Transportation for America, Author at Transportation For America

About Transportation for America

For general inquiries about the campaign, email info [at] t4america [dot] org.

USDOT’s new memo requires a review of competitive grant awards

A leaked policy memo from leadership at USDOT will add a new layer of extra-legal review of all awarded competitive grant projects without fully signed federal funding obligations, calling for bicycle infrastructure, green infrastructure, and EV chargers to be cut from projects.

What’s in USDOT’s new memo?

Drawing authority from the President’s inaugural slate of executive orders and the Secretary of Transportation’s first round of policy memos, the Department of Transportation Secretary’s office has, according to a leaked policy memo, issued another round of unprecedented orders, calling for the removal of all elements of projects related to bike infrastructure, charging infrastructure, climate change or those that take equity into account competitive grant funding. The memo specifically applies to competitive grants that have not yet completed grant agreements or obligated the funding, including those that have only been partially obligated. Projects with existing and executed grant agreements are not subject to additional review, but any new federal dollars made out to those projects would be.

What’s the difference between funding that is announced or obligated?

When the federal government announces an award, the awardee does not get that funding as a grant. First, the federal government and the awardee have to negotiate and sign a funding agreement, which lays out the project scope, schedule, and budget and demonstrates the availability of required nonfederal funding match.

Funds can be canceled or reclaimed until they are obligated, which is a binding commitment to pay out money. Funding cannot be obligated until the grant agreement is signed and all permitting and relevant regulations are complied with. Planning grants that don’t have those regulatory requirements are obligated once there is a signed grant agreement. However, capital (ie, construction) projects would need to complete regulatory review and permitting before being obligated.

Once there is a grant agreement and funds are obligated, an awardee must spend their own funding and file for reimbursement from the federal government.

This memo instructs USDOT operating administrations, like The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), to conduct a project-by-project analysis to identify any activities that include primary elements of “equity, climate change, environmental justice, green infrastructure, bicycle infrastructure, electric vehicles, and charging infrastructure.” Once projects are identified for non-compliance with the administration’s priorities, they will be subject to individual scrutiny for a final decision on whether they will be canceled, modified, or continue as planned. Projects that contain “flagged activities” could be revised, even if they meet all requirements of law, to comply with this administration’s agenda. This comes full circle from the “Woke Rescission” memo, which we unpacked in a previous blog, and follows the episode of STIP and TIP review of obligated projects that were recently walked back (though the new burdensome review remains an issue for environmental permits, according to a recent letter from AASHTO).

While it is normal for a new administration to set its own agenda, it has always applied to spending and policy going forward. This administration is setting the precedent that any project not underway can be undone when there is a new president. This memo furthers the agenda laid out in the “Unleashing American Energy” memo, which calls for increased reliance on fossil fuel consumption.

Under this approach, USDOT will reach back to 2022 to defund many projects that Congress specifically defined as eligible activities in the text of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Congress defines the scope of what federal programs can fund. Even under the Biden administration—despite its commitments to advancing zero-emission transportation—USDOT still followed congressional intent by awarding the statutorily required 25% of funds to more emitting fossil fuel buses under the Low or No Emission bus program, despite strong demand for zero-emission buses from applicants.

By nature of being eligible for funding, the bike, green infrastructure, and EV chargers elements of projects already got the okay for funding from Congress on a bipartisan basis. If this becomes precedent, future presidents could make unilateral decisions to freeze funding for any project that does not align with their own priorities. Allowing the pendulum to swing back and forth every four years undermines the rationale of the supposedly stable highway trust fund—perhaps further evidence that the model is no longer sustainable. If funding appropriated years in advance can be arbitrarily revoked, why even plan beyond the next fiscal year?

For an administration that has spoken at length about the elimination of waste, fraud, and abuse, even absent the hugely dangerous and detrimental impact this will have on people’s health, safety, and long-term environmental sustainability of the transportation system, these reviews are going to slow down projects they would want to proceed. Actions like these continue to sow confusion and are inefficient, waste staff time, and squander funds and resources at the federal and local levels.

What’s at stake

Nearly $2.9 billion in funding was announced for the Safe Streets and Roads for All grant program for projects in over 1,700 communities. Only $515 million has been obligated across 979 grant,s according to a search of USASpending data. The vast majority of this program’s funding, $2.4 billion, and hundreds of communities receiving assistance through this program would now be subject to review and renegotiation due to this memo.

About $7.6 billion was announced under the RAISE/BUILD program for federal fiscal years 2022 through 2025. Still, only $1.25 billion, or less, of funding has been secured and obligated, leaving the rest of the announced funds, representing potentially hundreds of projects, stuck once again in the grant review process.

Zooming out to the whole program, based on data last updated by the USDOT on January 31, the Federal Highway Administration, the Federal Transit Administration, and the Federal Railroad Administration have a combined $51 billion in funds unobligated for non-formula programs. Much of these funds are now likely subject to review, cuts, and delays.

It likely will not stop there

While the current memo applies to competitive grants, there is good reason to expect that this administration will expand this review to cover other programs, too, if they find they don’t agree with how states, regions, localities, and transit agencies are using the funds.

For example, new, flexible formula programs created in the IIJA designed to address infrastructure resiliency, greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, and build out the national network of electric vehicle infrastructure remain at risk and could be the next target for politicized review and freezes. Further, if Congress decides to rescind funds for impounded or frozen climate-related programs, the impacts would disproportionately hit rural states, likely disrupting planned projects of all types. Carbon Reduction Program and PROTECT funds have been programmed for anything from new highway lighting to tunnel rehabilitation. Members of Congress should be aware of how cuts to these programs may fall hardest on whose constituents.

A pause for TransportationCamp DC

backs of people at tcamp sticking sheets of paper with session proposals on the board

After careful consideration, Transportation for America is announcing that we have decided to pause TransportationCamp DC this coming January. For years, we’ve enjoyed hosting the event and particularly enjoyed bringing together all of the dedicated transportation leaders and advocates to share ideas, shape the future of mobility, and tackle pressing challenges like emissions reduction and street safety.

While it was a hard decision, it ultimately came down to two things: timing and resources. With the New Year’s Holiday falling on the Wednesday before TCamp, there’s not sufficient time for our staff to conduct the intense preparations that make this event so successful. Additionally, hosting the event requires significant funding and venue flexibility, which have been harder to secure in recent years, and this year in particular.

We understand that this year’s pause may be disappointing, but it offers a chance to reimagine how we can sustain the “unconference” in Washington, DC. If you or your organization would like to support future TransportationCamps through sponsorship or other contributions, we’d love to hear from you.

Thank you for being part of the TransportationCamp community. We look forward to working together to advance the conversations and new ideas that make this event so special.

We’ll see you soon!
Transportation for America

Another hurdle cleared for passenger rail on the Gulf Coast

Today, the Federal Railroad Administration, Amtrak, the Port of Mobile, CSX, and Norfolk Southern (NS) signed a $178 million grant agreement to fund necessary construction between Mobile and New Orleans, an important hurdle for passenger rail service to return to the Gulf Coast.

The signed agreement for a $178 million Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) grant is a critical step that represents 17 years of concerted efforts toward restoring passenger rail on the Gulf Coast after Hurricane Katrina. This agreement includes funding for station and rail infrastructure improvements along the route in Alabama, Mississippi, and Louisiana, all required for service to return.

“Every step towards the return of passenger rail is a victory for the people who call the Gulf Coast home,” said Transportation for America Chair John Robert Smith. “The past two decades of tireless efforts by the Southern Rail Commission and other champions have made it possible for service to come back even better than before, giving people more freedom to choose how they want to travel.”

This announcement coincides with a groundbreaking for passenger rail in Mobile, Alabama with Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg and other federal leaders, where these funds will be used toward station siding and an ADA-compliant platform. The CRISI will fund station improvements in Mobile and New Orleans, safety improvements along the route, multimodal connection, and rail line improvements. Once these improvements are made, local leaders will be able to create safe routes and welcoming places for all travelers along the Gulf Coast. We look forward to the ultimate result of these efforts: the return of service.

Progress on the Gulf Coast would not have been possible without Senator Wicker’s leadership in creating CRISI and for his steadfast support for this project for the past decade. In addition, Senators Cochran and Hyde-Smith have dedicated invaluable time and resources to the restoration of service.

Transportation for America supports the Southern Rail Commission to champion the efforts to return service in the Gulf Coast and across the Deep South.

A smaller footprint for freight

A cyclist rides his cargo-bike down a New York Street

Freight plays a valuable role in keeping our communities and local economies thriving, but heavy freight vehicles pose unique challenges to community roads and air quality. Fortunately, not all good things have to arrive in a diesel-powered package.

The following post was co-authored by T4A Policy Manager Corrigan Salerno and T4A Policy Intern Sam Packman.

The size of the vehicles on our roadways can make a big impact on our travel. Larger vehicles are harder on our roads, leading to an increased need for maintenance. Large freight vehicles, often diesel-powered, produce harmful emissions that have historically hurt marginalized communities the most. And the larger a vehicle is, the more likely a crash will result in a death, particularly for people walking. However, they also serve an essential purpose: carrying the goods we need.

Fortunately, efforts to address the size and carbon-footprint of freight vehicles are already making inroads across the country.

Reducing freight emissions

Because medium- and heavy-duty vehicles are major sources of both greenhouse gas emissions and toxic air pollution, reducing tailpipe emissions and oil use in this sector can support improved public health outcomes and help mitigate the climate crisis.

In our work co-leading the Coalition Helping America Rebuild and Go Electric (CHARGE), we advocate for policymakers to engage closely with communities most impacted by freight pollution and maximize benefits to create or maintain high-quality manufacturing jobs. Multiple groups in CHARGE are leading the way to help reduce medium- and heavy-duty vehicle emissions. Among them, the Electrification Coalition leads a consortium of industry partners toward freight electrification. CALSTART’s Trucks and Non-Road Vehicle Initiative supports faster adoption of low-emission, high-efficiency trucks and heavy equipment. Last year, the Environmental Defense Fund released a report to guide municipalities on how to form and evaluate Urban Freight Partnerships, stakeholder engagement groups that shape decision-making around urban freight.

CHARGE also supports policies that reduce distances traveled by larger freight vehicles while transitioning shorter, urban freight deliveries to electric micromobility, where applicable.

What does micromobility have to do with freight?

While large freight vehicles come in handy for long trips, when they make last-mile deliveries below full capacity, they produce just as many harmful tailpipe emissions as they do at full capacity. In these instances, cleaner, smaller, and safer microfreight options can help.

A man in an orange vest drives a pedal-powered vehicle that can fit in a bike lane — *NYC DOT pedal-assist e-cargo bicycle, “Cargi B” (NYC DOT)*

From more traditional electric bikes with space for cargo to new types of wider pedal assist bikes with semi-enclosed cabins and capacious holds, the flexibility of microfreight enables deployment in a variety of contexts. These vehicles can transport smaller amounts of cargo and thanks to their smaller size, they’re able to bypass road congestion, avoid clogging up the road themselves, and reduce wear on local roads. As an added bonus, the cost to charge e-cargo bikes can beat out fueling heavy vehicles.

Already on streets across the country, microfreight works well with a microhub model, where goods are first transported by traditional heavy- or medium-duty vehicles to an urban hub, then taken to their final destination. Learn more about how microfreight can support last-mile deliveries here.

Modernizing and improving the efficiency of our freight vehicles can support the nation’s efforts to maintain our roadways, improve traffic safety, and reduce harmful emissions. As innovations continue to move forward, policy will play a key role in ensuring efforts to reduce the most negative impacts of freight will succeed.

Even in California, infrastructure spending is a climate time bomb. Here’s how to fix it.

Governor Gavin Newsom wears a blue suit and tie, smiling from a podium

Without full transparency on California’s transportation spending, the state’s transportation investments will never align with our climate goals.

This post by Transform Policy Director Zack Deutsch-Gross and T4A Policy Manager Corrigan Salerno was originally published by Next City. Click here to read the original.

With the fifth largest economy in the world, California has for decades set the tone for what is possible on climate, with other states and even countries looking to it for bold policy leadership and direction. Yet while Gov. Gavin Newsom continues to tout California as a climate leader, his transportation agency—operating with little public oversight or accountability—continues to advance harmful projects that will guarantee future increases in emissions.

Nowhere is this contradiction more apparent than in how California is spending its Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) dollars.

The 2021 Bipartisan Infrastructure Law was hailed by the Biden Administration as the biggest investment in climate in U.S. history. It devoted $1.2 trillion to “rebuild America’s roads, bridges and rail, tackle the climate crisis, advance environmental justice, and invest in communities that have too often been left behind.” But states were given enormous latitude in choosing how to spend the hundreds of billions intended for transportation.

Both states and the federal government failed to embrace climate-forward policy to implement the infrastructure law, predictably directing funds to emissions increasing highway building. California’s current IIJA spending will result in a net increase of over 2.2 million metric tons of greenhouse gasses above pre-IIJA levels by 2040, according to a recent analysis of IIJA grant awards in California by Transportation for America. Despite ambitious climate legislation and impressive emissions reduction targets, California has dedicated more IIJA funds toward emissions-increasing projects than any state except Florida and Texas.

Driving this increase in emissions is the over $2 billion of federal dollars alone that California’s Department of Transportation, Caltrans, is spending on highway expansion. Building more and wider roads encourages more people to drive, undercuts public transit investments and increases greenhouse gas emissions. Transportation is the largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions in California, and one of the few sectors where emissions are still increasing annually. Yet while the state is literally on fire, Caltrans is doubling down on climate arson—a term we do not use lightly.

California’s IIJA spending begins to explain why we are off track when it comes to meeting climate goals. What about the rest of the state’s $30 billion in annual transportation spending?

Unfortunately, we don’t know. Caltrans does not collect and publicly display data in an accessible manner, and reports to the legislature are piecemeal at best. RebuildingCA.ca.gov, the public dashboard Caltrans uses to report on projects, is the best available resource to learn how transportation dollars are being spent in your community. But the website includes no information about how these projects contribute to improving safety, increasing opportunity in disadvantaged communities, or addressing climate change.

This lack of accountability allows Gov. Newsom to proclaim himself a climate leader even as his transportation agency fails to live up to his public promises. We need transparency if we are to hold state agencies to account.

Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo’s Transportation Accountability Act, AB 2086, which Transform is cosponsoring with The Greenlining Institute, will change that.

AB 2086 requires Caltrans to publicly demonstrate how its annual spending on major transportation programs is advancing the vision and goals of the California Transportation Plan. It will streamline existing, fragmented transportation reporting efforts into a uniform and consistent format made publicly available online. This will ensure that the public, lawmakers, and transportation decision-makers can easily access and understand how California’s transportation investments impact their communities and align with the state’s goals.

Now more than ever, we need more than rhetoric. We can’t expect another generational infrastructure investment from the federal government, and in tight budget years to come, California needs to maximize the return on every transportation dollar it spends.

We need to rebuild public trust by demonstrating results to voters through transparent, public reporting. We need to put our money where our mouth is by prioritizing climate-friendly transportation investments. While AB 2086 won’t change transportation spending overnight, it is an essential step toward addressing the climate crisis with fundamental good governance. Without it, all we can expect is continued inaction.

Building a charging network that works

An assortment of people walk down a wide sidewalk near a brightly colored apartment building

It’s nearly impossible to move forward with a transition to electric vehicles without a network of chargers in place. However, though some federal funds have rolled out to the states, efforts to build out a charging network still have a long way to go.

Transportation is one of the leading sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States. Take it from USDOT—any effective strategy to reduce emissions requires both a transition to electric vehicles and opportunities to travel outside of a car.

To support the shift toward more sustainable transportation, federal and state governments are funding vital infrastructure for non-gas and non-diesel options. Highways that reliably connect sustainable fuel sources are gaining a shiny new distinction: alternative fuel corridors, or AFCs.

AFCs have become a key aspect of national strategy toward reducing environmental harms. First name-dropped on Capitol Hill in 2009, state governments from California to New York have been supporting efforts toward non-gasoline or diesel fuels even before that, naming their own corridors as well as establishing tax credits and HOV lane access for electric and alternative fuel vehicles.

Federal legislation from as early as 2015 called for the designation of AFCs, allowing them to be mapped out on a national level. Alternative fuel corridors could be designated for five specific fueling types: hydrogen, propane, compressed natural gas, liquefied natural gas, and electricity. Among the alternative candidates on the list, electric vehicles have been the option of choice for everyday Americans looking to commute to work, school, and the grocery store with the occasional road trip for leisure.

While this early effort helped link individual states’ efforts to build a connected sustainable highway network, money to build infrastructure would not arrive until the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Under the IIJA, it’s up to states to deploy the majority of EV funds through the $5 billion National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure formula program, and the administration to handle the $2.5 billion Charging and Fueling Infrastructure program. The Departments of Transportation and Energy jointly administer and manage these programs through the Joint Office of Energy and Transportation, though the Federal Highway Administration plays the leading role.

Funding charging options

While the Biden administration has faced criticism for a sluggish EV charging station rollout, with fewer chargers deployed than hoped after 3 years, states each had to spin up individual programs for two-thirds of that funding. As states roll out their plans and start scaling deployment, we’ll begin to see progress accelerate.

In many states, NEVI sites are meeting trends in industry standardization, adopting the Tesla-led NACS guidelines for chargers while also including adaptors for CCS vehicles. The Department of Transportation has made progress in loosening and clarifying certain requirements for federal electrification programs. Under the first round of Charging and Fueling Infrastructure grants, half of the funding for EV and alternative fueling stations was initially required to be placed within 1 mile of alternative fuel corridors, a rule that helped functionally limit chargers largely to car-dependent gas stations and roadside malls.

However, the CFI Alternative Fuel Corridor program’s second round of funding expanded this radius to 5 miles, a change T4A has previously advocated for. This change comes just in time too, as applications for the current notice of funding are open until September 11, 2024. On top of that, the CFI grant can help build more than just car chargers — FHWA has clarified that some e-micromobility improvements can be added on top of CFI projects. Recently announced awardees of CFI Round 1B, like New York City, may be taking advantage of this. While CFI fills in many gaps, future programs should go all the way on supporting e-micromobility.

The gas station model won’t be enough

The EV transition alone can’t be the sole strategy toward fighting transportation emissions, and it’ll fail if we follow the same patterns as the gas-powered status quo. The basic mechanics of fueling are different, taking an average of two minutes for gas-powered cars versus the twenty required for EVs.

People stand to benefit from healthy, walkable services and amenities, but that environment is not easily found given the current infrastructure. Building charging stations in small town main streets off the highway, even if they may take slightly longer to access, could boost local economies while also providing a more engaging break from the road: walking to local parks, checking out mom-and-pop stores, or grabbing groceries from nearby markets.

Additionally, more thought must be placed into how chargers’ placements can influence driving patterns. Focusing charger construction along highways could lead to more time spent driving, leading to tire emissions and increased wear on our roadways due to the high weight of EV batteries.

Alternative fuel corridors are only as efficient as the types of vehicles that they transport: for natural gas and hydrogen options, which are more focused on long-distance freight, it makes sense for these fueling stations to be placed near industrial areas and highways. However, EVs that largely serve commuters should have charging stations placed where individuals live and work, not necessarily where people drive the longest.

While these programs are taking steps forward, we could go further to ensure that the EV transition is making the biggest benefit. Perhaps a new designation can be created for urban areas, where residents and pedestrians are forced to walk near the polluted air of crowded city streets. Alternative fueling zones, similar to the low emissions zones that limit polluting vehicles from accessing some city centers, could provide charging solutions to promote cleaner population centers. Prioritizing charging in urban offices and apartment buildings can boost charging access, making communities more energy-efficient and more convenient places to live and travel.

The bottom line

Constituents and markets—even in states deeply entrenched in America’s fossil fuel industry—have an appetite for greater choice in transportation. While the IIJA contained major funding wins for cleaner transportation options, its 2026 expiration is quickly approaching. As federal legislators plan the next transportation reauthorization’s funding for EVs, they need to remember it is not just how much funding to allocate, but what policy to enact to maximize benefits for all.

Transportation and extreme heat

A man in jeans and a white t-shirt walks along the side of a wide, sunny street

The following post was written by Mehr Mukhtar and London Weier.

Recent record-breaking temperatures demonstrate that we can no longer rely on old design approaches to meet the needs of our communities. Transportation infrastructure is no exception. Extreme heat can cause road surfaces to buckle and rail tracks to warp, leading to significant travel disruptions and safety concerns for commuters.

The heatwaves this past summer, where temperatures soared to record highs in the eastern and western parts of the US, starkly highlighted the vulnerability of our transportation infrastructure designed to meet the demands of past climate trends, not the trends we see today.

Sweltering heat has pushed transportation infrastructure, from roadways to railroads, to the brink, potentially leaving thousands of travelers stranded in the aftermath. Extreme heat has already caused major damage and disruptions, from planes being unable to take off in Phoenix to pavement buckling in Minnesota. Amtrak, too, recently witnessed service disruptions across the Northeast Corridor, and WMATA announced widespread delays in service. Asphalt and metal rails can expand and buckle under high temperatures, creating potentially unsafe travel circumstances. This results in delays caused by the need to reduce speed levels of train cars in the heat, brought about by the need to reduce speed levels of train cars in the heat, impacting travel plans for commuters. Extreme heat and other climate change induced weather events, such as rising sea levels, are poised to drastically increase the costs of maintaining, repairing, and replacing transportation infrastructure—at a time when the nation is already behind on roadway maintenance and repair.

Transportation infrastructure can also exacerbate the effects of extreme heat on our communities. The urban heat island effect, which occurs in urbanized areas, is partly caused by the large amounts of heat-absorbing materials found in buildings and roads. The impacts can make these heat events drastically more extreme, with pavement reaching temperatures of 160° F when the outdoor temperature breaches 100° F.

Community impacts

The impact of heat waves is not limited only to infrastructure. During the heatwaves this past June, over 30 million people were subjected to extreme heat advisories and their deadly effects as treacherously hot conditions persisted across the country. People walking, biking, or utilizing public transit are especially vulnerable to the health risks associated with extreme heat.

Imagine a bus user, navigating their typical commute on a record hot day where temperatures are breaking 100° F. The five-minute walk to the bus stop in the sweltering heat causes sweat droplets to form as soon as they leave their home. The sunlight bounces off surrounding buildings and structures, creating an almost blinding light, and fatigue sets in immediately. These conditions, exacerbated by the delay of a bus, or non-shaded shelters, can spiral into emergencies, such as heat exhaustion or heat stroke.

Often referred to as the ‘silent killer,’ extreme heat has profound health risks due to its effect on the body’s ability to regulate internal temperature. Health impacts of extreme heat disproportionately harm low-income communities and communities of color, as emphasized in a recent video released by Smart Growth America on the disparate burden of extreme heat experienced by communities in Atlanta. Low-income neighbors and communities of color more often lack trees, shade, and natural landscapes that can reduce the urban heat island effect. For some, a hot day means driving instead of taking transit, but for others, that option is nonexistent, and they are forced to endure the high temperatures out of necessity. Communities can use tools, such as the CDC’s Health and Heat Tracker, to determine if they are more vulnerable to extreme heat and develop their own heat preparedness plans (advice for decision makers on how to develop a heat preparedness plan can be found here).

At a recent congressional briefing on extreme heat resilience for community well-being co-hosted by the American Public Health Association and Massachusetts Senator Ed Markey, experts brought these impacts to the attention of federal legislators. At the core of Markey’s opening statement was the sentiment that “prevention is preferable to cure,” highlighting the importance of both responding to climate change-induced warming and reducing carbon emissions in order to avoid exacerbating climate conditions. It is clear that we will continue to contend with increased and more intense heatwaves in the future, requiring governments, community leaders and planners, and residents to urgently develop a vision for adapting to, and preparing for, a changing environment.

Resilience in the face of extreme heat

The impacts of extreme heat can threaten urban infrastructure that was not built to withstand such extreme weather events. Just as we created these conditions, we also have the opportunity to create environments that protect communities from the dangers of climate change and extreme heat.

With transportation policies and investments encouraging highways and sprawling development, communities have to drive further away to access the jobs and services they need to get to, causing more emissions to be generated. In combating extreme heat, a necessary strategy is measuring and reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and vehicle miles traveled (VMT) within the transportation sector is one way to help combat the impacts of extreme heat. With transportation policies and investments encouraging highways and sprawling development, communities have to drive further away to access the jobs and services they need to get to, causing more emissions to be generated. Tackling car-oriented design can play a significant role in not only reducing emissions but also mitigating the negative outcomes associated with extreme heat.

Other ways that we can address extreme heat in urbanized areas are heat mitigation and heat management. Heat mitigation seeks to reduce heat in our cities by changing the design of built environments. These initiatives might include incorporating more tree shade and native vegetation or using different building materials like more permeable and reflective pavements.

Heat management protects those in our communities when extreme heat can not be avoided. Management strategies could include improving bus shelters, establishing cooling centers, and creating heat preparedness plans. Approaching heat management with smart growth policies—like prioritizing location-efficiency, improving conventional zoning and land-use regulations, and adapting existing infrastructure—can drastically enhance effective response capabilities.

Additionally, our federal government should direct current and future investments toward building more resilient infrastructure. When government agencies, such as the Federal Highway Administration, set standards for materials used in new builds to be greener and better able to withstand high temperatures, they will ensure that taxpayer dollars are used to build a future that is sustainable and livable for all of the nation’s residents.

Solutions to the extreme heat crisis require bipartisan support to ensure that protections are enshrined in legislation and our built environments’ standards. Urbanized areas need to improve their resilience to extreme heat, especially our transportation system, to help ensure residents can safely travel to where they need to go, regardless of the temperature.

Full speed ahead: How federal leaders can keep building on passenger rail progress

Passenger rail efforts in the Gulf Coast demonstrated tireless commitment to federal advocacy, funding development, and ultimately service implementation. But if our nation’s leaders are truly interested in advancing a national network, they can take action now to support future efforts.

In recognition of recent progress for passenger service in the Coastal South, we’re releasing a four-part series exploring how unified regional and national approaches, supported by local advocacy and sound policy, can help create a successful passenger rail network. This is part four of the series, written by Mehr Mukhtar and London Weier. Read part one, part two, and part three.

In our last three blogs, we outlined the challenges and opportunities in the maintenance and expansion of passenger rail service in the country, with an emphasis on the story of recent achievements in the Gulf Coast. It’s clear that the 2021 federal infrastructure law (Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, or IIJA) unlocked a treasure trove of resources for advancing passenger rail in the United States, yet three years later, there’s still a great deal of progress to be made. This blog shares priorities for ensuring that we are making the most of this unlocked promise and possibility by creating a national vision for passenger rail.

National connectivity

Amtrak should continue to maintain and expand the connectivity and geographic coverage of the national network, as stipulated in the language of the IIJA. To ensure that the entire nation is served, both urban and rural, and judged by performance standards appropriate to the region served and type of service provided, the Northeast Corridor should not be treated as a separate entity to the entire national network.

Establish dedicated funding

Unlike public transit, aviation, and highways, passenger rail does not receive a dedicated source of revenue to build out its service. Instead, Amtrak relies on annual appropriations, which occur once each fiscal year. Our passenger rail network is living paycheck to paycheck, and that’s no way to invest in a long-term vision. In order to expand our network to its full potential, passenger rail needs to be treated as a service that has a future. Congress should set up a dedicated source of revenue for the development of passenger rail.

Encourage innovation

There are many private providers that, if given the opportunity, could lend their services and expertise to developing a robust passenger rail network. However, because Amtrak is the only passenger rail provider that can utilize the nation’s existing network of freight rail lines, it’s currently the only viable option to expand passenger rail across the country.

Extending the right-of-access to at least three providers would help spur innovation in passenger rail expansion, introducing new approaches, ideas, and competition. In addition, allowing freight or private providers to be eligible for federal funding for long distance service could further propel expansion.

Representation on the Amtrak Board of Directors

Amtrak’s existing board is not reflective of the geographic diversity of the communities across the nation that it serves or the types of service provided. An unrepresentative board prevents Amtrak from developing and advocating for strategic priorities that represent the interests of all of Amtrak’s users. The guidance laid out in the IIJA for representation on Amtrak’s board should be implemented and enforced.

Standardize the rail system

Right now, rail providers aren’t required to standardize their equipment, which means that any passenger rail network we create may require different equipment depending on the track design or power supply networks. This could lead to a disjointed rail network down the line, where only some trains are able to operate on certain tracks.

To ensure a streamlined customer experience and to make the most of taxpayer investments, equipment for conventional speed and high-speed rail should be standardized, as well as right-of-way infrastructure to ensure interoperability of the national system.

An upcoming opportunity

The 2021 infrastructure law is set to expire in 2026. At that point, our nation’s leaders will need to pass a new law, called the surface transportation reauthorization, to further enhance our nation’s transportation system. Reauthorization will present a monumental opportunity to reassert a consolidated vision for national passenger service. But we should be clear: there’s no need to wait. To make the most of the 2021 infrastructure law’s investments, our leaders can and should begin making progress on the priorities listed above right now.

From excitement to reality: Implementing passenger rail on the Gulf Coast

Passengers prepare to board an Amtrak train

Federal advocacy and allies were essential to turning local momentum for passenger rail from New Orleans to Mobile—set to reopen this very year—into a regional, and national, success story.

In recognition of recent progress for passenger service in the Coastal South, we’re releasing a four-part series exploring how unified regional and national approaches, supported by local advocacy and sound policy, can help create a successful passenger rail network. This is part three of the series, written by Mehr Mukhtar and London Weier. Read part one on the history of passenger rail, part two on building momentum for change, and part four on next steps for a national network.

As we explained in our last article on passenger rail in the Gulf Coast, in 2017, the Federal Railroad Administration’s Gulf Coast Working Group (GCWG) established that the region needs passenger rail expansion, first from New Orleans to Mobile—a major step in growing the region’s rail network. However, the restoration process would require infrastructure and operations investment.

At this point, Transportation for America had assisted the Southern Rail Commission with a variety of projects, including the 2016 ride-along that showcased local excitement for the restored route, but T4A started to take on a larger role to develop funding avenues, which could support the work that would come out of the FRA working group’s report.

Policy developments and funding

The first steps for the SRC and T4A was to find their champions, those legislators that would work to develop and support policy that could fund passenger rail restoration in the Gulf Coast. Senator Roger Wicker, former Chair of the Senate Commerce Committee; Senator Maria Cantwell, former Ranking Member and current Chair of the Senate Commerce Committee; and former United States Representative Peter DeFazio were key supporters of various initiatives brought to attention by the SRC and T4A.

A key initiative of the Southern Rail Commission, spearheaded by Chairman Knox Ross and Vice Chair John Spain, was advocating for the creation of passenger rail funding avenues on the federal level. They argued that federal funding sources, when combined with local financial support, would help build a cohesive and unified approach to restoration. Out of these efforts came two federal grant programs, the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) program and the Restoration and Enhancement (R&E) program, which provided the Gulf Coast with the resources needed to turn two decades of advocacy into action. These wins are a perfect example of the nationwide impact Gulf Coast efforts have had, as these federal grant programs provide funding for passenger rail expansion across the country.

The CRISI grant program makes funding available for projects which improve safety, efficiency, and reliability of intercity passenger rail and freight rail. In 2022, the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) was awarded this grant for the final design and construction of infrastructure needs for the Gulf Coast Corridor Improvement Project. These funds illustrate an exciting new phase of passenger rail restoration in the Gulf Coast as the SRC, Amtrak, and FRA step into the implementation phase. Additionally, funds matched by the state governments of Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama in addition to matches provided by freight rail corporations CSX Transportation and Norfolk Southern Railway exemplify successful efforts to unify local, regional, and federal rail actors behind the project.

On the other hand, the Restoration and Enhancement (R&E) grant would aid in operations support. These funding opportunities not only provide the necessary resources to complete the New Orleans to Mobile train; they also provide the entire nation with an opportunity to implement rail restoration.

These successes led to a broad recognition of the need for rail compacts, not only in the Gulf Coast Region, but across the nation. The SRC had successfully advocated for funding avenues and seen initiatives across the Gulf Coast awarded funding for project implementation. Rail compacts were born out of the recognition that a cohesive and unified approach to implementing policy and funding mechanisms was required to develop intercity passenger rail services, as proven by the SRC’s efforts. The Interstate Rail Compacts grant program was created to provide financial assistance to support the activities of entities implementing rail compacts for the purpose of unifying governments along a corridor. This served as a valuable coordination tactic for aligning stakeholders to further the development of passenger rail in a given area.

Once an institution is created to help develop, guide, and oversee a passenger rail vision, it will need support to create an implementation strategy. The FRA created the Corridor Identification and Development Program (CIDP) to direct federal investments and technical assistance towards priority rail corridors for new or improved intercity passenger rail services. This collaboration would help develop corridors that are desired by local communities and states, while also advancing passenger rail connectivity not only within their region but across the country. In December 2023, the FRA awarded the SRC $500,000 through this program to develop the I-20 passenger rail corridor, which would connect Shreveport, Ruston, and Monroe to Dallas, Texas. The commitment of funds towards developing passenger rail service reflects the interest of the FRA in continuing to invest in the future of passenger rail in the Gulf Coast region, and nationally.

A notable characteristic of the CIDP is the desire to highlight what communities find valuable, rather than solely rely on a national vision to develop new routes.

Mobile and Amtrak negotiations

Aligning state and local support for implementation was a crucial aspect of revitalizing passenger rail service, as funding is hinged on subsidies from the states. The states of Louisiana and Mississippi both agreed to supply the match required for a federal grant covering operating assistance for six years in the project federal matching fund, while the state of Alabama opted out of picking up the costs. This shifted the responsibility of providing a match for the project to the city of Mobile, leaving confirmed funding sources for Gulf Coast service hanging in the balance.

After a series of long negotiations lasting almost over a year between Amtrak and the Mobile City Council regarding an operations agreement and station site lease, a deal has been struck. Mobile’s funding obligation would be split equally between the city, the state of Alabama and the Alabama State Port Authority. Although the details of sustained operating funding is still to be ironed out, this represents significant progress and partnership between these entities in the realization of the Gulf Coast service.

The next stop

With service expected to begin at the end of the year, the creation of policy and funding vehicles for improving and expanding passenger rail services across the country has been a tremendous success.

The expansion of passenger rail on the Gulf Coast reflects the common challenges our nation faces when expanding non-car-centric infrastructure, yet it is also an example of how to right those wrongs. The road to passenger rail restoration in the Gulf Coast has been a long one, but rail service is soon to resume. At the heart of this story are shared efforts between the SRC, FRA, Amtrak, regional and local elected officials, and community leaders, which have culminated in a new path forward for passenger rail in the region. In our final blog in this series, we’ll share the final lessons we learned from the Gulf Coast.

Building momentum for a national passenger rail network

A crowd of people gathers by an Amtrak train, a U.S. flag waving above them.

After the setbacks of the late 90s and early 2000s, passenger rail advocates along the Gulf Coast were not discouraged. Through the work of a Regional Rail Commission and the cultivation of relationships with local, regional, and federal leaders, these advocates were able to build a foundation for the implementation of passenger rail restoration in the region.

In recognition of recent progress for passenger service in the Coastal South, we’re releasing a four-part series exploring how unified regional and national approaches, supported by local advocacy and sound policy, can help create a successful passenger rail network. This is part two of the series, written by Mehr Mukhtar and London Weier. Read part one, part three, and part four.

*Hundreds of Gulfport, MS residents greet Amtrak representatives and local officials as the inspection train arrives Thursday, February 18, 2016.* *(Tim Meuller)*

In our last article on passenger rail, we ended on the double blow caused by Hurricane Katrina coupled with years of consistent divestment away from passenger rail. The impacts of these years weren’t unique to the Gulf Coast, with the negative impacts of divestment away from passenger rail service being felt across the nation. Reversing these trends has taken consistent efforts from champions to build both momentum and support for passenger rail.

The Southern Rail Commission, T4A, and other champions built relationships, cultivated policy, and established a desire for funding to grow the presence of passenger rail in the region. While these efforts aren’t unique to the Gulf Coast, we can turn our attention to this corner of the nation as a strong example of how to address this multitude of challenges, even when the odds are stacked against you.

The creation of the Southern Rail Commission

Authorized by Congress in 1982 as the nation’s first Regional Rail Commission, the SRC was awarded a designation as a future high-speed rail corridor along the Gulf Coast and up through Meridian, Mississippi. This was reflective of the momentum for passenger rail that had been building in the country.

For years, the SRC worked to expand rail in the Gulf Coast and connect regional lines with long distance ones, ultimately resulting in the first truly transcontinental rail line in American history. The designation as a future high-speed rail corridor further exemplified support for expanding passenger rail as it made available federal funds necessary for project planning and implementation. Yet, following Hurricane Katrina, the loss of crucial passenger rail connections was ignored in the great recovery despite the restoration of all other critical infrastructure.

The SRC stepped into this void, bringing the matter to local, regional, and national attention. A national energy for the restoration of passenger rail did not emerge out of thin air, rather, it was the concerted efforts on behalf of leaders across the country who optimistically believed in the reality of the train.

Map showing the stops of the restored route from New Orleans to Mobile, making stops in Bay St. Louis, Gulfport, Biloxi, and Pascagoula along the way. — *(Southern Rail Commission)*

Building excitement, locally and nationally

Elected officials, mayors, federal representatives, and community leaders tirelessly advocated for the economic, cultural, and mobility opportunities that the service had the potential to restore. Relationships were cultivated with advocates in Congress and the Senate, with leaders such as Senator Roger Wicker (MS) and Senator Thad Cochran (MS), who took positions as champions for expanding the national rail network, including restoring service on the Gulf Coast.

The Gulf Coast Working Group (GCWG) was authorized by Congress in 2015 to oversee the prospect of restoring passenger rail service, bringing attention to passenger rail as the backbone of the transportation system. Members of the group were tasked with evaluating options for intercity passenger rail restoration, selecting a preferred option for the route, and determining federal and non-federal funding mechanisms necessary to the restoration. Findings of the GCWG, as reported to Congress in 2017 in the Gulf Coast Working Group Report, determined that the first service that should be restored would be the New Orleans to Mobile route.

In the midst of developing the Gulf Coast Working Group Report, the Southern Rail Commission coordinated with the Federal Railroad Administration, Amtrak, and state and federal leaders to build local and regional excitement for the initiative. A defining moment arrived for the restoration of Gulf Coast passenger rail with the ride-along in 2016. The inspection train, traversing from New Orleans, LA to Jacksonville, FL, helped identify a potential route and examine the existing freight line infrastructure.

The inspection train arrives in Mobile, greeted by a crowd lined up by the tracks — *(Amtrak)*

As the train rolled into Mobile for the first time in nearly a decade, the passion for the rail line was on palpable display. Cheering crowds flocked to the platform showcasing the community’s desire to restore the rail connection and options for transportation and mobility for the region. Scores of people continued to throng the route to watch the train run, even when the train wouldn’t stop in their community, serving as testament to what restored service represented for communities in the Southeast—and proof of the political will needed for service to return. Transportation for America has worked with the SRC to build on this momentum through policy advocacy at the federal level.

Negotiations begin

Restoration of passenger rail faced numerous obstacles in its implementation, one of them being disagreements amongst freight rail carriers on the infrastructure requirements for the route. Freight carriers, CSX and Norfolk Southern, expressed concern about capacity challenges when their existing rail infrastructure would need to accommodate passenger rail trips.

Continued support and involvement from the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) helped resolve the disagreements and ensure that passenger service would be restored. In fact, the FRA’s involvement in the Gulf Coast Working Group Report to Congress found solutions to shared track schedules and illustrated the numerous benefits that track restoration would have to both freight rail and passenger rail. The success of these negotiations underscored the importance of collecting reliable and transparent rail data, and the ongoing value of collaboration between freight and passenger rail.

Political advocacy, community engagement, and the evolving discussions with freight rail laid the groundwork for restored passenger rail along the Gulf Coast. These efforts made it possible to begin negotiations and construction, but there are still some necessary components needed to make it to the finish line, most notably funding. Stay tuned for the next part of this series when we explore how the momentum for this cause is translated into implementation and wins!

What happened to U.S. passenger rail?

An empty black-and-white train track disappears into the fog

Almost a century ago, the railroads were the economic engine of the country, spurring the transportation of both goods and people over long distances. Now, the American railroad system is merely a specter of its former self. How did the United States devolve from an expanded passenger rail network to the system we have today?

In recognition of recent progress for passenger service in the Coastal South, we’re releasing a four-part series exploring how unified regional and national approaches, supported by local advocacy and sound policy, can help create a successful passenger rail network. This is part one of the series, written by Mehr Mukhtar and London Weier. Read part two on building momentum for change, part three on converting support into action, and part four on next steps for a national network.

The Rail Passenger Service Act of 1970 created the National Passenger Railroad Corporation (Amtrak as we know it today). The advent of the automobile, creation of the Interstate Highway System, and a boom in air travel all diverted passengers away from rail. Railroads began losing out on passengers, and in their desire to increase profits, they started viewing their requirement to maintain passenger railroads as a costly financial burden. Creating a dedicated entity to serve passenger rail was seen as the solution to shifting the burden of passenger railroads away from freight railroads.

The mission of Amtrak at its inception, to maintain a national passenger rail network, is a far cry from the current state of the corporation. This is largely due to a failure in government funding, as policymakers continue to criticize Amtrak for a lack of profits, even as a lack of funding diminishes the service. In 1995, Amtrak faced severe budget cuts by the federal government, forcing suspensions and reduced service across the country.

In most of the country, passenger service decreased from 7 days per week to only 3 days per week and some routes were permanently eliminated, devastating the frequency of the service and its reliability as a mode of commuting. This had particularly far-reaching consequences for smaller towns and cities that suddenly became disconnected from their passenger rail routes.

Despite this setback, local leaders coalesced to press Amtrak and Congress to restore many of these reductions in service. Congress responded by creating an entirely new Amtrak Board of Directors, and under new management, Amtrak made great strides in the Northeast Corridor with the rollout of Acela, their first high-speed rail, in 2000. They accomplished this all while improving long distance service and developing state supported service. These improvements were short-lived, however. Changing leadership of the board and executive staff led to decisions focused on the Northeast Corridor to the detriment of the national system. This deficiency of investments and oversight outside of the corridor stifled expansion in the rest of the nation.

In the Coastal South, as in much of the United States, this trend ultimately resulted in a passenger rail system that was failing to prioritize connectivity and meet the needs of the public. Hurricane Katrina was the final nail in the coffin.

In 1962, a robust web of passenger rail service skirted across the U.S.

By 2005, this network was immensely diminished, showing only a small smattering of distinct lines

Even before Hurricane Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, passenger service was experiencing an ongoing decline in every part of the country. Maps created by Michael Kenton using data from the Rail Passengers Association.

Disaster strikes

In 2005, Hurricane Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast of the United States, causing thousands of deaths and over $108 billion in property damage. Among the damage caused by the storm was considerable destruction of critical rail infrastructure, especially on the line between New Orleans, Louisiana (LA) and Mobile, Alabama (AL).

In the days immediately before and after the storm, all Amtrak service through New Orleans was halted. Today, three long distance trains depart from New Orleans Union Passenger Terminal, the City of New Orleans (service between New Orleans and Chicago), the Crescent (service between New Orleans and New York), and the Sunset Limited (service between New Orleans and Los Angeles).

Although the City of New Orleans and the Crescent returned in full swing about one month after Katrina made landfall, the Sunset Limited service was permanently changed. Prior to Katrina, Sunset Limited connected communities from coast to coast, running from Los Angeles to Orlando, Florida; however, since Katrina, the train reaches its final eastward destination in New Orleans.

The brunt of track damage occurred on the eastward bound sections of track connecting New Orleans to Mobile, an essential connection to continue Sunset Limited service to Orlando. Along this route, Amtrak passenger trains shared track belonging to freight companies CSX Transportation, Norfolk Southern (NS), and Union Pacific (UP). CSX took the brunt of storm damage and needed to restore five bridges and 40 miles of track that were completely washed out in the wake of Katrina. Norfolk Southern and Union Pacific lines also experienced considerable bridge damage and track repairs, including the need to restore felled power lines. Though freight rail lines took four months to repair, tracks shared by Amtrak (which were the responsibility of freight railroads to restore) took six months to recover.

In the almost two decades since Katrina made landfall, passenger rail lines leading eastward from New Orleans have not been restored. Post-hurricane rail restoration left this line out of the picture, an oversight that members of the impacted communities would fight for years to amend.

The loss of Gulf Coast service after Katrina had a particularly devastating impact on communities in the region, but the decline of passenger service in the South was also reflective of a larger disinvestment in passenger rail in every part of the country, particularly outside of the Northeast Corridor.

These lessons from the past can serve as a blueprint for the future of nationwide passenger rail that we are aspiring towards. New funding mechanisms and policy developments, such as the IIJA, capture the efforts to revive the historic role that passenger railroads have played in the country. Through decades-long advocacy with passenger rail groups across the country, Transportation for America has demonstrated that good policy, combined with the knowledge and expertise of dedicated advocates, can build momentum for improved service to reverse the deterioration our passenger rail system has witnessed. We’ll explain how in the next three parts of our series. Stay tuned!

Webinar: Transportation electrification and smart growth in the U.S.

A parking space painted green with a symbol indicating the space is dedicated for EVs

On Tuesday, May 14 from 2 – 3 p.m., we’re partnering with the International Parking & Mobility Institute to offer a free webinar exploring smart growth strategies. Register here.

Many climate advocates and pro-climate decision-makers are focused on electrification as the primary, or even only, emissions reduction solution in the transportation sector. As transportation advocates and professionals, we know that electrification is essential but insufficient to achieve our greenhouse gas reduction goals. How do we push transportation electrification forward in a way that supports essential smart growth goals?

This webinar will be a discussion with transportation electrification experts and parking and mobility professionals to discuss how smart growth strategies should work with transportation electrification policy to maximize climate, equity, mobility, quality of life, and sustainability benefits. This roundtable will elevate strategies that are compatible with and support vibrant communities, uplifting walkability, access, transit, shared mobility, and micromobility. Register now.

Offers one AICP credit and one CAPP point. To earn the CAPP point, attendees must attend the live webinar.

Recordings will be sent to those who cannot attend in person, but may not use this webinar for CAPP application or recertification.

Learning objectives

Review and discuss the role of transportation electrification in the content of broader mobility ecosystems and Smart Growth.
Understand fundamental concepts of Smart Growth that can be applied to maximize climate, equity, mobility, quality of life, and sustainability benefits.
Explore how featured Smart Growth strategies work to amplify and reinforce transportation electrification and other new innovative technologies and processes.

Presenters

Chris Rall, T4A Outreach Director

Chris Rall has been with Transportation for America since 2010, originally serving as Oregon Field Organizer. Incrementally expanding his role and responsibilities, he became Outreach Director in 2019. Chris runs T4America’s membership program, keeps partners and allies apprised of developments on transportation policy and opportunities for innovation, and guides T4America’s amplification of the local voices so critical to reforming the United States’ transportation system. Chris manages T4America’s co-leadership role in CHARGE (Coalition Helping America Rebuild and Go Electric) in which he helps a broad coalition of energy and transportation advocates find synergies that advance zero-emission transportation and smart growth at the same time. Before joining T4America, Chris co-founded Green Wheels, a local transportation advocacy organization in Humboldt County, CA, and served as Policy Director for the Healthy Humboldt Coalition. Originally from New Jersey, Chris graduated from the University of California at Berkeley, and received his graduate degree from Humboldt State University. He is based in Portland, OR.

Corrigan Salerno, T4A Policy Associate

Corrigan conducts research, provides technical assistance, and advocates for sustainable, equitable transportation policy. He has led research into the climate impact of the IIJA, evaluated the walkability of hundreds of new NEVI program charging stations, and helps coordinate the CHARGE Coalition of labor, environmental advocates, and industry groups that advocate for effective electrification policy. Prior to joining Transportation for America, Corrigan worked as a research assistant at a federal contractor assisting the Federal Highway Administration, focusing on human factors projects related to the MUTCD and connected/autonomous vehicles.

Questions?

For more information, contact Kathleen Federici, M. Ed., Director of Professional Development at the International Parking & Mobility Institute.

Restoring Buffalo’s “Emerald Necklace”

A park extends down the center of two narrow streets

Humboldt Parkway, once home to vibrant public space, was destroyed by the Kensington Highway, displacing over 600 families and leaving a concrete gash through Buffalo’s network of city parks. With federal support, the Kensington Expressway project aims to reconnect the community.

The rendering below is not an accurate depiction of the Kensington Expressway project. After hearing from local advocates, we’re working to uplift the on-the-ground experience that paints a different picture than the one we initially shared.

In the meantime, take a look at this article that sheds more light on the situation in Buffalo and check the rest of our case studies that demonstrate the right way to heal the divides caused by divisive infrastructure…and the stories where those efforts have gone wrong.

Why we need the Stronger Communities Through Better Transit Act

A diverse set of passengers (women and men, young and old) rides a bus down a sunny street

Representative Hank Johnson (GA-04) reintroduced the Stronger Communities Through Better Transit Act, which would establish a federal funding program for transit operations, providing $20 billion in annual funding over four years ($80 billion) to expand the service of buses and trains. We are joining the National Campaign for Transit Justice, the Transport Workers Union of America (TWU) and the Amalgamated Transit Union (ATU) in support of this bill.

Public transit is essential to communities, local economies, and the lives of millions of people across the country. As they work to deliver frequent and reliable service, transit agencies can use federal funding to repair and maintain their systems and to build out new services—but they can’t use it to help cover the cost of operating their systems, which accounts for two-thirds of a transit agency’s total expenses. Agencies have to turn to local taxes, fares, and fees to cover this gap.

Faced with fiscal cliffs in the years after the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic plus escalating inflation, many transit agencies have been forced to reduce service rather than focusing on increasing ridership back to—and beyond—pre-pandemic levels. This crisis has demonstrated that the current approach is failing to meet the needs of millions of Americans who rely upon transit to reach their essential destinations.

The Stronger Communities Through Better Transit Act would modernize transit operations funding by creating a new formula grant program that can be used to make “substantial improvements to transit service.” Furthermore, the bill aims to allot funding for places that need it most, clearly defining funding for areas of persistent poverty and underserved communities—places where transit ridership tends to be highest.

“Getting people to work and providing essential services is the primary purpose of the transportation system, and it fails if it can only do that for people who have the money and ability to drive. With the Stronger Communities Through Better Transit Act, Rep. Johnson not only offers needed support for increased transit service to connect people with the things they need, but for the high quality, dependable transit service that people require for true access to opportunity.” —Beth Osborne, Director of Transportation for America

The U.S. relies on public transit to make our economy work. Americans depend on transit to get to where they need to go and help their businesses thrive. The U.S. needs to invest in frequent, reliable, and affordable transit, and the Stronger Communities Through Better Transit Act is a crucial step forward in achieving this vision.

Take Action

Transportation for America Applauds Long-awaited USDOT GHG Rule

The GHG emissions measure will require U.S. states and territories to measure and report transportation-related emissions on federal roadways.

WASHINGTON, D.C. (Nov. 27) — Last Wednesday (11/22), the Biden Administration released the U.S. Department of Transportation’s greenhouse gas (GHG) rule. The rule requires all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, to track greenhouse gas emissions associated with travel on the parts of the National Highway System that lie within their boundaries and sets a unified standard for reporting emissions.

Transportation is the leading contributor to GHG emissions in the U.S. and the performance measure is an important first step to advance climate goals by bringing sunlight to states’ progress on emissions targets, allowing states and MPOs to better align their work with climate goals, and demonstrating to policymakers and taxpayers what they are getting for their transportation investments.

“We thank USDOT for its leadership in requiring states to measure GHG emissions from transportation,” said Beth Osborne, Director of Transportation for America. “Because transportation is responsible for nearly a third of climate emissions nationwide, and as much as half in some metro areas, determining the impact of transportation investments on climate emissions is essential for understanding how well the transportation system is performing. It is hard to think of a way that states could participate in a solution without articulating the current problem and setting targets for achieving them.”

“This rule is a crucial first step toward climate accountability in transportation and very simple for the states to implement, but we must go further by investing in public transportation and location efficiency to allow people to reach the things they need without being forced to drive more and more each year,” continued Beth. “These investments have benefits beyond reducing emissions, including public health benefits and providing people with more opportunities to travel outside of a car, which enhances safety and economic mobility.”

“Transportation for America stands ready to support the rule’s implementation and we look forward to continuing to advocate for increased transparency and aggressive climate change mitigation policies and investments.”

This GHG rule is final and is now in effect. The first milestone requires State DOTs to establish and report targets on February 1, 2024, necessitating a rapid rollout and immediate implementation measures from federal and state governments alike.

###

Transportation for America is an advocacy organization made up of local, regional, and state leaders who envision a transportation system that safely, affordably, and conveniently connects people of all means and ability to jobs, services, and opportunity through multiple modes of travel. T4America is a program of Smart Growth America.

Join us for Smart Growth Social!

A group of people in business professional attire gathers in a room talking and smiling over drinks

The Coalition for Smarter Growth’s Smart Growth Social is coming up on October 24, 2023! This year, we’re partnering with them to bring you a night of networking, community, and celebration of smart growth.

The Coalition for Smarter Growth’s Smart Growth Social is back and better than ever! And, we have exciting news… Our special guest speaker this year will be David Zipper, leading thinker and commentator on transportation, technology, and cities. David is a Visiting Fellow at Harvard’s Kennedy School and a contributing writer at Bloomberg CityLab, who’s also been published in Vox, Slate, The Atlantic, and The Washington Post.

David will be talking about how we can save transit, offering thought-provoking ideas as we all work together for Metro funding and the walkable, transit-oriented communities that are key to a sustainable future.

Smart Growth Social

October 24, 2023, 6:30-9pm

Eastern Market, North Hall

Tickets $30 (includes wine, beer, food, fun!)

Register now

Smart Growth Social has always brought together our region’s most passionate urbanists, community activists, and professionals from across public service, urban planning, and transportation sectors in the DC region. We’ve been lucky to hear from amazing leaders and advocates like Jeff Speck, Katie Cristol, Beth Osborne, Jeff Tumlin, Gabe Klein, and Dan Reed.

We’ll have beer, wine, food, and lots of time for networking. There’s so much to enjoy at Smart Growth Social! So, don’t miss this opportunity to connect with friends and be inspired to action by one of the most influential people in transportation policy.

Tickets are bound to sell out quickly, so buy your tickets today!

See you on October 24th!

Two logos side-by-side: Coalition for Smarter Growth's Smart Growth Social with Transportation for America

VIDEO: Pedestrian fatalities continue to rise. Here’s why.

Beth Osborne talks with a CBS reporter on the side of a wide, busy roadway as a car speeds past

In a conversation with CBS Sunday Morning, T4A’s executive director Beth Osborne explains that our roads are dangerous by design.

If you watch CBS on Sunday mornings, you might have caught our own Beth Osborne talking about dangerous street design. She was joined by John Barth, who’s working on Complete Streets implementation in Indianapolis, and Latanya Byrd, a safe streets advocate in Philadelphia.

In the clip, Beth explained why more people are being hit and killed on our nation’s roadways. She noted that vehicles have gotten bigger, and streets continue to be designed for speed over safety. As we explained in our report Dangerous by Design, the combination of speed and size leads to deadly consequences for people walking, particularly people of color.

The interview follows news from the Governors Highway Safety Association that pedestrian fatalities reached a 40-year high in 2022. But people walking aren’t the only ones who pay the costs.

“It turns out when we build things unsafe for pedestrians, we build them unsafe for everybody. There’s really nobody winning in this system,” said Beth.

Setting priorities at Future of Transportation Caucus Roundtable

Representative Chuy Garcia sits in the center of an oval table, surrounded by advocates and legislatures

With federal transportation funding set to be reauthorized in three years, the congressional Future of Transportation Caucus met with advocates to discuss the country’s most pressing funding priorities.

A crucial conversation about our transportation priorities

With every passing day, reauthorization for federal surface transportation funding grows closer and closer. Our current framework, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), expires in 2026, and it’s critical that the country gets its funding priorities right by then. If our dollars don’t go towards the right initiatives and objectives, spending more money on transportation and infrastructure will only result in the same poor outcomes. With many competing priorities, discussion between policymakers and advocates about the current state—and future of—our national transportation system remains essential.

Last Wednesday, July 12th, the Future of Transportation Caucus, led by Representatives Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04), and Mark Takano (CA-39), led a roundtable discussion with advocates on transportation electrification, public transit, active transportation, public health, and road safety. These leaders met to talk through transportation priorities and find common ground.

What does our transportation funding need to focus on?

Advocates covered a wide range of issues, including transportation electrification, operations funding for public transit, and road safety. Advocates discussed the need to electrify public transit and medium/heavy-duty vehicles as well as affordable, safe, and equitable charging for electric vehicles (EVs). Regarding operations funding, advocates spoke about expanding and supporting operations in the face of transit fiscal cliffs, increasing service frequency, and exploring solutions to reduce barriers and increase transit ridership. Finally, road safety advocates discussed improvements for bicyclist and pedestrian safety as well as the dangers of poorly thought-out autonomous vehicle (AV) rollouts in cities.

One point in particular proved to be an underlying thread throughout the conversation: a need for the basics—the baseline infrastructure essential for cities—to be focused on people, at the very minimum. Advocates emphasized the importance of good bus systems and facilities, functional sidewalks, and more, recounting how much of a difference that investing in these essentials made in their communities and socioeconomic outcomes.

Leadership makes a difference. Thanks to @RepChuyGarcia @RepPressley and @RepMarkTakano for the great conversation about improving safety in transportation, transit service and ridership, and electrifying vehicles. https://t.co/WCouBMQXRi
— Beth Osborne (@BethOsborneT4A) July 13, 2023

Looking ahead to the 2026 reauthorization

It’s essential that Congress gets the right transportation funding priorities in line before the next reauthorization cycle rolls around in 2026. With a massive rise in pedestrian fatalities, a focus on expansion that leaves , and a climate crisis that has only begun, America can’t afford to continue with more of the same. Instead, we need to rethink what our current funding dollars are going towards. T4A’s three key principles for transportation infrastructure investment—prioritize maintenance, design for safety over speed, and connect people to jobs and services—can serve as a guiding framework for a plan that brings the country towards safe, convenient, affordable transportation for all.

We need to move past the outdated “80/20” highway/transit funding split and resist getting distracted by fantasies that promote car dependence like smart cities dominated by AVs. Rather, our federal funding needs to prioritize the maintenance and repair of existing infrastructure, advance safer streetscapes centered on people first, and prioritize access to goods and services, including increasing operations funding for public transit so agencies can expand the crucial services that people rely on.

At the end of the day, we need to commit to investing in our vision of an accessible and equitable transportation system that strengthens communities—one that focuses on moving people, not just vehicles.

Divided by Design: Quantifying the damage of our transportation program

Our new report examines the racist roots of our current transportation system. Most importantly, it demonstrates how today’s policies and practices were shaped by the past, leading to racial disparities today. Without a fundamental change to the overall approach to transportation, today’s leaders and transportation professionals, no matter their intent, will perpetuate and exacerbate the damage.

Beginning in the 1950s, highways devastated communities of color and changed our cities forever. But the consequences continue, even as we begin to acknowledge our past mistakes.

To create a better system, we can’t settle for small changes. We need a total shift in approach. To learn more about the report and our analysis, join our webinar on July 25 at 2 p.m. ET.

Read the report

A guide to this report

Part I examines the damage and inequities deliberately created by and in the federal transportation program from ~1950 onward. It concludes with a unique analysis of both an unbuilt and built highway segment within Atlanta and Washington, DC to quantify what was lost, who bore the brunt of the damage, and what could have been lost with highways that were never built.

Part II examines our current transportation program to demonstrate how the programs, standards, models, and measures have their roots in the previous era and exacerbate inequities—whether intentional or not.

Part III outlines what needs to change—concrete steps we can take to fundamentally reorient the program around unwinding those inequities.

Two cities divided

Divided by Design also quantifies the damage caused by highways in two U.S. cities: Atlanta, GA and Washington, DC. Like hundreds of others in the U.S., these cities are forever scarred by highways that demolished communities of color, robbing them of opportunity and potential.

Atlanta’s I-20 displaced over 7,500 people and destroyed 1,400 occupied homes. In DC, I-395/695 displaced over 5,000 people and demolished 2,200 homes. These numbers only scratch the surface of the full damage and dislocation.

More significant damage was also avoided in these cities. To understand what might exist in these communities if they hadn’t been disrupted by highways, we looked at two planned highway segments that were never built and the hundreds of businesses, office buildings, and homes that wouldn’t exist today. Click to read these stories:

The damage continues

The models, policies, and practices we use today took root in the highway era, and they continue to inflict the most harm on people of color. Our approach leads to worse health outcomes, greater congestion, and deadlier roadways. It leaves millions of Americans without access to reliable transportation options to get where they need to go. We can’t build a better system on a rotten foundation. It’s time for a paradigm shift.

We need a new approach.

Read Divided by Design

Explore the report’s full content—jump to one of the three parts with the graphics below.

Don’t miss supplemental maps, videos, and animations in the DC and Atlanta case studies which are not in the hard copy. Download a PDF version of the report.

82% don’t believe highway expansions are the best solution for reducing congestion

Graphic showing poll results referenced in text

New nationwide survey shows that prioritizing road repair, improving transit, and reducing driving are more popular options for spending transportation dollars

WASHINGTON, D.C. (June 29) — A new nationwide survey of American voters’ attitudes reveals a significant divide between voters’ attitudes about the best short-and long-term solutions for reducing traffic, versus the actual priorities of their state and local transportation agencies.

In 2021 The Washington Post estimated that highway widening and expansion consumed more than a third of states’ capital spending on roads (over $19 billion). These projects were backed by promises to reduce congestion. The public isn’t buying it. The results of a national survey of 2,001 registered U.S. voters—90 percent of whom own a car they drive regularly—underscores a widely shared belief that highway expansion doesn’t work as a short- or long-term strategy for reducing traffic and that we should invest more in other options.

70 percent of respondents agree that “providing people with more transportation options is better for our health, safety, and economy than building more highways.”
67 percent of respondents agreed that “expanding highways takes years, causes delays, and costs billions of dollars.” The same percentage believes that “widening highways attracts more people to drive, which creates more traffic in the long run.” Only 11 percent felt state DOTs actually deliver congestion relief with highway expansions. In other words, the public understands the concept of “induced demand,” which is widely ignored by state legislatures, DOTs, Congress, and federal agencies.
69 percent of respondents agree that “it’s more important to protect our quality of life than to spend billions of tax dollars on expanding highways. By removing a few miles of highway and adding more transportation options, like trains, buses, bike lanes, and sidewalks, we can have healthier communities.”
71 percent of respondents agree that “no matter where you live, you should have the freedom to easily get where you need to go. Almost all government spending on transportation goes to highways. Instead, states should fund more options, like trains, buses, bike lanes, and sidewalks.”

The survey revealed a deep dissatisfaction with the overall status quo of state and local transportation spending which overwhelmingly prioritizes spending on new roads, often at the expense of keeping roads and bridges in good condition, investing in transit and safe streets for walking or biking, or reducing the need to drive overall. Given seven choices for the best short- and long-term solutions for reducing traffic, the least popular option was “building new freeways and highways,” even as states are poised to spend tens of billions on new highways thanks to the 2021 federal infrastructure law.

“Our country remains on a highway spending spree while requests for basic investments in walkability and transit are given low priority. I hope this survey serves as a wake-up call to politicians that the public is clamoring for reasonable investments in our health, climate and quality of life, not traffic-inducing polluting highways,” said Mike McGinn, Executive Director of America Walks.

Prioritizing the repair of existing roads and bridges first was the top option for how states should be investing their transportation funding (selected by 22 percent of respondents), though Congress has long agreed—in a strong bipartisan fashion—not to institute any binding requirements to prioritize repair first.

“We’re repeatedly told by leaders on Capitol Hill that requiring states to prioritize maintenance first is just too controversial,” said Beth Osborne, director of Transportation for America. “But this survey shows yet again that there’s no controversy among the people they serve—they’re beyond ready to retire the last generation’s playbook when it comes to improving mobility and getting them where they need to go.”

While “reducing congestion” is the top policy goal that shapes the spending decisions of most state DOTs, traffic is not a huge stumbling block for most people to access what they need. Just one in four said they find it difficult to get around.

Survey respondents expressed positive feelings about a range of messages about spending transportation money differently, demonstrating that voters are looking for new ideas, policies, and/or investments that address their problems and deliver meaningful benefits to people and communities—instead of just doing the same old things over and over again. (See attached PDF for full results on pages 19-22, all of which were supported by over 60 percent of respondents.)

“These results are clear: Americans are eager to see the transportation investments that can connect and repair their communities,” said Rabi Abonour, a transportation advocate at NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council). “Federal, state and local leaders should follow the lead of the public and invest in the public transit and related projects that will really improve mobility, clean the air, and address climate pollution.”

Read the full survey results

About the poll

Hattaway Communications, a strategic communications firm based in Washington D.C., was retained to conduct this survey of 2,001 registered voters and assess their awareness of relevant issues, attitudes toward transportation projects, and aspirations for their communities. The survey was fielded online, between February 23–March 7, 2023, and reflects the demographic and geographic composition of the United States.

This survey was supported by the Natural Resources Defense Council and a grant from the Summit Foundation.

###

America Walks is leading the way in advancing walkable, equitable, connected, and accessible places in every community across the U.S. We are the national voice for public spaces that allow people to safely walk and move. At the regional, state, and neighborhood levels, America Walks provides critical strategic support, training, and technical assistance to partner organizations and individuals to effectively advocate for change. https://americawalks.org/

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) works to safeguard the earth—its people, its plants and animals, and the natural systems on which all life depends. https://www.nrdc.org/about