“It is a good sign, indeed, that bipartisan negotiations between House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid resulted in an agreement that will keep Americans at work building our nation’s infrastructure. We are especially pleased that the extension funds the transportation program at existing levels and does not include divisive policy changes that deserve a full hearing and debate.

“The six-month timeline allows the relevant House and Senate Committees an opportunity to continue crafting a long-term authorization that protects and creates jobs, while investing in the travel options Americans want with the accountability they deserve. We look forward to working with Congress to get a new bill done next year.”

Ryan’s budget would cap transportation spending at 2008 levels. Noting that the general fund has been tapped for $35 billion in recent years to cover shortfalls in the highway trust fund, his proposal aims to keep the fund “solvent without additional general fund transfers or increases in the gasoline tax.” The Congressional Budget Office estimates that the gas tax will raise $230 billion over the next six years. That’s more than $50 billion below SAFETEA-LU, the current transportation law.

The proposed budget would cut at least $17 billion in transportation investment per year over the next several years, according to one analysis. The proposal does not address specific funding levels or cuts for individual programs, and it has as little to say about policy except for a strong bias against inter-city rail. His proposal also contains a misleading statement that would seem to blame bike trails for the shortfall in the trust fund. For the record, those items amount to less than 1.5 percent of annual outlays, while paying enormous dividends in safety, health, reduced energy consumption and quality of life.

“We share the Chairman’s desire to ‘focus every dollar on pursuing a targeted and cohesive national transportation policy,’” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America. “However, we cannot get to ‘targeted and cohesive’ by having budget writers make narrow and premature choices about which modes matter and which ones don’t.”

Corless added that the sweeping nature of Ryan’s budget proposal makes it all the more critical that we begin serious debate, soon, on passing a smarter transportation authorization.

“For our money, that will necessarily include, at a minimum, realigning the highway program to emphasize repair and rebuilding our roads and bridges (see our report on the latter here); enabling communities to meet their needs for more and better transportation options; and insisting that state transportation agencies account for their progress on road and bridge maintenance, access for people of all ages and incomes and providing alternatives to congestion,” said Corless. “These are the policies that will ensure our future economic prosperity and quality of life.”

On the website of Transportation for America, a group advocating clean transportation and smart-growth planning, there is a ticker that has been counting up since the expiration of the last surface transportation reauthorization bill. Today, the counter hits 365 days — marking a year since states had a long-term funding plan for their transportation projects.

That timeline has not been lost on anyone, as calls for a new reauthorization bill have grown stronger and the Obama administration has begun generating its plans.

The trepidation and delays surrounding the reauthorization are nothing new — the massive, six-year bills have typically been late and slow to form. But to TFA President James Corless, it is important that Congress start moving on the bill soon.

“I think everyone still believes the next authorization bill remains one of the best opportunities we have to reimagine the nation’s transportation policy,” Corless said. “This meets a multiple set of really urgent imperatives that country has to take. … We want to put people back to work and transition into a clean energy economy and we think this is one of the best vehicles to do that.”

It’s not just groups like T4 America or industry groups pushing for a long-term bill from Congress. He also pointed out that most transportation officials at the state and local levels would prefer a comprehensive reauthorization to the quick-fixes Congress has continued to pass over the last year.

Congress is almost sure to pass a shorter extension after the elections, but states say they need a full reauthorization to provide the financial security and assurance that allow them to embark on larger projects.

President Obama brought long overdue attention to the nation’s infrastructure during his speech in Milwaukee on Labor Day, calling for a $50 billion down payment to fix roads, bridges, highways and transit systems. More recently, administration officials have signaled their intention to move on reauthorization in early 2011.

There is the potential for real bipartisanship. Ohio Senator George Voinovich, a Republican, has indicated a sense of urgency toward moving on infrastructure and a willingness to look at a number of revenue sources. Previous transportation bills that, while imperfect, made important strides toward investing in multimodal transportation were passed during a Republican Congress, and the last bill was signed by President George W. Bush.

Under the leadership of Secretary Ray LaHood, USDOT has already led the way in identifying a transformative change in direction for the nation’s transportation priorities as we climb out of the 1950′s mindset that guided the last half century of spending. Plautz writes:

LaHood has promised a “sea change” in transportation planning, including offering alternatives to driving like bike lanes and public transit. The administration has also been investing in high-speed rail.

USDOT officials have also been forward-looking in articulating the crucial link between transportation and land-use policies, especially with the transportation sector accounting for nearly 70 percent of the nation’s oil use. “We’re in the climate change business whether we like it or not, so we should probably be in that discussion,” Roy Kienitz, USDOT undersecretary for policy, said in a recent town hall.

“The administration really prioritizes more options and building in more performance measures that include environmental equity and economic indicators,” Plautz quoted T4 America Director James Corless as saying. “It’s a great opportunity to begin to move in a direction that reduces the reliance on oil.”

Help us get moving on a transformation reauthorization bill today.

Do you want the count-up clock for your site or blog? Grab it today.

The economy is showing some signs of growth, but that’s little encouragement for the millions of Americans without a job – the unemployment rate nationwide is still a notch below 10 percent. It is difficult to see how America’s economy can grow and recover without sustained job creation.

EPI ran the numbers and found that T4 America’s proposed $500 billion transportation bill would support 400,000 more jobs than would be created by continuing SAFETEA-LU, the existing transportation law, at that same $500 billion level. The T4 America proposal would support more than 7.2 million jobs.

T4 America’s proposal is an effective and swift job creator because it calls for investment in some of the more labor-intensive areas of transportation, such as repair and maintenance of existing infrastructure and public transportation, all reliable job creators. Many highway expansion projects take longer to move because they require permits and spend a larger percentage of funds on land acquisition rather than labor. As a result, many of these projects also end up employing less people.

Adopting T4’s plan would give a leg up to the Americans hardest hit by the economic downturn, especially low-wage workers and Americans who did not go to college. In fact, 80 percent of the new jobs created would be filled by Americans without a four-year degree. And the proposal is also a good deal for the working men and women of organized labor – 15 percent of the jobs created would be union jobs, compared to just 12 percent of the jobs in the overall economy.

And these are not just jobs for jobs sake – T4’s plan puts people to work building the transportation system we need for the 21st century, an all-of-the-above approach that rebuilds and maintains roads and bridges, expands travel options, implements real accountability for how we spend precious taxpayer dollars and ensures America’s small towns and rural areas take part in our economic recovery as well.

We need strong infrastructure to achieve steady growth and opportunity in the decades to come.

The ability of T4 America’s proposal to create good-paying jobs and promote economic growth has won our coalition broad support. Sam Williams, president of the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, a T4 partner, praised the proposal as “an important and timely message for Congress” and “critical to economic development not only in metro Atlanta but across the country.” Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa says the kind of investment in clean transportation advocated by T4 America “will create millions of good paying quality jobs and put our nation on a path to a lasting economic recovery.”

You can read the full report here, or check out T4 America’s release and fact sheet.

As America continues to reel from sustained, high unemployment, a new analysis by the Economic Policy Institute shows that, with a smart investment strategy, authorization of a proposed $500 billion transportation measure could support more than 7.2 million jobs.

EPI examined the jobs impact of two investment scenarios: a continuation of current transportation law, known as SAFETEA-LU, and a package of investments proposed by Transportation for America that emphasized maintenance and retrofits of existing infrastructure and completing the transportation network with adequate public transportation, in addition to highway capacity. The analysts found that, given an investment of $500 billion under either scenario, the T4America proposal would yield 400,000 more jobs over the six-year life of the law, for a total of more than 7.2 million jobs.

“The T4America proposal creates more jobs in large part because it calls for investments in more labor-intensive sectors of the economy, including repair and maintenance of the existing transportation system and public transportation,” said Ethan Pollack, the principle author of the study.

The analysis also found that the T4America investment strategy would especially benefit those hardest hit by the recession, including low-wage workers and Americans without a college degree. About 80 percent of the new jobs created would be filled by Americans without a four-year degree. The proposal also would create jobs at a higher level of unionization (15 percent) than the overall economy (12 percent).

“This study shows why America needs a new direction in our transportation policy,” said Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa. “Cleaner and smarter transportation investments will create millions of good paying quality jobs and put our nation on a path to a lasting economic recovery.”

The EPI study echoes the 2009 findings of the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts. That study showed that public transportation generates 31 percent more jobs than new construction of roads and bridges, and repair work on roads and bridges generates 16 percent more jobs than new road and bridge construction. While the T4America package includes ample funds for new highway capacity, the emphasis on maintaining existing infrastructure and on completing the transportation network with adequate transit produces more jobs than a continuation of current policy.

The T4America strategy would support more than 761,000 manufacturing jobs, helping to expand or revitalize a range of industries associated with transit vehicles and other technologies. Another study released today by Duke University and the Apollo Alliance found that the rail industry is poised for particularly strong growth. The study examined the U.S. manufacture of rail vehicles in intercity passenger, high speed, regional, metro, light rail and streetcars. It finds that the U.S. rail supply chain includes at least 247 manufacturing locations in 35 states. More robust investment in rail would especially benefit New York (with 31 rail manufacturing facilities), Illinois (23), Pennsylvania (26), California (22) and Ohio (13).

“Transportation for America has an important message for the nation: The right kind of transportation investment creates jobs,” said Sam Williams, president of the Metro Atlanta Chamber of Commerce, a T4America coalition member. “The vision of complete transportation networks, connected cities and viable transit options is critical to economic development not only in metro Atlanta but across the country. This is an important and timely message for Congress.”

Central to the T4America proposal is an emphasis on repairing existing infrastructure and expanding public transportation options in order to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, provide well-maintained roads and bridges, convenient public transportation and safe places to walk and bicycle, boost our economy and keep Americans active and healthy.

The Act extends current transportation law until December 31, 2010 and restores $19.5 billion in interest to the Highway Trust Fund. This works out to $14.7 billion for highways and $4.8 billion for mass transit. The HIRE Act also restores $8.7 billion in contract authority that was rescinded due to late Congressional action last September.

This clean extension is far superior to the stop-gap measures of the past several months. State Departments of Transportation and regional officials can now move forward on new projects with confidence.

Also of note, the Act extends the ability of urban areas to apply mass transit funding to operating assistance. Painful cuts to public transportation are a real drain on communities across America. This provision will help keep people in their jobs while helping commuters access jobs.

For a more thorough run-down of how the HIRE Act affects transportation, read this summary prepared by T4 America.

As the national transportation program faces fiscal uncertainty today following Sen. Jim Bunning’s (R-KY) refusal to extend legislation to fund transportation and other national programs on Friday, James Corless, campaign director of Transportation for America, released the following statement:

“The problem is not simply that one Senator was able to thwart a crucial, timely vote. That lone Senator was able to shut down our nation’s transportation program only because Congress has left this essential underpinning of our economy on life-support for far too long. The highway trust fund we created to build the interstates in the 1950s simply is not up to the job of building and maintaining the system we need for the 21st century. This is not a backburner issue, even if Congress has been treating it as one.

“While we lurch, from extension to extension, with our transportation program teetering on the brink of insolvency, the rest of the world is not standing still. China is building a $500 billion rail network. Canada, whose hockey team just beat us for the gold medal, is beating us in building efficient urban transportation networks, even as our public transportation systems are being forced to slash service in the face of Congressional inaction.

“American jobs – millions of them — are relying on the authorization of our transportation program. Americans everywhere depend on an efficient, safe and accessible network of roads and transit systems to get to work each day. If we are going to right this economy permanently, Congress must quickly address our nation’s outdated transportation program and ensure stable funding levels for public transportation, including operating assistance for struggling systems, for the repair and maintenance of our highways and bridges, and a robust investment in projects that will make our communities sustainable for the long haul.”

James Corless is the Campaign Director of Transportation for America.

UPDATED: We posted a similar question-and-answer document covering the specific issue of rescissions. Read that here.

As you may have read on Streetsblog Capitol Hill, where Elana Schor has been closely tracking the inexorable march toward expiration of the old transportation bill (SAFETEA-LU), the Senate passed an emergency one-month extension of the current law last night, just hours before the deadline.

There have been a lot of questions flying around today, so we’re going to try to post some simplified answers to clear up any confusion. Federal transportation policy is not the simplest code to decipher, but we’ll try our best to start with the basics.

The short explanation?

The Senate failed to pass an extension of their own to match the House’s recent 3-month extension before the transportation bill expired last night.

To prevent transportation spending from stopping entirely, Congress added a one-month extension of current transportation law to a last-minute bill (a Continuing Resolution) that keeps the federal government from shutting down in case they don’t pass the required individual spending bills for the next year. The one-month Continuing Resolution did not address the scheduled loss of $8.7 billion in transportation funds that will be taken from states, starting today.

Click through the jump below if you want much more detailed information.

Did our current six-year transportation bill (SAFETEA) expire at midnight last night?

Yes it did. Though it expired, the spending and programs of SAFETEA will now be continued for one month.

Why September 30th?

The start of the new fiscal year for all government agencies is October 1st. Every year, the House and Senate have to pass a slew of yearly spending bills that fund all government agencies before the previous bills expire on September 30th. This includes the Department of Transportation in addition to all other government agencies.

If new bills are not passed, the government can shut down, as it did in 1994.

The House recently passed a 3-month extension and the Senate wanted an 18-month extension of the transportation bill. How did we end up with just one month?

Last Friday the House passed a three-month extension of SAFETEA. The Senate needed to pass an extension of their own and then reconcile the length of their version with the House’s version in a conference committee before sending it to the President. The Senate failed to pass an extension of 3, 18 or any other substantial number of months before reaching the deadline.

To keep government from shutting down when old spending bills expire on September 30th, lawmakers have built in a backstop known as a Continuing Resolution (CR). The House and Senate included a one month extension of funding for the transportation bill in the CR. The House passed their CR bill on Friday as part of the Legislative Branch Appropriations Bill, and the Senate passed theirs last night and sent it to President Obama.

What does this one-month emergency CR extension do to the possibility of a longer extension of SAFETEA.

This stopgap Continuing Resolution (CR) buys just one month of time for the Senate to act on their version of a longer extension. The House passed a 3-month extension last week. The Senate can pass a longer-term extension this month, and then try to reconcile the length of theirs with the House version. As of today, they have 31 days left to work on this.

But, starting today, 8.7$ billion in transportation money is being taken away from the states (see rescission, last section below). This will give the Senate strong urgency to work out a deal as soon as possible. State DOTs, local politicians, lobbyists and others will be putting heavy pressure on Senators to work out a deal immediately to keep their states from losing money.

Does this mean they can still pass a longer extension soon?

They can pass a longer extension anytime this month. The House passed a 3-month extension, so the decision is now up to the Senate on how to proceed, and how long of an extension to pass. The ball is in their court.

It is virtually guaranteed that a full transportation bill will not pass during October, though it’s legally possible. Chairman Oberstar in the House will continue negotiating with the Senate to pass his 3-month extension, while continuing to work on his full transportation bill (STAA). He wants to pass a full, six-year bill before the end of the year. (Though if a 3-month extension is enacted this month, it would carry us to January 31st instead of December 31st.)

What are the chances it’ll be 18 months like the Senate originally preferred.

Though the Senate maintained their preference for an 18-month extension, in line with the administration, they’ve shown willingness to negotiate. There was an attempt to pass a 3-month extension in the last two days, which failed to garner enough support to reach a vote. It’s entirely possible the Senate could pass a 3-month extension in the coming days or weeks.

If they pass an extension longer than 3 months, then the House and Senate will reconcile their versions before sending it to the President.

They have until October 31st to act, though states will be losing transportation money until they do.

States will be losing money? What is this “rescission” issue I keep hearing about?

In short, it was an accounting provision built into the last transportation bill, SAFETEA-LU, that takes back a share of funds that states have not obligated to contracts or projects yet. Under the Continuing Resolution, states will lose a total of $8.7 billion in contract authority (spending, basically) for all transportation projects.

We’ll have more details on this issue later today. It’s quite complex, but here is a quick summary from the subscription service Transportation Weekly

…state highway departments can expect the Federal Highway Administration on Wednesday to withdraw each state’s share of the $8.7 billion rescission in highway obligation authority.  Many states will, overnight, lose millions of dollars in transportation spending authority…

Attempts last week to attach the rescission repeal to either the government-wide continuing resolution or to the House-passed three-month SAFETEA-LU extension bill failed, having run into House rules requiring an offset of either increased revenues or equivalent spending cuts in other areas of the budget, neither of which can normally be easily done on an expedited basis.

For the House to repeal the rescission, they needed to find other funds to pay for it, per budget rules in the House. Streetsblog reports this morning that there was a bipartisan plan to use TARP money to prevent the rescission, clearing the way for the House to approve it, but that it was shot down by a group of GOP lawmakers in the Senate:

A bipartisan bid to extend existing federal transportation law for three months — and tap the TARP bailout fund to avert the cancellation of $8.7 billion in contract authority — was rejected on the Senate floor last night after GOP senators insisted on using stimulus money, rather than bailout cash, to fix the problem.

The drama played out hours before the midnight deadline for preserving the $8.7 billion, the majority of which would go toward state road and bridge work. Senate environment committee chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and her panel’s senior Republican, Sen. Jim Inhofe (OK), agreed with their respective party leaders to shift $300 million in bailout money as a temporary fix to prevent state DOTs from canceling projects.

The rescission will affect every state differently in terms of money lost — and from what programs it will be taken. The last time there was a rescission, some states tried to take an unfairly large share from programs that repair and maintain bridges, protect air quality, or build sidewalks or bike commuting trails.

We will have some details on the numbers up as soon as we have them. Questions? Ask away in the comments and we’ll try to answer.

With the House passing a $7 billion patch for the Highway Trust Fund yesterday afternoon to keep it from running out of money before September, we thought it might be useful to post a brief Q&A about the trust fund patch and how the full six-year transportation authorization bill could be affected. The $7 billion patch now moves to the Senate for a vote, probably this afternoon, before reaching President Obama’s desk. The Highway Trust Fund (HTF) provides funds for the federal portion of transportation projects.

If the patch is approved by the Senate, Congress will then be is now facing a much bigger decision before the current transportation bill expires on September 30th: pass a new six-year transportation bill, or pass a short- or long-term extension of SAFETEA-LU, the existing transportation bill.

What is the short-term patch and who supports it?

The short-term patch would repair the trust fund insolvency through a $7 billion cash infusion into the HTF. The funds would be transferred from the General Fund before Congress goes on recess in August and would ensure that states can continue to obligate transportation funds through September 30th, 2009. The patch would address the funding shortfall due to declining gas tax revenues that are no longer sufficient to cover the federal portion of transportation projects.

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman Jim Oberstar supported this option and testified before the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on July 23rd asking for the $3 billion patch. (That patch has since been increased to $7 billion to match the Senate’s preferred amount.)

How does this relate to the upcoming expiration of SAFETEA-LU on September 30th?

With this cash infusion Congress could continue to focus on pushing the authorization of a new 6-year surface transportation bill this September. The original $3 billion figure was based on recent estimates made by DOT but both the White House and DOT officials have expressed concern that $5-7 billion is a more accurate figure needed to keep the HTF solvent through September. (The House passed a $7 billion patch.)

What is the extension and who supports it?

An extension would continue SAFETEA-LU policies and funding guarantees for a specified amount of time to allow Congress and the Administration to continue working on a full 6-year comprehensive bill.  A proposed 18-month extension would extend SAFETEA-LU to March 2011. Numerous Senators have stated their preference for an 18-month extension, which is also currently supported by the White House. On July 23rd the Senate Banking Committee became the third Senate committee to approve an 18-month extension bill. Congress is also considering the possibility of a short-term extension of 3, 6, or 12 months in lieu of a longer-term extension.

How would the extension be funded and how does it address the near-term shortfall in HTF funds?

An extension of SAFETEA-LU for any length of time would be paid through gas taxes and a possible General Fund infusion. (More funding from some source would certainly be required, as gas taxes do not cover the current funding levels.)

The Senate Financing Committee Chairman Max Baucus released a funding proposal (S. 1474) on July 21st that would maintain the HTF’s solvency throughout an 18-month extension.  This provision will transfer $26.8 billion from the General Fund to transportation ($22 billion to HTF, $4.8 billion to the mass transit account).  The fund transfer will begin in time to provide near-term funding (through August) before HTF reaches insolvency.

Any questions? Ask away in the comments and we’ll try to answer.

Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James L. Oberstar, D-Minn., said in an interview that he will not sponsor or support an extension of surface transportation programs if a new long-term authorization bill cannot be completed by the Sept. 30 deadline.

Instead, Oberstar said late Tuesday, he would allow the programs to expire, and lawmakers would have to answer to states that lose their federal transportation support. “It all dies,” Oberstar said.

That threat may be hard to sustain, particularly given the importance of infrastructure spending to create jobs during the current economic recession. Democratic leaders in both chambers would have the final say on the matter.

During the last big battle over federal transportation legislation — which started in 2003 and didn’t end until the bill was signed in August of 2005 — 12 different extensions were filed as lawmakers struggled to write and agree on language for our current transportation bill, SAFETEA-LU.

The extensions on the bill allowed Congress to continue funding surface transportation projects, even as policy for the next five years was being hammered out. Needless to say, things would not be looking good for our transportation system if this Congress couldn’t pass a new bill by September 30 and refused to extend the existing legislation

Ultimately, the House will have to wait on the Senate to pass their own version of the transportation bill, where four separate committees have jurisdiction over different parts of the bill, and early indications are that the Senate may push the work back until 2010.

On top of that, Charles Rangel, the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee — which will be in charge of finance on the new transportation bill — has already stated that transportation is not at the top of his committee’s list of issues.

Will Oberstar’s claim bear out? One thing is certain. While House leadership may eventually put pressure on him to pass an extension, the current transportation bill cannot be extended without going through his committee.