One thing is certain: as Congress is finally close to passing a transportation bill more than 953 days after it first expired, many cities and communities have charged ahead with more “fine-grained” approaches to transportation funding and construction. These cities and regions have a sharp understanding that the choices made about infrastructure today affect their economies for years to come and are taking steps to make those needed investments today.

But will they be enough without the strong federal partner we’ve had for the last 50 years leading the way?

That remains to be seen, according to this compelling new report from the Urban Land Institute out yesterday, which lays out the state of infrastructure investment here and around the world. But it also points out innovative ways to take the situation we have — flat-lined federal investment and no likely windfall of cash for large scale infrastructure anytime soon — and do all we can with the dollars we have to build the system that will carry us deep into the 21st century.

One key change ULI suggests we might see is one we’ve been pushing for from day one at T4 America — and also in the current House/Senate conference: measuring the performance of the dollars we spend to see if they’re helping us meet our goals, and holding states accountable if they don’t. “Ironically, fiscal constraints finally may compel some better results,” they say, “figuring out what matters most, and what will get the best bang for the buck, becomes even more urgent.”

The report is a good overview of the state of our country’s infrastructure, how we fund it, and the challenges we’re currently facing right now — all of which are things we’ve all heard regularly. There’s been no shortage of reports and calls to action and reminders of the sorry state of our country’s infrastructure over the last few years. Which is why the most exciting parts of this report chronicle all the different ways that states, cities and local communities are stepping out on their own, raising funds from innovative sources, casting their own vision for transportation, and hoping that the federal government will soon again reaffirm its commitment as a strong financial partner.

As we’re fond of pointing out, when there’s transparency and accountability for exactly what transportation dollars are going to buy — this new transit line, that new busway, this new bridge project — transportation ballot measures pass close to 70 percent of the time, even when voters are taxing themselves. Check out this graphic from the report on transportation ballot measures.

Click to enlarge.

There’s also a great section on Measure R and America Fast Forward, Los Angeles’ innovative plan to build 30 years of transit projects in 10 years. Two-thirds of L.A. voters approved a 30-year sales tax as a dedicated funding stream for the program that will also be used to leverage what they hope will be loans and low-cost financing from the federal government. This L.A. story, just like so many others of innovation highlighted in the report, are indeed examples of innovation, but examples that urgently need federal help and partnership to truly succeed. They’re stepping up with innovation and local funding, but they can’t go it alone.

Let’s hope that Congress passes a strong transportation bill soon and affirms a new role for the federal government in both supporting and rewarding the kind of innovation highlighted in this report that’s beginning to bubble up around the country.

Read the full report here.

Falling Apart and Falling Behind lays out the economic challenges posed by our ailing infrastructure, provides a comparative look at the smart investments being made by our international competitors, and suggests a series of recommendations for crafting new innovative transportation policies in the U.S. This report frames the state of our infrastructure in terms of the new economic realities of the 21st-century economy and presents the challenges we currently face.

America’s railroads — once the fastest and most comprehensive in the world — opened up the interior of the country but America truly forged its status as a world economic superpower in the decades following World War II as our booming country awash with wealth embarked upon building new infrastructure, airports and an interstate system that was the envy of the world.

There was a time when we led the world in the very real physical infrastructure that drives economic success in our cities and states but those days are behind us as we’re failing not only to build the next generation of transportation systems, but failing to even properly maintain our past investments to ensure they continue serving us and our economy.

The last great vision for transportation our country rallied behind was a national interstate system laid out in the 1950s, but we’ve been rudderless for the last 20 years since completing that system with no grand vision. While we’ve been treading water and spinning our wheels, other countries have been investing the kind of money we once did in their transportation systems, positioning them to succeed for years to come.

This report from BAF is a concise summary of the problem we face and the perhaps obvious solution staring us in the face: If we want to continue leading the world in economic dominance, we’ve got to lead the world in investing in our transportation networks — and casting a vision for the next 50 years of investment.

Read the report here, and you can see an interview with two of the BAF co-chairs, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor Ed Rendell yesterday on MSNBC’s Morning Joe.

Perhaps it takes a penny-pinching persuasion from the across the pond to put our infrastructure shortfalls in perspective. The U.S. has considerably larger highways than most of Europe, yet we spend more time in traffic. Domestic engineers give our roads and bridges failing grades, and the World Economic Forum ranks our infrastructure system 23rd worldwide. We spend dramatically less per capita on infrastructure than many developed European countries, and certainly far less than booming China.

The U.S. also lags behind other wealthy nations in passenger rail service, the magazine notes. Even our fastest and most dependable line, the Northeast Corridor’s Acela, “averages a sluggish 70 miles per hour between Washington and Boston,” while the French TGV from Paris to Lyon “runs at an average speed of 140mph.”

“All of this is puzzling,” they opine, noting that the U.S. remains the world’s largest economy, with its richest citizens. Large public works projects are part of our DNA, dating back to our nation’s founding and the continental railroad. The Economist continues:

Between 1956 and 1992 America constructed the interstate system, among the largest public-works projects in history, which criss-crossed the continent with nearly 50,000 miles of motorways.

Furthermore, the Economist argues, our current system for spending transportation dollars “tends not to reward the prudent”:

A state using road-pricing to limit travel and congestion would be punished for its efforts with reduced funding, whereas one that built highways it could not afford to maintain would receive a larger allocation.

By way of solutions, the magazine points out that we will “need to spend a lot more” on infrastructure and identify new revenue sources. A higher gas tax may not be politically viable in today’s climate, but it could be later. Some have also floated a tax on vehicle miles traveled. And, the National Infrastructure Bank supported by President Obama and others offers some promise as well.

At the state and local level transport budgets will remain tight while unemployment is high. With luck, this pressure could spark a wave of innovative planning focused on improving the return on infrastructure spending. The question in Washington, apart from how to escape the city on traffic-choked Friday afternoons, is whether political leaders are capable of building on these ideas.

Those are the facts, and 69,000 bridges sure sounds like a lot, but what does that look like in real terms? Where are these bridges? Does your city or state have a lot of deficient bridges, or does the state do a good job taking care of them? Those questions are going to be much easier to answer with our online tools accompanying the report, launching today at t4america.org/resources/bridges.

We’ve taken the whole federal bridge database and put it online in a map, so you can type your address, and see all the bridges within a ten-mile radius. Structurally deficient bridges will show up as red icons. Click any bridge and you’ll get more information about it, including its rating in a box on the right.

Curious about how your state stacks up? Click on “By State” and click your state to see a quick overview of their performance, including the best and worst five counties, as well as their rank nationally and total percentage of structurally deficient bridges.

The national report and all 51 state reports are being officially released today at noon with a national telebriefing, but you can go ahead and check out the map and data now on our site. (Media members? Contact david.goldberg@t4america.org if you want information on the telebriefing.)

Check out the map today and please spread the word about it. We’ll be posting several times throughout the day with more information about the national report, which is available for download now — as well as reports for all 50 states and D.C.

Share this on Twitter

Share

Share this on Facebook

The BUILD Act is sponsored by Senator John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee from Massachusetts; Texas Republican Kay Bailey Hutchison; and Virginia Democrat Mark Warner, a former governor with a history of prioritizing transportation infrastructure.

The infrastructure bank would start out with $10 billion, with the goal of generating private investment to match the federal commitment. Leveraging private capital is a recurring theme in discussions about transportation finance and a notable point of agreement between President Obama and House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica.

While the plan resembles what the President had proposed, the Kerry-Hutchison-Warner bill would only include loans, not grants. Only revenue-generating projects would be funded, a concession Kerry has said is necessary due to the current political appetite for less domestic spending. The bank would operate independently of the U.S. Department of Transportation.

In an enthusiastic endorsement of the proposal, the New York Times editorialized that the bank would allow officials with limited resources to pursue needed repairs.

By providing low-cost capital to states, cities and authorities, the bank would help these strapped governments kick-start projects that are now unaffordable, while attracting investments from pension and private-equity funds that are looking for stable money-generating ventures in which to invest.

The Times also put the proposal into a broader context, citing the very real possibility of future tragedy absent the proper maintenance, and the misplaced priorities of tax cuts over investment.

…already conservatives are railing against what some have called a “boondoggle,” a phrase used to demonize virtually any public investment. What will these opponents tell voters when the dams break and the bridges fall? Before more lives are lost, lawmakers should ask themselves whether they used their public office only to slash spending (and taxes for the wealthy), or to spend money wisely.

A recent Boston Globe op-ed authored by former Massachusetts homeland security adviser Juliette Kayyem also made a strong case for the bank, and Streetsblog covered the bill’s release here.

Photo courtesy of the Center for American Progress.

Nick Rahall, who represents West Virginia’s Third Congressional District in the state’s southern corner, rebuked the House Republican budget during the groundbreaking for a public water service extension in Mingo County. He called the prevailing budget in the House a “meat-ax approach” and warned that “we have to be careful or we may be doing our economy and doing the recovery more harm than we can ever envision.”

Rahall also put Washington’s spending-reduction mood in context, saying that while some cuts are necessary, eliminating basic services today does nothing to help future generations of West Virginians or any Americans. Taylor Kuykendall of the Beckley Register-Herald quoted the Congressman as saying:

I have long been convinced, and will continue to preach, that the price of doing nothing, the price of letting our water and wastewater services deteriorate, the cost of our highways and bridges crumbling, the debt that grows as our broadband digital divide widens are not ‘financial burdens’ as some see them. To me, they are the very basic things the people elect their government to fix. Put simply, these are investments in our country’s future.

With the fate of the fiscal year 2011 budget — and, with it, millions of cuts to crucial transportation — unresolved and the potential for a new transportation bill later this year, we hope this sort of emphasis on the infrastructure deficit rather than just the fiscal deficit will inform future discussions.

Photo courtesy of Congressman Nick Rahall.

In the midst of the fervor about the House’s budget resolution for 2011 released Friday, and the President’s budget proposal for 2012 dominating the news today, a new bipartisan poll from the Rockefeller Foundation contains compelling arguments from a majority of Americans in favor of increased and accountable investment in transportation.

The poll shows unequivocally that voters from across the political spectrum are tired of bickering and want Congress to seek compromise. And almost nowhere else is their desire for cooperation and solutions greater than with the issue of transportation infrastructure.

Americans largely see investments in transportation as a way to improve the economy and make communities safer, while improving the quality of life for more people. They clearly see a need for reform when it comes to paying for and choosing the transportation projects we need, according to the results.

This poll shows that we believe strongly that providing a safe transportation systems that works is a primary role of our government, and that it should be above partisan divisions, more than most other issues. The Administration’s budget proposal, released this morning, also delivers on the desire reflected in the poll to prioritize the maintenance of what we’ve already built, and for giving local communities more say in how they solve their transportation issues and build for the future.

It’s fitting that the release of this poll is sandwiched between the House’s 2011 plan to gut transportation spending and the Administration’s 2012 plan to invest more money in transportation (within a budget laced with overall cuts). This poll makes it abundantly clear that the House 2011 budget resolution – which would cut support for communities that want better public transportation and safer streets — is at dramatic odds with the desires of a majority of Americans.

Here are some of the detailed top-line findings from the poll:

Should Congress find some way to work together on the issue of transportation? 71 percent of voters say there should be common ground on this issue — higher than other major issues — while 19 percent say leaders should hold fast to their positions, which is lower than other major issues.

The connection between investing and building the economy: Four in five (80 percent) voters agree that federal funding to improve and modernize transportation “will boost local economies and create millions of jobs from construction to manufacturing to engineering.” Just 19 percent disagree with this. 79 percent agree that “in order for the United States to remain the world’s top economic superpower, we need to modernize our transportation infrastructure and keep it up to date.” Only 19 percent disagree.

What should greater investment on transportation net us in the end? What would the benefits be? Voters’ top goal by far is “safer streets for our communities and children.” 57 percent say this should be one of the top-two priorities if more money is invested in infrastructure. The second-highest priority for voters overall (32 percent) is “more transportation options.” In addition, 85 percent agree that “spending less time in traffic would improve quality of life, make communities safer, and reduce stress in people’s daily lives.” Moreover, the vast majority also believe the country (80 percent) and their own community (66 percent) would benefit from an expanded and improved public transportation system.

What should we change about how we invest money in transportation? Two-thirds of respondents favored 9 of 10 reforms offered, with 90 percent supporting more accountability and certification that projects are delivered on time and fit into a national plan. Among the specific reforms to the system that were proposed, 86 percent supported a “fix it first” policy that focuses on maintaining existing transportation systems before building new ones.

This poll was conducted by two Republican and Democratic polling firms from Jan. 29-Feb 6 2011. Disclosure: T4 America is a grantee of the Rockefeller Foundation.

Writing the same day Vice President Biden and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood were in Philadelphia promoting a $53 billion, 6-year passenger rail package, Geithner argued that investing in our nation’s roads, bridges, rail and transit systems creates “both immediate and long-term economic benefits.”

Treasury Department analysis reveals an unemployment rate among American workers building infrastructure at 15 percent, significantly higher than the national average. Investing in infrastructure would create jobs in construction, manufacturing and retail trade, all sectors hard hit by the economic downturn, and nine out of ten jobs created would pay middle-class wages.

Geithner emphasized the administration’s commitment to spending federal dollars in a targeted and fiscally responsible way, writing: “our strategy is designed to make crucial investments in infrastructure while bringing our deficits down to sustainable levels.”

Simply increasing spending levels is unacceptable, Geither wrote, adding “we must also reform the ways in which we invest.” He continued:

Not all infrastructure investments are good investments, and too often we have seen transportation projects exemplify the worst of Washington – the bridges to nowhere that rightly make American taxpayers cringe. The President’s Budget recognizes this and will make some difficult choices, proposing significant spending cuts, including to some programs we would preserve in better times.

President Obama’s plan includes a National Infrastructure Bank, which would “select projects on the basis of rigorous analysis,” Geithner explained. The Bank would evaluate and fund projects that generate the best return on investment, leverage private capital to do it and promote increased transportation options along the way. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee chairman John Mica, a key player in Congress, has cited securing private capital for projects as a key priority for federal transportation spending.

Infrastructure investment benefits all Americans, even in ways we do not always think about. Upgrades and additions to the New York City subway system allow millions to “get to work faster, increasing their productivity and quality of life by decreasing the amount of time lost to commuting,” Geithner notes. But it also means that “the far-away Kawasaki plant in Lincoln, Nebraska that manufactures the subway cars will increase production, putting Nebraskans to work.”

You can read Secretary Geithner’s entire post here.

Photo: Washington Post

“The third step in winning the future is rebuilding America,” the President said, after discussing his vision for innovation and education. Other nations have outpaced our investment in roads and railways, and our own engineers have graded our infrastructure a “D,” he noted.

President Obama rightly emphasized the need for a 21st century transportation system on top of fixing what we built in the 20th. He also pointed out that we create more jobs and greater opportunity when we embrace an array of transportation options. The transcontinental railroad, rural electrification and the Interstate Highway System did not just put Americans to work in construction, he said. Jobs also came from “businesses that opened near a town’s new train station or the new off-ramp.”

“We were thrilled to hear the President come right out and say that investment in transportation and other infrastructure is central to rebuilding and growing our economy,” said Transportation for America Director James Corless. “An upfront investment in the most needed, clean transportation projects is a great opportunity to create near-term jobs and lay the groundwork for the future economy.”

The President also reiterated his strong support for high-speed rail, with the goal of giving 80 percent of Americans access to the system within 25 years. “This could allow you to go places in half the time it takes to travel by car,” he said.

“For some trips, it will be faster than flying –- without the pat-down,” he added, to laughter.

Although he did not identify the program by name, President Obama endorsed the principles behind an infrastructure bank, saying we ought to “pick projects based (on) what’s best for the economy, not politicians.” And he vowed to harness private capital to help pay for new projects, a goal shared by House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica, a Florida Republican.

A number of groups, including business and labor, hailed the President’s focus on investing in the future. U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Tom Donohue echoed Obama’s call for “a world class infrastructure” and called for “common ground to ensure America’s greatness into the 21st century.” ALF-CIO’s Richard Trumka said, “We strongly support the President’s vision on infrastructure to create good jobs and succeed in a global economy, and working people are ready to work with him and hold him to his promises.”

AASHTO, the trade group representing state departments of transportation, was “encouraged that President Obama supports investing in America’s transportation infrastructure – recognizing the role it plays in creating jobs, growing the national economy and balancing the federal deficit,” according to Executive Director John Horsley, who added that he looks forward to working with the Administration and Congress on a reauthorization bill.

The Equity Caucus at Transportation for America said that “smarter transportation investments can unleash the under-realized economic power of communities across America.”

T4 America echoes these sentiments, and we are especially pleased with the President’s dual commitment to job creation today and economic prosperity tomorrow.

“The President’s vision for infrastructure is not just about near-term construction jobs,” Corless said. “It is, as he said, about growing new businesses, livable neighborhoods and dynamic regions that can attract a young and mobile workforce and compete internationally.

“It’s about jobs associated with new transportation technologies and manufacturing modern transit vehicles, everything from real time information systems to make our highways and transit corridors smarter, to the new rail cars being built today by United Streetcar in Oregon that can breathe new life into our cities and suburbs,” he added.

You can read T4 America’s entire statement here. You can learn more about the Equity Caucus at Transportation for America and read their entire statement here.

Photo: AP

This morning, representatives from Transportation for America and other key stakeholders joined President Obama and a bipartisan working group in making the case for renewed and expanded investment in America’s infrastructure. The accompanying report, titled “An Economic Analysis of Infrastructure Investment,” mirrors a similar analysis from the Economic Policy Institute study of T4 America’s proposal. Both reports conclude that immediate and aggressive action on rebuilding roads, bridges, rail and public transit would create good-paying jobs and lay the foundation for future economic growth. And, according to polling, the American people overwhelmingly support these investments.

Here is T4 America’s full statement:

Meeting today with representatives from Transportation for America and other key transportation groups, President Obama released an economic analysis that makes a powerful case for transformational investment in the nation’s rail, road, transit and aviation networks.

“An Economic Analysis of Infrastructure Investment,” prepared by the White House Council of Economic Advisers and the treasury department, concludes that now is the time to rebuild our aging 20th century infrastructure while building the rail, public transit, broadband and other infrastructure needed for a 21st century economy.

“The president’s economic advisers put forth an investment strategy that offers the most bang possible for our infrastructure dollars,” said Angela Glover Blackwell, Founder and CEO of PolicyLink, who represented both PolicyLink and the T4America coalition as a member of its executive committee. “It would create jobs for the people who need them most, while also providing transportation options to the people who most need affordable access to jobs.”

The investment strategy examined by the White House Council of Economic Advisers and the treasury department closely parallels the one embraced by Transportation for America’s coalition. An analysis this summer by the Economic Policy Institute found that an authorization of a proposed $500 billion transportation measure could support more than 7.2 million jobs, nearly a half-million more than continuation of current policy.

In his remarks following the meeting with a bipartisan array of governors, mayors and policy advocates, the President noted that 90 percent of American households spend more on transportation than on food. Building a transportation network that allows people to own fewer vehicles and drive them less and helps them find ways to avoid the traffic that costs them time and money will save families transportation dollars, which can be used elsewhere in the economy.

“The economic analysis shows why we cannot afford to continue to limp along under the old framework, using what he rightfully called ‘outdated formulas’,” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America. “We have to set high standards in order to make the most efficient of our investment, and then hold agencies accountable for meeting them.”

The approach outlined at the White House today would encourage private sector investment, as well as a lay a foundation for business and commercial growth.

“The economic analysis indicates a smart set of investments will support a future economy that is more resilient, less dependent on oil and that will compete well against countries that already are making similar investments,” Corless said.