The new 775-page draft of the House Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 2009 opens up with lofty language describing some goals and principles to guide the $450 billion transportation bill. But does reality match the rhetoric in the 774 pages that follow? We look at the nuts and bolts of the bill to see where it stacks up, breaking down an evaluation into positive areas, areas needing improvement, and notable omissions.

We need you to make one call to Congress and ensure that transportation spending delivers. Click here for details on making a call. Or just call the Congressional Switchboard at 202-224-3121 and tell your Representative to support the National Transportation Objectives Act of 2009. (HR 2724) As we post this, Chairman James Oberstar’s transportation bill [...]

Capitol Hill is buzzing with the news. As you may have heard, Chairman Oberstar and his House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee released the full 775-page transportation bill earlier this afternoon. Rep. Oberstar is poised to get his six-year bill moving this week, and the Obama administration is pushing Congress to pass a (shorter) funding plan quickly. Why the rush? Because transportation funding is running out. Tell your representative to make a stand: no more money without real reform!

Chairman Jim Oberstar and the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee have released the full 775-page transportation bill text. Download it here. (pdf) Check back here for details over the coming week.

Americans are taking the train (and the bus) like never before, and public transportation ridership reached its highest level in more than 50 years in 2008. Cities of all sizes are looking to meet the burgeoning demand for quality public transportation service. With Chairman James Oberstar’s 90-page proposal for the next transportation bill coming out this morning from the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, we are left with an important question — how would these current or future transit systems fare under his proposed program?

The Economist looks ahead at the transportation bill and talks to T4 America Campaign Director James Corless. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood asks for an 18-month extension on the current transportation bill, as Rep. James Oberstar releases an outline of a new one. (Wall Street Journal) Streetsblog breaks down Oberstar’s outline. A new study shows that [...]

Full Transportation Bill Outline (.PDF) For those readers brave enough to wade into 90 pages of policy detail, we know have Rep. James Oberstar’s full outline proposal for the next transportation bill. At a press conference to discuss the release this afternoon, John Mica, the Republican Ranking Member of the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, said [...]

We’ll have a running series of posts today breaking down some of the notable spending levels and reforms proposed in Chairman Oberstar’s outline of the transportation bill. He told Congressional Quarterly this morning that he is still planning on releasing full bill text and marking up the bill in his Highways and Transit Subcommittee next week. According to his summary, the upcoming bill will restructure and transform the different programs away from multiple “prescriptive programs” into a “performance-based framework” “designed to achieve specific national objectives.”

UPDATED: The 11 a.m. press conference has been moved to 2 p.m. A 10-page summary of the transportation bill draft is out this morning from the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. The bill outline, entitled the “Surface Transportation Authorization Act of 2009,” is available at right, alongside a second document that describes the myriad programs which being recommended for consolidation under the new bill.

This morning on Capitol Hill, DOT Secretary Ray LaHood proposed an 18-month extension of the current SAFETEA-LU transportation authorization bill. Beyond simply extending the current bill, LaHood indicated that he wants to include some reforms in the 18-month extension — including a focus on metro areas, extensive cost-benefit analysis, and a commitment to “livable communities” — but was short on other specifics.