Better believe it, folks. Alaska Congressman Don Young, a conservative Republian, is taking very seriously his job of shaping a national infrastructure program as chairman of the powerful Transportation Committee of the U.S. House.

Young has a lot more on his agenda than bike trails, of course. The list starts with the rebuilding of crumbling interstate highways and the building of major north-south highway networks to relieve congestion.

He has a couple of bridge projects in mind for Alaska, too.

Anchorage is a prime example of a city that needs more sidewalks, Young said.

The big priority on Young's list for 2004 is the reauthorization of the six-year federal surface transportation program, which is about to emerge from the House Transportation Committee to begin a tortuous path through the U.S. Congress. Young said the bill should clear his committee in February.

There's little debate over the need for a massive fixup for the nation's surface transportation system, but there's a big debate over how much it should cost and more important, how it will be paid for, Young said.

Young wants $375 billion for the six-year surface transportation program. He's now horsetrading on the numbers with the White House and the U.S. Senate, he said. According to Young, the White House is willing to go for $244 billion and the Senate seems willing to talk about a $318 billion program. Young has been able to get House Speaker Dennis Hastert to talk in terms of $350 billion.

He's somewhat confident the final number will be in the higher ranges. "I think I have a wall built around $350 million, and I think I can persuade the president to agree to another $25 billion," he said.

That means a lot for Alaska, of course. Under the distribution formula being proposed in the bill, Alaska could get $450 million per year or more, he said. Alaska now gets about $300 million per year under the current federal transportation act.

There is also the possibility of special projects Young hopes to secure approval for, including $200 million for the long-discussed Knik Arm crossing. The total cost of the project is estimated at $900 million, so the remaining $700 million for the project must come from other sources, he said.

He foresees a bridge built to accommodate at least two lanes of traffic with the capability of being expanded to four lanes, or four lanes might be built right from the beginning. Young said he'll leave the details of the project to others, mainly the new Knik Arm crossing authority. He would like to see it built with the capability of eventually handling trains as well.

"It is a big project, but quite frankly in view of many of the other large infrastructure projects being built or planned around the country it's not that big at all," Young said.

Besides the home-state projects, Young's focus is mainly on the reauthorization of the surface transportation act. There hasn't been much done to modernize the interstate highway system since it was built by President Eisenhower in the 1950s, and repairs in many places have been neglected, Young said.

He sees repairing and modernizing surface infrastructure as key to the nation retaining its economic competitiveness.

The loss of productivity due to traffic congestion imposes huge costs that are not being recognized, he said. "The average American worker spend 68 hours a month just sitting in traffic, burning about $1,100 per year in fuel as the car idles," Young said.

One priority should be building major north-south highways. The interstate system is mainly east-west, and when it was planned no one conceived there could be anything like the North American Free Trade Act (NAFTA) that has caused mushrooming U.S.-Canada trade, and huge volumes of new truck traffic.

The main east coast north-south route, Interstate 95, for example, is clogged with heavy trucks. Young counted 150 virtually in a row during one trip he took on I-95, he said. There are big costs to the economy in traffic, wear and tear on roads because trucks in heavy traffic brake often and add wear to road surfaces, as well as accidents, injuries, lost lives and lost time, he said.

"Our roads weren't built for the kind of heavy loads that are now being moved," Young said. Neither were bridges. There are 136 major bridges approaching the point where they are dangerous, he said.

The solution is not just more highways but things like truck lanes paid for by tolls, or even highways designated for trucks.

Truckers aren't happy about tolls, but experience has proven again and again that designated toll-only lanes are effective in serving people with a need to get somewhere faster, and a willingness to pay more, Young said. Productivity gains will far offset costs, he said.

Tolls to support new roads are just one of Young's ideas of how to pay the huge cost of modernizing infrastructure. A higher federal fuel tax is another idea, which has subjected Young to substantial criticism.

He doesn't care whether it's a gas tax or some other way of raising revenue linked to use of highways, Young said. The core idea is a user fee, that whoever uses highways helps pay for their upkeep and renewal.

The higher gas tax is just one idea; there are other kinds of user fees. Another approach is a one-time federal auto or truck registration fee paid at the time of purchase, or paid annually, Young said.

He acknowledges that the gas tax is very sensitive politically because consumers note it every time they fuel up. On the other hand, it could be harder for a middle-income or lower-income consumer to handle a large lump-sum highway use tax, such as through a registration fee.

No way of paying will be popular, but upgrading the nation's highways, bridges and ports are vital and a way to finance the work must be found, Young said.