Tag Archive for 'construction industry'

Page 2 of 331

ARTBA Reports: State Analysis Shows Gas Tax Supporters
 Not Hurt at Ballot Box

d9cdad69-e8aa-4830-b455-58392c53ea55Voting for a gas tax increase to fund transportation investments has not hurt Republicans or Democrats at the ballot box, a new political analysis shows. c2a12953-6ea4-4a4f-9879-ef3b7f2d1285

Ninety-five percent of all Republican state legislators who voted to increase their state gas tax to fund transportation improvements in 2013 and 2014 and ran for re-election last November won their races.  That was a one percent higher winning percentage than that racked up by all state Republican legislators who voted against a gas tax increase during the prior two years.

On the Democratic side, 88 percent of state legislators who voted in favor of a state gas tax increase and ran last year were re-elected, as were 86 percent who voted “no.”

“This analysis shows two things members of Congress need to know,” American Road & Transportation Builders Association (ARTBA) President & CEO Pete Ruane says.  “First, a bipartisan majority can be found to increase transportation investment if the leadership of both parties actually lead—rather than play politics—and give their colleagues a chance to vote.   Second, if legislators are honest with their constituents and clearly explain why a gas tax increase is necessary and important and what benefits their constituents will derive from it, they have little reason to fear the ballot box over a gas tax vote.”

Seven state legislatures passed a gas tax increase or its equivalent during the last election cycle, according to the analysis by ARTBA’s Transportation Investment Advocacy Center:  Massachusetts, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, Vermont, Wyoming and New Hampshire.

Three of the states passing increases had a Republican governor and GOP control of both the House and Senate—Pennsylvania, Virginia and Wyoming.  Three had Democratic governors with party control of both legislative chambers—Maryland, Massachusetts and Vermont.  New Hampshire had a Democrat as governor and a split party state legislature.

Republicans helped pass gas tax increases with 216 votes in six states, 34 percent of Republican state legislators in office at the time of the vote and 36 percent of Republican state legislators who cast a vote.  No Republican legislators supported the increases in Maryland and only one legislator supported the increase in Massachusetts.  All but eight who supported gas tax bills and ran for re-election won.

The analysis shows 384 Republicans voted against the gas tax measures in the seven states.  Of the 305 who ran for re-election, 19 lost.

Democratic state legislators cast 673 votes in favor of a gas tax increase, 82 percent of Democrats in office at the time of the vote and 87 percent of Democratic state legislators who cast a vote.  Of the 546 who ran for re-election, 68 lost.  Democrats cast 101 votes against a gas tax increase.  Of the 83 who ran for re-election, 12 lost.

A total 1,385 state legislators cast votes on gas tax measures, the analysis found.  Of those voting, 191 were registered as signing the Americans for Tax Reform (ATR) state pledge “to oppose (and vote against/veto) any efforts to increase taxes”—180 Republicans and 11 Democrats.  Thirteen percent of the signees ignored the ATR and supported increased revenue for transportation improvements, the analysis found.  Only one legislator who defied the ATR and sought re-election was not returned to office.

d1d08f67-dfe6-4061-a2b6-346428195dd2 42d2c2ab-d0a5-4d01-bed9-b167f3046226 e42d3632-b710-4921-a999-8bb6a1e6023a



Am I Operating a Commercial Vehicle?

CCommercial Vehicle Operation

Three Key Factors for Excavator Selection

3 Key Factors 3 Key Factors2

AEM Construction Industry Hall of Fame

AEM_HallOfFameAEM Hall of Fame
Recognizing the Pioneering Spirit that Helps Our Industry Change the World
AEM Hall of FameThe Association of Equipment Manufacturers is proud to recognize those whose inventions, ideas, leadership and courage have made supreme contributions to the industry and to our quality of life.

The AEM Hall of Fame traces its roots to 1993 and development of the Construction Equipment Hall of Fame as a not-for-profit industry-wide initiative by Construction Equipment magazine. AEM served on its Board of Directors; the first Hall of Fame induction ceremony was held at CONEXPO 1993 and the last ceremony in 1999. The Hall lapsed in the early 2000s and AEM took over ownership and operation in 2008 creating the AEM Hall of Fame.

The AEM Hall of Fame honors the pioneering individuals who invented, managed, built and led the off-road equipment industry. Individually and collectively they represent some of the best, brightest and most influential minds in the history of the off-road equipment industry.

By honoring these individuals, the AEM Hall of Fame also strives to instill a deeper public understanding and appreciation for the continuing role of our industry in global business success and continued growth for our unparalleled standard of living.

Now, more than ever, we face the challenges of navigating a changing global economy. In no small way, the off-road equipment industry and its leadership will steer the way to increased employment and a higher gross national product. The example of the AEM Hall of Fame members is also a beacon for the workforce development necessary for future excellence in the off-road equipment industry.

Even more great accomplishments are on the horizon as our industry continues to work with corporations, government agencies, industry and business groups and the public to build a better and more productive society.

Nomination Process
The AEM Hall of Fame accepts nominations year-round. Please honor those who have risen to the elite of our industry with a nomination to the AEM Hall of Fame.

Inductees into the AEM Hall of Fame should exemplify five guiding principles:

Industry Contributions
Corporate Citizenship/Social Responsibility
Download the Nomination Form

For more information about AEM Hall of Fame or the nomination process, contact AEM’s Jordanne Waldschmidt (jwaldschmidt@aem.org, Tel: 414-298-4152)

ABC Reports: Nonresidential Construction Spending Inches Lower in March

CEU2“Up until six months ago, the U.S. economy was manifesting surging momentum, but the last six months have been disappointing.”—ABC Chief Economist Anirban Basu

Spending 5.1Nonresidential construction spending has now declined during each of the year’s first three months, according to a May 1 report by the U.S. Census Bureau. In March, nonresidential construction spending fell 0.1 percent on a monthly basis, though the pace of spending is still 4.7 percent higher than at the same time one year ago. Spending for the month totaled $611.8 billion on a seasonally adjusted, annualized basis. Spending estimates for both January and February were upwardly revised—the estimate for February construction spending rose from $611.5 billion to $612.4 billion and January’s estimate was revised from $611.9 to $613.1.

“Up until six months ago, the U.S. economy was manifesting surging momentum, but the last six months have been disappointing.” said Associated Builders and Contractors Chief Economist Anirban Basu. “The recovery’s momentum has slowed to a crawl. Lower energy prices and their impact on investment spending, a stronger U.S. dollar, weather, and the West Coast port slowdown have all conspired to undo the economic momentum apparent during mid-year 2014. However, there is little reason for despair. Last year also got off to a hobbled start, but the economy still managed to expand 2.4 percent in 2014. This year can still be better, including for nonresidential construction.”

Seven of 16 nonresidential construction subsectors posted increases in spending in March on a monthly basis.

  • Manufacturing-related construction spending expanded 3 percent in March and is up 50.3 percent for the year.
  • Office-related construction spending expanded 2.2 percent in March and is up 19.8 percent from the same time one year ago.
  • Construction spending in the transportation category grew 1 percent on a monthly basis and has expanded 9.2 percent on an annual basis.
  • Lodging-related construction spending was up 5.2 percent on a monthly basis and 22 percent on a year-over-year basis.
  • Health care-related construction spending expanded 0.2 percent for the month, but is down 0.2 percent for the year.
  • Spending in the water supply category expanded 4 percent from February and is up 2.3 on an annual basis.
  • Communication-related construction spending expanded 12.3 percent for the month and is down 8.5 percent for the year.

Spending in nine nonresidential construction subsectors failed to rise in March.

  • Public safety-related construction spending slipped 2.8 percent on a monthly basis and is down 9.1 percent on a year-over-year basis.
  • Commercial construction spending was down 2.2 percent in March, but is up 12.8 percent on a year-over-year basis.
  • Religious spending fell 5.1 percent for the month and is down 17.6 percent from the same time last year.
  • Sewage and waste disposal-related construction spending shed 0.2 percent for the month, but has grown 19.6 percent on a 12-month basis.
  • Power-related construction spending fell 4.5 percent for the month and is 17.2 percent lower than at the same time one year ago.
  • Highway and street-related construction spending fell 2.4 percent in March and is down 5.3 percent compared to the same time last year.
  • Conservation and development-related construction spending fell 11.4 percent for the month, but is up 12.3 percent on a yearly basis.
  • Amusement and recreation-related construction spending fell 3 percent on a monthly basis, but is up 23.8 percent from the same time last year.
  • Education-related construction spending fell 1.8 percent for the month and is down 3 percent on a year-over-year basis.

To view the previous spending report, click.