanying offsets. The House is expected to vote on the measure Thursday, with Republican leaders anticipating its approval by unanimous consent.

With the latest band aid placed over the gaping wound of long-term funding, both chambers will revisit the issue of funding early next week. Earlier in the week, the Senate also agreed to a revised version of Majority Leader Reid’s stopgap measure (HR 2608) that would fund government operations through November 18^th and eliminated the disaster aid for fiscal 2011 and accompanying offsets mentioned above.

While both of these measures avert a temporary, partial federal government shutdown, collaboration on how to provide long-term stability for the federal agencies remains a contentious issue. On Tuesday, House appropriators released “committee reports” for the fiscal 2012 State-Foreign Operations and Transportation-Housing and Urban Development spending bills. Both these bills have been marked up in their respective subcommittees, but accompanying committee reports are usually reserved until the full committee has had a chance to review the bills. This often serves as a signal that the measures will not be marked up by the full committee this year. Strategically, providing the reports ahead of time allows House appropriators to lay the groundwork ahead of negotiations with the Senate on a measure that would be more inclusive – such as an omnibus spending measure that will allow conferees to assign instructions and guidance on the use of appropriated funds to the Departments of Transportation and State.

The Same Old Song… (A Capitol Hill Update)

2011-09-21T19:04:40Z

By Cian Cashin Senior Manager, Government Affairs, AAMVA

The House Rules Committee has approved a rule for providing House floor consideration of a small business extension measure (HR 2608) by a vote of 7-2. This legislation is slated to serve as the vehicle for a continuing resolution to keep the government operating past the impending deadline of September 30th. It looks like another showdown over issues, and another threat of abandoning a Congressional recess scheduled for next week (where have I heard this before?). At issue this time is the party division over the CR’s removal of a $1.5 billion price tag to make cars more fuel-efficient. Democrats call this an essential “job creator” while Republicans mark it as a necessary offset. To complicate measures further, House Republicans remain at odds with Senate Democrats over how to provide new disaster aid to the tune of $500 immediately available in FY ’11 and an additional $6.9 billion in FY ’12 without finding appropriate offsets. With all the revolving issues being tied to the CR under the guise of “jobs”, I’m fairly certain when the music stops, one may be left without a chair.

Senate appropriators have advanced a FY 2012 spending bill that would keep federal funding for highways at current levels. The draft bill would proved $55.3 in discretionary spending for the Department of Transportation and the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Federal-aid highways would get $41.1 billion which is the same as current funding levels. Competitive grants for significant transportation projects, provided through the TIGER program, would receive $550 million a 4 percent increase from FY 2011 levels. The House version of the bill contains no funding for the TIGER program. In order to allow the maintained federal-aid highway spending as well as some high-profile housing programs and Amtrak – cuts were made to HUD’s community development block grants and negation of funding set-asides for high-speed rail projects.

With job creation being a top Congressional and election issue, harping on the Republican mantra of “creating jobs through deregulation of industry” will continue to resonate around the Capitol. But in an instance where protecting “American” jobs takes precedence over government deregulation, House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith (R-TX) pressed ahead with markup of his legislation (HR 2885) – a bill that would require all employers to use the online employment verification tool to make sure all new hires are legally present in the United States. This system, known as E-Verify, ties into the AAMVA community through the matching of a prospective employees presentation of identity documents for comparison with data entered into the E-Verify system for verification purposes. The E-Verify system has been lauded by both parties as an essential component for wide-ranging social issues from legal presence to homeland and national security. The bill’s movement at this time once again reinforces the notion that identity verification components must play into any feasible systems we rely on to ensure citizen protections and tangible oversight of the nation’s borders. The fact that the Republican chair has pressed ahead with the legislation given the above-mentioned mantra proves a couple of important points. One, that the E-Verify system and its component verification systems will continue to play into the larger social issues considered by Congress regardless of party affiliation; and two, that the driver’s licenses and identification cards presented by citizens and issued by the state will continue to serve as integral components to the broader national citizen management structure. While the system has been roundly lauded, the bill’s movement is in some ways considered academic. The President and the Senate have asked that it be tied into a more comprehensive immigration measure for consideration – something neither party seems to want to address in an election year.

Preheating the Oven (A Capitol Hill Update)

2011-09-15T20:34:34Z

By Cian Cashin, Senior Manager, Government Affairs, AAMVA

Things are heating up and there’s a lot going on this week on Capitol Hill, so I’m going to try and cover a number of different topics that are (and I can’t believe I’m saying this) simultaneously divergent and convergent. They’re divergent in their approach and in how they propose to accomplish expectations. They’re convergent in that they all tie into the political discrepancies between vying parties in the House and Senate and start preheating the pre-election pressure cooker.

First, there has been a truly frenetic pace to the number of appropriations markups being held in their respective Committees this week. Many of them came somewhat unexpectedly, and many of them repeatedly shifted scheduling to make tracking their progress complex. To add to the complexity, Congressional committee staffers have held their drafts and reports very close to the chest, especially in the Senate where rules don’t provide specific guidelines for quick committee disclosure. As I’ve noted before, I don’t expect all the measures to pass separately, and instead expect them to be rolled into an omnibus appropriations measure or a series of continuing resolutions that would continue to fund government operations (hopefully) at their current (though debatable) spending levels. However, taken at face value, these events serve as important indicators of what we can expect in the coming months. The timing of the markups indicates that for all intents and purposes, discussion on what should or should not be included in the appropriations measures has drawn to a close. The timing further indicates that appropriators are working to get their recommendations on paper prior to the November 1st deadline for the recommendations coming from the “Super Committee” or “Deficit Reduction Committee” so that they will have a basis for discussion no matter what mechanism moves forward. In some terms this will likely simplify the measures following the recommendations, and further allow legislators to take into account the deals made during the “debt-limit increase” negotiations held prior to recess. What I take from the push is a strong indication that Committees are rushing to get their proposals moving so that when the Deficit Reduction Committee recommendations come down, and when those tough decisions are being forced through, they’ll have a marker that shows proposed spending and be able to work from there. It also conveys emphasis will likely be put on what gets cut, not what can be added, to these measures. So at this point, all eyes are on getting the economy back on track, tightening belts, and competing for the almighty dollar – likely even amongst Committees.

Secondly, all eyes are on Oklahoma Republican Tom Coburn this week. Earlier in the week, the House passed HR 2887 which provided an extension of surface transportation programs for six months by voice vote. Once that bill reached the Senate, Senator Coburn expressed his displeasure by offering an amendment to the bill eliminating the mandatory ten percent set-aside of surface transportation program highway formula funding for “transportation enhancements,” which include bike and pedestrian paths. The objection, due to the timing of the bill, jeopardizes not only surface funding, but also an extension of the Federal Aviation Administration, which without passage of the measure by Friday would cause its second partial shutdown of the year. This puts Coburn in a unique position for leverage, given that the House has adjourned for the week, and any amendment to HR 2887 would essentially cause an FAA shutdown at least until next week.

Third, and just as an ancillary note, House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio has suggested that the next surface transportation bill should be linked to energy production. Initially I’m wondering if this means we’ll actually see a surface transportation bill in the coming year. This kind of proposal would help Republicans solve the funding gap in bill comparisons while simultaneously opening up the country’s business prospects in the energy production and extraction sectors, but it would really complicate discrepancies between House Republicans and Senate Democrats on an issue that is already rife with plenty to yell about. The last thing the surface transportation measure needs is to be the central piece for getting America back to work. With both parties leaning that way, I see the probabilities of the bill seeing passage in the near future evaporating.

Fourth, House appropriators have unveiled a continuing resolution that would keep the government running until November 18th after current spending law expires at the end of September. The measure would fund the government at the level agreed upon in the debt limit agreement ($1.043 trillion.) Interestingly, the measure included an expected $3.65 billion in disaster aid, with $1 billion of that funding being offset with cuts to a Department of Energy vehicle efficiency program.

I’d like to close with the mention of the President’s proposed “Jobs Bill.” At this stage, and a cursory initial analysis, I have both plenty and nothing to add. I personally consider the measure likely to thud, applaud the infusion of funds into infrastructure, and won’t hold my breath on its political success - noting that it fuels speculation that the President is simply proposing a “stimulus package part II.” You’re welcome to comment with your own thoughts on his proposal below.