FIND A CONTRACTOR BUYER'S GUIDE
BECOME AN INDUSTRY PARTNER
MCAA Logo
MEMBER LOGIN JOIN
NEWS
Join Us For The 75th Anniversary Midyear Meeting Sep 7-11 ↗

Stop the Federal Government Picking Winners and Losers

Words: Stephen BorgAs Congress returns from its August recess, I wanted to take this time to bring a new bill to your attention and ask that you share our concerns with your local members of Congress. On April 28, 2016, Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) introduced S. 2892, the Timber Innovation Act (TIA). Then, on July 14, 2016, Rep. Suzan DelBene (D-WA) introduced the companion House legislation as H.R. 5628. Specifically, the legislation directs the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to establish a research and development program “advancing” the use of wood in tall buildings 10 floors and higher. It also creates a grant program for state and local communities to promote the use of wood materials in construction of these buildings over other materials and establishes a competition for tall wood building design.

The Mason Contractors Association of America (MCAA) has many concerns with this legislation, but our main objections center on the safety and soundness of the built environment – including tall wood buildings – and the federal government providing an unfair advantage to one building material over all others. As a result of our concerns over this bill and the timber industry’s aggressive lobbying effort, MCAA has joined a coalition – a diverse group of stakeholders consisting not only of the construction and building materials sector but also insurance and firefighters’ organizations – in opposition to this bill and has been meeting with Congressional offices to raise our concerns.

Our main argument against this legislation is that we believe it is inappropriate for the federal government to pick winners and losers for building materials in the construction industry, especially at U.S. taxpayers’ expense. The wood industry already benefits from an industry-funded federal check-off program, which is entirely appropriate. Putting the federal government in the position of promoting one industry at the expense of others would be inappropriate and counterproductive for job growth. The federal government should instead be promoting fair competition in the marketplace. It is critically important to allow the engineers, architects, general contractors, material suppliers, and other interested and affected parties to determine the best practices for designing and constructing buildings based on sound science and engineering standards.

Our coalition also has serious concerns about the safety of extensive wood use in tall building construction and has been raising this issue in many of our meetings. Model building codes, including the International Building Code (IBC), classify mass timber as a combustible construction material with longstanding limitations on building height and area in order to mitigate the inherent risk to firefighters, first responders and building occupants. Recent code proposals, sponsored by the wood industry seeking to amend these limitations, have been considered and rejected. The code development process provides the appropriate consensus mechanism for interested parties and building science experts to evaluate changes in the interest of public safety. We encourage the federal government to allow the code development process to continue to evaluate the risk associated with timber construction in a comprehensive manner, without the appearance of a preference for any one construction material, as suggested by the TIA legislation.

As members of Congress return to Washington, D.C., the MCAA and our coalition partners will continue to sound the alarm in regards to this legislation, but we are asking for your help as well. Take the time to educate your local member of Congress on the Timber Innovation Act, and ask him/her to oppose this dangerous legislation.
About: Legislative
 0
From Bikes to Buildings: Part 2
September 2025

As rainscreen wall designs become increasingly prevalent in today’s construction environment, there have been questions regarding their design. How wide should the capillary break be? How do we create this capillary break? Can the same methods be used i

Keith Lolley
Technical Talks
Read More
Vibing Masonry #8: CMU’s Durability and Maintenance Value
September 2025

Heading to Spokane, WA, I found myself riding the airport tram at O’Hare in Chicago. Looking out the window at a part of the 26-year-old International Terminal 5, I spotted a painted structural steel beam in front of a concrete masonry unit (CMU) wall. Th

Steve Blye
Technical Talks
Read More
Keeping it Clean: Lifecycle Maintenance for Manufactured Stone Veneer
September 2025

One of the many benefits of manufactured stone veneer is that it’s a robust, durable product that requires little maintenance over the course of its life span. In fact, its irregularity in shape and color helps hide minor dirt and dust. But like any build

Jeff Tew
Technical Talks
Read More
MCAA's Wall Evaluator: The Future of Masonry Training and Assessment
September 2025

MCAA Wall Evaluator, Masonry Training, Masonry Assessment, 3D Scanner, AR Glasses, Digital Twin, Digital Mesh, Point Cloud, Infrared VCSEL, Vocational Technology, EdTech, Standardized Assessment, Objective Evaluation, Data-Driven Feedback, Portable Traini

Dan Kamys Jason Blake Jeff Buczkiewicz Jordan Van Leeuwen
Read More