Skip to main content

Author Archives: Jenna Fortunati

How transit agencies are keeping workers and riders safe

As we slowly settle into a new normal, transit agencies across the country are making big changes to their operations to keep employees and riders safe. We checked in with our transit agency members across the country to see how they’re adapting to COVID-19 and what they need to keep going. 

Join us on Twitter all-day tomorrow (Thursday, September 17) for a #SaveTransit Tweet Storm. Tweet at your member of Congress to #SaveTransit using our social media toolkit, and send an email to your members using our action page.

A transit rider wearing a mask on the Washington, DC Metro. Photo by Elvert Barnes on Flickr’s Creative Commons.

It’s been almost six months since COVID-19 radically altered our lives, and public transportation remains both vital and in a major crisis. The pandemic has shattered transit agencies’ funding sources, with necessary shutdowns and social distancing measures depleting revenue from fares and sales taxes. 

It was already a perpetual challenge for agencies to keep trains and buses operating in pre-pandemic times, thanks to limited federal funding and a national transportation program that prioritizes driving over all other modes. But the added (and costly) challenge of keeping transit employees and riders safe from contracting COVID-19 has made operating transit safely and efficiently even more challenging. Transit agencies across the country are announcing major cuts to service, a consequence of plummeting revenues. 

Transit agencies have a vital role in connecting people to jobs, healthcare, grocery stores and other essential services. Here’s what Transportation for America’s transit members are doing to keep employees and riders safe and connected to the things they need—and what will happen if the transit industry doesn’t receive at least $32 billion in emergency relief from the federal government. 

Innovating on the fly

With limited federal guidance, transit agencies across the country often acted on their own to implement COVID-19 safety measures. Many transit agencies decided to suspend fare collection to reduce contact between riders and bus operators, and only allow rear-door bus boarding and install plexiglass shields at bus operators’ seats for the same reason. 

Both Mountain Line (Missoula, MT) and DART (Des Moines, IA) began running “plug buses”—running two buses in tandem—to provide riders with more space to social distance on buses. Mountain Line, Pierce Transit (Tacoma, WA), and the Sacramento Regional Transit District also parked some of their buses to create community WiFi hotspots, providing another service essential to weathering the COVID-19 crisis, especially for students lacking internet service at home to continue their studies remotely. 

Spending more than ever

Most transit agencies are spending more than they ever have on cleaning transit vehicles and personal protective equipment to keep their employees safe. Pierce Transit hired temporary employees to increase sanitizing buses. King County Metro (Seattle, WA) committed to cleaning buses every night, with special attention paid to ensuring the safety of cleaning staff. Most transit agencies acquired sanitizing wipes, hand sanitizer, and washable masks for employees—but struggled with procuring these essential items in the early days of the pandemic. 

Cleaning isn’t the only category increasing costs—many transit agencies are giving employees more paid leave to ensure the health of themselves and their families. DART found that many of its bus operators fall into high-risk health categories, causing the agency to increase leave for high-risk employees and employees dealing with childcare issues as a result of school closures. Pierce Transit also allowed high-risk employees to take four to five weeks of leave, and took advantage of the federal Families First Coronavirus Response Act to provide employees with an additional 80 hours of paid leave for childcare. That’s good for employees, but it has also left some agencies without enough workers to provide essential service.

Without federal emergency relief, transit can’t go on

The double whammy of increased costs and decreasing revenue is slamming transit agencies—to the point where if they don’t receive emergency relief soon, they’ll have to drastically reduce service (or even cease to exist). While March’s CARES Act provided some relief ($25 billion in operating support), the financial hole public transportation is falling into has gotten much, much larger—at least $32 billion. 

Transit agencies across the country are calling for at least $32 billion in emergency relief from the federal government, but Congress isn’t listening. Senate Republicans’ most recent COVID-19 relief proposal didn’t include any emergency funding for transit, and the House Democrats HEROES Act provided less than half of what transit needs. And both chambers of Congress are no closer to reaching any agreement whatsoever on a desperately needed relief package to provide support for transit, unemployment, the Payroll Protection Program, or other critical mechanisms for supporting Americans during this economic crisis.

Without transit, millions of people across the country will lose access to essential jobs, healthcare, and grocery stores—in the middle of a major, deadly pandemic. Losing transit service also erodes the prospect of any long-term economic recovery, with limited and infrequent transit service unable to connect people to opportunities and essential services they need. 

Congress must include at least $32 billion in emergency operating relief for public transportation in the next COVID-19 relief bill, or leave your constituents stranded. 

Tell Congress that they needed to pass emergency relief for transit yesterday. Email your members of Congress using our action page and tweet at your Congressional delegation to #SaveTransit using our social media toolkit.

Transit agencies, riders, unions, and members of Congress rally to save transit

Last week, a diverse group of transit stakeholders advocated for at least $32 billion in federal emergency funding for public transportation during a virtual rally. Scores of transit riders, transit agency executives, union leaders and members of Congress made it clear that transit won’t survive this crisis without help.

Transit needs your help. Here’s what you can do.

Public transit is essential and facing a financial crisis. We need to keep the pressure on Congress to pass at least $32 billion in emergency relief for transit.

(1) Email and call your members of Congress. Your Congressional delegation needs to hear from you. Use our action page to send an email to your members of Congress, and then follow-up with a call using this script.

(2) Tweet #SaveTransit today. We’re joining with the Save Public Transit Rally organizers this Tuesday to make #SaveTransit trend. Use our social media toolkit to tweet (and tag your members of Congress) in support of at least $32 billion in emergency relief for transit. 

Senate Republicans’ most recent COVID-19 relief proposal didn’t include any emergency funding for public transportation (at a time when transit is in crisis) and the House Democrats HEROES Act provided less than half of what transit needs. With budgets in freefall, transit agencies across the country are making drastic cuts to service, severing millions of people from access to essential jobs, healthcare and grocery stores—all during a deadly pandemic. These cuts erode the prospect of any long-term economic recovery, with limited and infrequent transit service unable to connect people to opportunities and essential services they need. 

That’s why transit agencies, riders, union leaders, and members of Congress came together last week to explain why transit agencies need at least $32 billion in emergency relief. 

Click through to take action to save transit.

At the Save Public Transit Rally, transit executives and riders from Chicago, Cleveland, New Orleans, New York City, Philadelphia, and San Francisco joined forces with the AFL-CIO Transportation Trades Department, the Transport Workers Union, Senators Chuck Schumer (NY) and Chris Van Hollen (MD), and Representatives Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-4) and Jerry Nadler (NY-10) to resoundingly support at least $32 billion in emergency relief for public transit. The rally, available to watch in full here, was organized by Transportation for America, the Riders Alliance of New York, and Alliance for a Just Society, and co-sponsored by 39 other organizations. 

“Public transit is not an option. Public transit is a lifeline,” said Rep. Jesús “Chuy” García. “The working men and women at all transit agencies across the country roll up their sleeves and go to work everyday.  They enable the rest of our essential frontline workers to get the job done.  Now it’s our turn.” 

What made the rally especially powerful was that transit riders spoke before the leader of their transit agency and explained how critical transit is to their life. 

“I live in New Orleans. Public transit is my bread and butter,” said Judy Stevens, a New Orleans transit rider. “I’m an essential healthcare worker. I don’t own a car. I use transit to get to work, grocery, doctor appointments, all daily activities. I rely and depend on it. With cutbacks to service during COVID, riders aren’t able to social distance right now. Please Congress, listen to riders, and fully fund transit service.” 

There are thousands of essential workers and riders like Judy across the country. By choosing not to act, Congress is stranding Americans who rely on transit each day and hampering any future recovery. But it’s not too late for Congress to pass the assistance that our nation’s transit systems need to keep running through and after the pandemic.

Three things to know about FY2021 House transportation appropriations

Earlier this month, the House Appropriations Committee approved transportation funding levels for fiscal year 2021. Emergency funding for the primary transit construction program and passenger rail is great, but more money for highways—funneled into existing broken programs that just make traffic worse—is not. Here’s what’s to like and not to like in the House FY2021 transportation appropriations bill. 

Increased funding for transportation is only good if it’s spent on programs that make a difference. Unfortunately, current federal highway policy fails to prioritize maintenance while worsening safety, climate change, and congestion, and undermining investments in rail, transit, biking, and walking. That’s why our transportation problems continue to worsen despite large sums of funding: our highway funding creates problems that wastes the money spent on transit and passenger rail. 

While current public transportation, BUILD Discretionary Grants, and passenger rail policy can be improved, additional funding for these programs, even under current law, is absolutely critical for state and local governments. This is why the FY21 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) bill approved by the House Appropriations Committee is, for the most part, a mixed bag. Here are three things to know. 

1. Emergency funding and policy improvements for Capital Investment Grants (CIG)

Capital Investment Grants (CIG) is the main federal program for constructing new transit assets. In order to receive CIG funding, state and local governments need to raise matching funds. With COVID-19 demolishing state and local governments’ budgets, few entities will be able to receive funding from CIG without making major sacrifices. 

The FY21 THUD appropriations bill includes $5 billion in emergency funding for CIG, bringing CIG’s total fiscal year funding level to $7.2 billion. The bill also makes a policy change that will make CIG funding more accessible in the COVID-19 era: Funds made available by this bill can be used for amendments to an existing Full Funding Grant Agreement to lower or defer the local match, something that may be necessary due to COVID-19. 

2. No emergency funding for transit operations

With all of public transportation’s funding sources—farebox revenue, state and local sales tax revenue, and more—dwindling due to COVID-19, transit is in dire need of emergency operating support. Many transit agencies are anticipating running out of funds in the next few months, stranding riders who depend on transit to reach their jobs, healthcare, groceries, and other services. 

In May, transit agencies, elected officials, and organizations across the country called for $32 billion in emergency support; many agencies have now upped their ask to $36 billion. But the FY2021 THUD appropriations bill doesn’t provide any emergency operating support for transit. There’s hope that transit will be included in the next round of COVID-19 relief legislation, but it might not be at the level necessary to keep transit services running. 

3. More highway funding for broken programs

The FY2021 THUD bill significantly increases highway and transit funding levels to match the INVEST Act, the House-passed proposal to reauthorize federal transportation policy. However, while FY21 appropriations must be approved to avoid a government shutdown, the INVEST Act is unlikely to become law, at least not this year, and the most likely scenario is an extension of current law (the FAST Act). 

This means that these increased funding levels will just be funnelled into programs that make our problems worse—particularly the federal highway program, which is still hardwired to prioritize car access, incentivizing projects that improve vehicle speed without actually increasing people’s access to jobs and services, reducing our maintenance backlog, or saving lives from crashes. The INVEST Act would update the federal highway program with performance measures that would connect federal funding to the outcomes Americans value, but in the meantime, increased highway funding will likely be spent on building roads to nowhere. 

If the INVEST Act was law, this would be a different story 

The Appropriations Committee directs spending—not policy—so we cannot hold the committee responsible for outdated transportation policy that just makes our problems worse. Although we are concerned that significant new highway funding without policy reform will continue to undermine our goals, we appreciate increased funding levels for transit, passenger rail, and the BUILD program, and the support this Committee has given to the CIG program in FY21 and in recent years. 

This is why we support the INVEST Act, and why we’ll continue to work to secure fundamental reform in the next surface transportation authorization: under new transportation policy, all federal funding will work to improve Americans’ access to the things they need. We’re looking forward to working with Congress to pass transportation policy that puts funding to work. 

What’s next for the INVEST Act?

Last week, the House passed a long-term transportation authorization—the INVEST Act—as part of the Moving Forward Act, House Democrats’ large infrastructure package. But the INVEST Act likely won’t become law anytime soon. Here’s how the INVEST Act advances the debate by moving the starting line for future legislation—and presses the Senate to do something better. 

Biking near the National Mall in Washington, DC. Photo by Elvert Barnes on Flickr’s Creative Commons

Last week, the House of Representatives passed the Moving Forward Act, an infrastructure package that included the INVEST Act. The INVEST Act is a  long-term transportation authorization that takes a markedly different approach to transportation policy: it fundamentally changes the programs at the heart of federal transportation policy to help communities improve access, safety, and their maintenance backlogs. 

But President Trump and the Senate majority have already signaled that they won’t support the bill, and Senate Democrats are supporting a far more inferior reauthorization proposal passed in a committee last summer. And with Congress focused on other pressing issues such as another COVID-19 relief bill, there’s not much time left on the Congressional calendar for Senators and Representatives to agree on a massive infrastructure package. The INVEST Act is likely dead on arrival. 

But all of our research and reports, your calls and messages to legislators, the op-eds, the group and individual sign-on letters, the fact sheets, the social media campaigns, the blogs and more had a major impact. The hard work that made the INVEST Act a new kind of transportation bill laid a powerful foundation for future transportation legislation, making a better final product—whenever one finally passes—far more likely. 

“You think nothing is happening on the Hill, and then it all happens in two days,” said Chris Rall, T4America’s Outreach Director. While the actual legislating only occurs over the course of a few weeks, the work that goes into that first draft bill takes months—years, even. T4America has been laying the groundwork for this new kind of transportation bill for at least the last year, launching our three principles for transportation success in October 2019—all three of which were included in the INVEST Act. 

“One chamber of Congress just voted to make fundamental reform, and that’s a significant victory,” said T4America policy director Scott Goldstein. “The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee did the hearings, research, and outreach. Votes were cast and it’s forever in the Congressional record. And once things are written down, they stick around and become normalized. That’s massive.”

This victory is worlds away from the process that produced MAP-21, a transportation authorization that Congress passed in 2012. During those negotiations, the House attempted to kick public transportation entirely out of the highway trust fund, undoing the political compromise forged by President Reagan in the 1980s to raise the gas tax and devote a portion to transit. A rapid, massive group sign-on letter organized by T4America ultimately prevented the House from passing their calamitous reauthorization proposal, leading House legislators to enter conference with the Senate with only a draft. 

Unlike MAP-21, the FAST Act that replaced it in 2015, and all other transportation authorizations, the INVEST Act starts the work of finally connecting federal funding to the outcomes Americans want—rather than the Senate’s approach of simply pouring more money into the same old broken systems and hoping for better results.

The INVEST Act almost certainly won’t become law this year. But when lawmakers are able to focus on an infrastructure package, the INVEST Act—a bill that updates our broken federal transportation program by prioritizing maintenance, safety, access, climate, and equity—will be the template for the House. That’s a success in our books.

House’s new climate action plan takes a page from T4America’s playbook

Last week, the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis released a new legislative blueprint for tackling climate change that incorporates a number of T4America’s recommendations. The blueprint goes beyond merely electrifying vehicles to take a much wider view—prioritizing repair, safety, and access, and promoting transit, biking, and walking. 

Riding a Citi Bike in New York City. Photo by Thomas Hawk on Flickr’s Creative Commons

For too long, electric cars have been the sole focal point of legislative efforts to reduce transportation emissions. Transportation is the single largest source of greenhouse gases (GHG), contributing 29 percent of the United States’ total greenhouse gas emissions—and the majority of these emissions come from driving. Electric vehicles (EV) would seem like a guaranteed way to bring those emissions down, but they are not enough. Increasing rates of driving are negating even impressive gains in fuel efficiency and EV adoption. Between 1990-2016, a 50 percent increase in driving negated a 35 percent increase in overall fleet fuel efficiency brought on by the implementation of CAFE standards. This caused emissions to rise by 21 percent over the same time period. 

To truly bring down transportation emissions, we need to think #BeyondEVs. We need to stop building expensive, unnecessary new roads that just increase vehicle miles traveled (VMT). We need to stop making car ownership a prerequisite for participating in the economy. We need to actually measure emissions from the transportation sector, and penalize states for pursuing projects that fail to bring those emissions down. We need to focus on the low-carbon modes that can improve people’s lives: transit, walking, and biking. 

This is what we recommended to the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis in November 2019 when they asked us for strategies to reduce emissions. The Committee released their new legislative blueprint for tackling climate change last week, and we are incredibly pleased to see our recommendations shaping the transportation section. 

Here are the T4America recommendations for moving #BeyondEVs that found a home in the new blueprint. 

Measure what matters: Greenhouse gas emissions and access

The House blueprint recommends creating a new performance measure for greenhouse gas emissions, requiring states and metro areas to measure emissions and then create plans for lowering them—just like in the INVEST Act. “It gets a lot harder to justify building a new highway (that you probably can’t afford to maintain anyway) when you have to reduce emissions with your federal dollars, considering that every 1 percent increase in lane miles results in a 1 percent increase in vehicle miles traveled,” as Smart Growth America wrote in this more expansive blog on the House blueprint.

The blueprint also takes steps to increase access to jobs and services by all modes, a climate-forward proposition that starts to make moving people—not just vehicles— the focus of transportation funding. “The House Select Committee adopted our core priority to start measuring access to destinations, directing states and MPOs to start evaluating how well the transportation system is facilitating access to housing, jobs, and critical services by any and all modes—similar to provisions that were included in the INVEST Act,” as Smart Growth America wrote in this more expansive blog on the House blueprint. The blueprint also directs agencies to analyze how low-income communities and communities of color experience difference degrees of access to jobs and services. 

Make roads safer to walk, bike, and ride transit

Walking, biking, and riding transit are the lowest-emitting modes of transportation, but dangerous streets and disconnected communities make them difficult for many Americans to reap their benefits. The Committee makes numerous recommendations throughout the plan to prioritize funding for low-carbon transportation, especially walking and biking—and not just by increasing funding for the Transportation Alternatives Program, which receives only a meager $750 million for biking and walking projects across the country.  

Measuring access instead of vehicle speed, as noted above, would begin to improve safety for all road users by measuring access by all modes—that includes walking, biking, and riding transit. But the plan also recommends requiring states to use “complete streets” and context-sensitive principles, using language that actually comes directly from T4America’s long letter of recommendations for the Committee. 

Stop building needless new roads by prioritizing maintenance

Prioritizing repair is not the kind of strategy that is on the radar of most climate advocates, but it would in fact make a huge difference by stemming the trend of inducing more driving, making it an incredibly effective climate policy that could be easily implemented. How so? The nation’s roads are deteriorating, contributing to a looming financial problem, yet states consistently underinvest in maintenance and build new roads instead that bring increases in emissions. As we found in our report Repair Priorities (cited by the House Select Committee in their blueprint), between 2009 and 2017, the percentage of the roads nationwide in poor condition increased from 14 to 20 percent. At the same time many states continued to spend a significant portion of funding to build new roads. 

As we discussed above, building new roads increases driving, with every 1 percent increase in lane miles resulting in a 1 percent increase in vehicle miles traveled. Prioritizing maintenance means that states can’t use federal funds to build new roads while neglecting their basic maintenance needs—a requirement that was included in the recently-passed INVEST Act. 

It’s time to go #BeyondEVs—and the House majority agrees

With driving contributing the majority of U.S. transportation emissions, it’s time to shift our focus from reducing pollution from all the cars to asking: “why do we need all those cars in the first place, and can we drive them less overall?” Because we know that electrifying cars isn’t enough. We will not be able to electrify vehicles faster than vehicle miles traveled are increasing—the consequence of our national transportation strategy prioritizing vehicle access above all else. 

To substantially reduce our GHG emissions, we need to couple electrification with strategies that cut to the heart of our problem: too much driving. We’re pleased to see so many of our recommendations included in the Committee’s blueprint, and are excited to continue to push the needle towards reducing emissions with our new partners in the House.

Release: 88 elected officials, organizations, and businesses thank the House Transportation Committee for passing the INVEST Act

press release

WASHINGTON, DC: Last week, 88 elected officials, organizations and businesses signed a letter written by Transportation for America commending the leaders of the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee for passing a new framework for the federal transportation program. The INVEST (Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation) in America Act takes a markedly different approach to transportation policy that would begin to put outcomes—instead of the price tag—at the center of our decision making.

“Chair Peter DeFazio has done a tremendous job crafting a new kind of transportation bill,” said Beth Osborne, director of Transportation for America. “Change on this scale is notoriously difficult to achieve, but the House T&I Committee pulled it off. We thank Chair DeFazio and the House T&I Committee for their work and urge the full House to pass the INVEST Act. We especially recognize the hard work of Representatives Jesús ‘Chuy’ García and Mike Gallagher in introducing and supporting an amendment to strengthen the maintenance requirement in the bill, respectively.” 

Many of these same 88 signatories also signed a Transportation for America letter to Congress this past April urging the House T&I Committee to adopt important reforms—reforms that were ultimately included in the INVEST Act. Last week’s letter thanks Chair Peter DeFazio (OR-4) and Ranking Member Sam Graves (MO-6) for their efforts and expresses strong support for the INVEST Act, praising its efforts to finally place the highest priority on repairing U.S. roads, bridges and transit systems; saving lives; increasing access to jobs and services by all modes; and reducing greenhouse gas emissions. 

With federal transportation policy set to expire this September, the full House of Representatives will vote on the INVEST Act this week, which  would represent a notable rewrite of our country’s transportation policy. The INVEST Act stands in sharp contrast to the long-term transportation bill passed by the Senate last July, America’s Transportation Infrastructure Act (ATIA). The ATIA pours billions of new dollars into the status quo of broken policy, overshadowing notable improvements like a climate title and Complete Streets requirements. 

The full letter is available to view here.

House committee passes a new kind of transportation bill: the INVEST Act

After two days of debate, the House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure passed its proposal for long-term surface transportation policy last week. The INVEST Act starts the work of updating our broken federal transportation program by prioritizing maintenance, safety, access, climate, and equity. T4America thanks Chair Peter DeFazio for leading this effort and we urge the House to pass this modern bill next week. 

For decades, federal transportation policy has sung the same tired tune: if we spend more money (that we don’t have) on building new roads (that we don’t need), our transportation problems will solve themselves. But they’ve only gotten worse. Inequitable access to jobs and services, congestion that only gets worse, more and more people killed while walking and biking, astronomical maintenance needs, increasing emissions—you name it. 

But last week, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) passed a bill that starts to change this story. The INVEST (Investing in a New Vision for the Environment and Surface Transportation) in America Act takes a markedly different approach to transportation policy that would begin to put outcomes—instead of price tags—at the center of our decision making. 

“Chair Peter DeFazio has done a tremendous job crafting a new kind of transportation bill,” said Beth Osborne, director of Transportation for America. “Change on this scale is notoriously difficult to achieve, but the House T&I Committee pulled it off. We thank Chair DeFazio and the House T&I Committee for their work and urge the full House to pass the INVEST Act. We especially recognize the hard work of Representatives Jesús ‘Chuy’ García and Mike Gallagher in introducing and supporting an amendment to strengthen the maintenance requirement in the bill, respectively.” 

The full House of Representatives will likely vote on the INVEST Act next week; if passed, the bill would rewrite our country’s transportation rules for the next five years. T4America is pleased to support this exciting bill and strongly recommend that House legislators vote in its support. 

What does the INVEST Act actually do?

The INVEST Act starts the work of connecting transportation funding to the outcomes communities need from their transportation systems: improved access, decreased emissions, safer and well-maintained roads and more. Here’s the rundown. 

  • Maintenance: Sets aside funds for repair and requires states to fulfill conditions (which includes performance measures for state of good repair and others) before  building or expanding roads.
  • Safety: Takes aggressive action to make our streets safer with everything from new street design standards to changing how speed limits are set.
  • Access: Focus transportation planning on multimodal access so people outside of cars are no longer left behind.
  • Equity:  Prioritizes safety—especially for people struck and killed while walking which disproportionately affects low-income people and people of color—, requires that every state establish a vulnerable road user safety assessment, and reserves transit funding to serve areas of persistent poverty.
  • Climate. Takes a holistic approach to addressing climate change through new performance measures and grant programs.

In addition to our four key amendments that we were tracking (of which only the repair amendment was approved), here are the others that we were keeping a particularly close eye on.

We’ll have more shortly, including a quick look at a few important things to know about the INVEST Act, and how the INVEST Act stacks up against the Senate’s reauthorization proposal from last year. 

Here’s how the new House bill prioritizes getting people where they need to go

It’s surprising, but the current federal transportation program doesn’t actually require that states spend federal funds to improve people’s access to jobs and services. This is why the bulk of transportation funding goes to increasing vehicle speed, a “goal” that fails to help many people get where they need to go. The new transportation proposal from the House of Representatives fixes that with a powerful new performance measure and grant programs. 

The House transportation committee is marking up and voting on the INVEST Act this week. View our amendment tracker here, get real-time updates by following @t4america on Twitter, visit our hub for all T4America content about the INVEST Act, and take action by sending a message to your representative if they sit on this House committee.

There’s a reason why Transportation for America’s third principle for transportation policy is to connect people to jobs and services, because instead of measuring transportation success by how many jobs and services people can get to, our current federal transportation policy considers how fast cars can drive on specific segments of road.

Here’s how a new performance measure and grant programs in the House’s five-year INVEST Act would start to focus transportation funding on what counts: getting people where they need to go.

The current approach is broken

To determine if you had a successful trip, you probably think about getting from point A to point B and how long that trip would take. But transportation agencies don’t measure success that way: they instead measure whether or not your vehicle was moving quickly at some point of the trip. Whether or not you actually arrived isn’t measured. This metric of “success” ignores those who can’t or don’t drive, take transit, or are mobility impaired. This doesn’t mean drivers are loving life either though: they may be able to go fast but still feel trapped in their car for too much of the day to get to the things they need. Vehicle speed isn’t a good measure of whether or not people can conveniently access the things they need in their daily lives.

We think it is time to consider how well the transportation system provides access to jobs as well as all other necessities, from the grocery to the bank to school and health care. Access is not only a much better measure, areas with high accessibility allow people to access opportunities and necessities even if they’re not able to afford to drive alone. So this measure captures whether our communities provide equitable access to opportunity, allow for healthy and active living, and contribute less to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions as well as pollutants that harm public health.

And now, the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure brought this important concept into their vision for the future of the nation’s transportation program .

How this game-changing performance measure works

The INVEST Act creates a new performance measure that requires project sponsors to improve access to jobs and services by all modes. While seemingly minor, this marks a huge shift in how transportation funding would be allocated—especially because project sponsors will be penalized if they fail to use federal funding to improve access. The Virginia Department of Transportation has been doing this successfully for years, but this type of performance measure has not been tried across the nation yet and has never been attempted at the federal level before.

Under the INVEST Act, states and MPOs must consider whether people traveling (not just driving) can reach jobs, schools, groceries, medical care and other necessities. And they will be penalized if they fail to use federal funding to improve that access.

New grant programs will also support this approach

The INVEST Act authors know that transportation doesn’t exist in a vacuum: housing plays a huge role in how many jobs and services people can access. Putting housing (and especially attainable housing) close to transit is a powerful way to increase access to jobs and necessities. That’s why the bill requires the Federal Transit Administration to create the Office of Transit-Supportive Communities to provide funding, technical assistance, and coordination of transit and housing projects within the U.S. Department of Transportation and across the federal government. Further, this proposal adds affordable housing into the planning considerations for metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and state DOT Transportation Improvement Programs, as well as for future transit capital grants.

The new Community Transportation Investment Program also solidifies the importance of access as a measure of success to the federal transportation program. The INVEST Act authorizes $600 million per year for competitive grants to localities and agencies for projects which improve safety, state of good repair, access to jobs and services, and the environment by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This requires the Secretary of Transportation to develop a system to objectively evaluate projects on program criteria, and develop a rating system which can be used to compare the benefits and costs of each application—as with Virginia’s Smart Scale program.

How these policies will actually improve the transportation system

Measuring access—not vehicle speed—puts transportation projects, regardless of mode, on an even playing field. Technologies like GIS and cloud computing makes it easier for states and MPOs to determine whether their system is connecting people in residential areas to jobs and services by all means of travel. With this information, project sponsors can consider all kinds of transportation projects and all transportation users equally. States and MPOs can also see when it is more cost-efficient to build the things people need closer to them, rather than defaulting to building expensive, new transportation projects to make far away necessities less inconvenient to travel to. With this, we can create more equitable access to economic opportunity, lower transportation costs, and reduce emissions and the damaging climate and health impacts of them.

The federal transportation program as we know it was largely created to increase vehicle speeds across the country, connecting the nation through a network of highways. Now that those highways are built, and we thoroughly understand the consequences of speed—both in terms of loss of life and failure to improve travel times and cost—it’s time to use technology to connect federal funding to the transportation outcomes we need. We’re pleased to support this new performance measure and accompanying grant programs in the INVEST Act.

Over 160 sign letter in support of $32 billion for transit, but the fight isn’t over

Last week, the House of Representatives passed a COVID-19 relief bill that only included $15 billion in emergency support for public transportation. That’s not nearly enough; and it’s why over 160 organizations and elected officials signed our letter in support of $32 billion for transit on short notice. But we still need you to take action.

Public transportation is on life support. Without at least $32 billion in additional emergency funding, transit agencies can’t keep their workers healthy or safely return to service when this pandemic subsides. That’s why over 160 organizations and elected officials quickly signed our letter urging Congress to pass $32 billion for transit with less than 48 hours’ notice.

But the fight isn’t yet won. Last Friday, the House of Representatives passed a COVID-19 relief bill—the HEROES Act—that only includes $15 billion in emergency operating support for public transportation. That’s a start, but it’s insufficient for the scale of the crisis. We know that transit needs more, which is why we’re also calling on individuals to send a message to their members of Congress

Take action

A coalition of transit-related unions and transit agencies in New York City, San Francisco, New Jersey, and Atlanta have estimated that transit programs across the country will need an additional $32 billion through the end of 2021. In March, research group TransitCenter estimated that transit agencies would experience losses between $26-$38 billion this year due to impacts from COVID-19. Agencies are predicting losses that far outstrip the one-time emergency funding they received in March from the federal government. 

As the HEROES Act stalls on Capitol Hill, we need you to send a message to your congressional delegation: the next COVID-19 relief package must include $32 billion for transit.

If we don’t act now, millions of Americans—including millions of essential workers, such as nurses and grocery clerks—will lose access to jobs, healthcare, and other critical services. And any long-term economic recovery will be nearly impossible without transit service to help people safely get back to work as this unprecedented crisis subsides. We can’t afford for transit to stop running, or be unable to pick up when the economy does. We need Congress to act. Send your message today!

Here are 4 things transit agencies can do to fight for more funding

The $25 billion in emergency funding provided for transit agencies in the first COVID-19 relief package was a great start—but as the crisis continues, agencies (and rural agencies in particular) likely need more funds to keep their personnel safe and return to normal service when stay at home orders loosen. Here are four powerful actions transit agencies can take to fight for more funding. 

Public transportation budgets are currently in freefall. With revenue dwindling due to dramatically reduced ridership, diminished sale tax receipts, and other impacts from a contracting economy, transit agencies might lose between $26-$38 billion this year. This severely constricts agencies’ abilities to run enough service to get essential workers to their jobs and to keep their personnel safe from contracting COVID-19—and all but annihilates the possibility of returning to normal service when stay at home orders loosen. 

The $25 billion in emergency operating assistance for transit included in the first coronavirus relief package—the CARES Act, passed last month—will support agencies for a little while, and even helped Grand Rapids’ transit agency postpone 300 layoffs. But it’s not enough. If transit agencies, riders, and advocates don’t speak up, the choice to cut transit funding at the federal and state level may not be too hard.

Transit agencies can make sure that doesn’t happen. Here are four powerful actions transit agencies can take to push Congress to pass more emergency funding for transit. 

1. Track and publicize how COVID-19 is impacting your agency

COVID-19 is having a massive impact on every aspect of public transportation—so if you aren’t already, track these impacts. Quantifying costs and recording stories from personnel and riders will help you make the case for funding. 

Some items worth tracking are COVID-19’s impacts on your budget, particularly:

  • Whether funding from the CARES Act is sufficient to help you maintain frequent, uncrowded service for essential workers, and how long existing funding will last; 
  • If your needs have changed since receiving CARES Act funding; 
  • If you are considering layoffs and what it would cost to avoid layoffs; 
  • Rates of staff illnesses, quarantines, and fatalities. 

2. Work with reporters to cover these impacts

What’s happening to public transportation—and what will happen if transit agencies don’t receive anymore emergency funding—is an incredibly important and newsworthy story. Be open with reporters: share COVID-19’s immediate impacts with them, and how COVID-19 is affecting your ability to provide transit service now and in the future. You have a story that deserves to be in the news. 

3. Call your elected officials

As an essential industry on the frontline of the pandemic, transit agencies are some of the only entities that can give elected officials accurate and detailed accounts of how COVID-19 is impacting public services and hurting their personnel. And as recipients of federal funding, transit agencies have a responsibility to communicate to Congress particularly that your ability to connect essential workers to jobs is shrinking due to dwindling resources. 

We recommend just picking up the phone and calling your Congressional delegation, your state representatives, your governor’s office, your mayor’s office, and your city council—it is their job to listen to you. Tell them about staff illness and quarantines, and what you need to get essential workers to jobs. Tell them what you’re doing to protect employees and the public, and what you need to keep them safe. Tell them that frankly, you don’t know what COVID-19 means for your agency.

4. Engage your local advocates and riders

Passionate transportation advocates and riders—especially essential workers who are using transit to get to their jobs—are one of your greatest resources. Tell advocates and riders that if they want transit service to exist now and when stay at home orders loosen, they need to call their elected officials to secure more emergency operating funding for transit. Share how COVID-19 is impacting your agency to arm advocates and riders with the tools to help you. 

For inspiration, Oklahoma Transit Association’s Faces of Transit project is a terrific example of using riders’ stories to promote increased funding for transit. 

Psssh, there’s one more thing: Tell T4America how we can help you: Email us (or ask to hop on the phone) to tell us what you’re experiencing. The more we know, the more we can help. 

The CARES Act isn’t enough to save public transportation

COVID-19 is costing transit agencies billions in lost revenue and increased costs to protect personnel. And unfortunately, the $25 billion in emergency funding Congress gave transit in the CARES Act isn’t enough—especially if stay-at-home orders continue indefinitely. The next relief package needs to give transit agencies more emergency assistance in order to keep transit workers safe and make sure that transit will be there when this crisis is over. 

Last month, President Trump signed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Emergency Security (CARES) Act, a $2 trillion relief package that gives transit agencies $25 billion in emergency relief. This is great, especially since the first draft of the bill included not one cent for public transportation. 

But as transit agencies across the country report mounting losses, we know that the CARES Act likely isn’t enough. Congress needs to give transit more emergency assistance. If they don’t, agencies won’t be able to keep their personnel safe from the virus, and they might not be able to  return to normal service when this crisis ends. 

Federal emergency funds are lower than transit’s losses

In March, research group TransitCenter estimated that transit agencies would experience losses between $26-$38 billion this year due to impacts from COVID-19. That range seemed huge at first, but no longer: agencies are predicting losses that far outstrip the emergency funding they received from the federal government. 

The $25 billion in emergency assistance from the CARES Act was apportioned to urbanized areas—not directly to transit agencies—through existing formula programs, meaning that we don’t yet know how much money individual transit agencies received. However, in New York’s case, the total sum for the urbanized area is smaller than the amount the region’s largest transit agency is losing. With ridership and revenue from sales taxes plummeting, New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) announced in March that the agency is anticipating losing approximately $10 billion in revenue this year—almost $5 billion more than the entire region received from the CARES Act. TransitCenter also recently estimated that MTA faces a shortfall of at least $4.4-$8 billion.

Many other urbanized areas are also home to multiple transit agencies, further splintering each region’s CARES Act funding. Each region typically follows their own protocol for distributing federal funding among its transit agencies. But this unprecedented loss of  revenue—and first ever infusion of federal support for operating expenses, not capital costs—might throw that protocol into chaos, meaning that agencies might not receive the percentage of federal funding they normally get. 

The San Francisco Bay Area has over 27 transit agencies, with the  Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) the largest of all. COVID-19 has created a budget shortfall between $258 million to $452 million for the agency, yet the entire region only received $822 million from the CARES Act.

It’s a similar story in the Washington, DC region, home to over 20 transit agencies. The Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) is anticipating a “$67 million deficit, including $17 million in unanticipated expenses for gloves, sanitizer, disinfectants and other supplies the agency ordered to protect against the pandemic and $2.5 million a day in lost fare revenue,” according to the agency’s general manager. Yet given other regions’ unprecedented losses, WMATA’s deficit is likely much larger. Funding from the CARES Act for the DC region—a total of $1 billion—likely won’t cover their needs.

It’s not just big city transit agencies that are in trouble, though: rural transit agencies, already operating on very tight margins with unstable support, might not survive COVID-19 without more emergency assistance than they received through the CARES Act. The modest pay and part-time nature of driving for a rural system means it doesn’t pay the bills but can supplement retirement income. Because of this, rural transit drivers are more often older—most are over 65—and therefore at greater risk of complications or even death, should they be infected by COVID-19. 

“The federal funding may get us through the peak of this pandemic,” Karl Gnadt, the managing director of the Champaign-Urbana Mass Transit District in Illinois, said to the New York Times . “The real concern is what’s next. At a time when unemployment is going to be rising and public transit becomes more and more critical, our funding is going to be going away. And we will be seeing significant service cuts.”

Without emergency funding, transit workers are at risk

Lost revenue isn’t the only strain on transit agencies’ budgets. Without funding, it’s becoming increasingly difficult for agencies to keep transit workers safe from COVID-19. 

Over 2,500 employees of New York City’s transit agency, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), have tested positive for COVID-19—and 68 have tragically died from the disease. With 5,000 employees quarantined, maintaining already-reduced service for essential workers is even more difficult. “If you have 10 people on a [transit] line and three of them are sick, you are going to have a schedule that’s not working and leads to overcrowding,” a spokesperson for the Transport Workers Union (TWU) told The Chief. 

It’s not just New York that’s struggling. According to the TWU, transit workers have also died from COVID-19 in Detroit, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington, DC, Rocky Hill, CT and Everett, WA. (The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released guidance for transit agencies on keeping personnel safe, but they know more guidance is needed—which is why they have invited transit agencies to submit feedback on improving these safety protocols.)

Nobody should die doing their job—which is why transit agencies are pouring resources to keep personnel safe. Transit agencies all over the country are suspending fare collection to minimize riders’ interactions with operators, allowing rear-door boarding, and distributing thousands of masks and gloves every single day—all incredibly costly but necessary measures. 

But it’s still not enough. Transit agencies need more emergency funding from the federal government to make sure that workers are protected from the virus. Funding transit isn’t “infrastructure”—it’s protection for frontline workers, and a guarantee that essential personnel, from healthcare to grocery workers, can get to their jobs now and when this crisis is over. 

Transit agencies need to keep telling Congress what COVID-19 is costing them

Update, 4/17: Our friends at TransitCenter are leading a sign-on letter to the White House Coronavirus Task Force requesting personal protective equipment for transit workers. If you represent an organization, please sign TransitCenter’s letter by end of day Monday, April 20th.

With costs rising to protect transit personnel from the pandemic and revenue streams simultaneously coming to a halt, public transportation likely needs more emergency funding than the $25 billion passed three weeks ago. Transit agencies have a responsibility to communicate their needs—and the major steps they’re taking to save lives—to their Congressional delegations. 

Transit workers—the bus operators, train operators, station managers, and other personnel that make public transportation thrive—are on the frontline of the COVID-19 pandemic. Without them, scores of essential personnel wouldn’t be able to get to work; at least 35 percent of riders during regular times work in healthcare, grocery, and other essential industries. 

But with revenue screeching to a halt, transit agencies don’t have the tools to protect their employees from this pandemic, let alone return to normal service after this crisis ends. The $25 billion in emergency assistance for transit provided by the federal government is a great start, but it’s almost certainly not enough—especially with TransitCenter estimating losses between $26-$38 billion. 

The best way to ensure that Congress provides transit with additional emergency assistance is for agencies to communicate these needs with their Congressional delegations. As an essential industry on the frontline of the pandemic, transit agencies are some of the only entities that can give Congress accurate and detailed accounts of how COVID-19 is impacting public services and hurting their personnel. And as recipients of federal funding, transit agencies have a responsibility to communicate that their ability to connect essential workers to jobs is shrinking due to dwindling resources. 

Congress hears from airlines. Congress hears from automakers. Congress hears from state DOTs. They don’t hear from transit agencies as frequently. Congress’s minimal understanding of transit agencies’ needs might partially explain why the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 only provided transit agencies with capital funding, meaning that they could use that money for maintenance or constructing new infrastructure, but not for the costs of actually running transit service. The lack of operating support meant that transit agencies across the country had to cut service—at a time when Americans needed an affordable, convenient, and safe connection to jobs the most. 

Transit agencies need funding to protect personnel from COVID-19

Nobody should die doing their job—which is why transit agencies are pouring resources into efforts to keep personnel safe. Transit agencies all over the country are suspending fare collection to minimize riders’ interactions with operators, allowing rear-door boarding, and distributing thousands of masks and gloves every single day—all incredibly costly but necessary measures. 

But without robust funding, transit agencies can’t do enough to protect employees. Over 1,500 employees of New York City’s transit agency, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA), have tested positive for COVID-19—and 41 have tragically died from the disease. With 5,000 employees quarantined, maintaining already-reduced service for essential workers even more difficult. “If you have 10 people on a [transit] line and three of them are sick, you are going to have a schedule that’s not working and leads to overcrowding,” a spokesperson for the Transport Workers Union (TWU) told The Chief. 

It’s not just New York that’s struggling. According to the TWU, transit workers have also died from COVID-19 in Detroit, New Orleans, Philadelphia, Boston, Washington, DC, Rocky Hill, CT and Everett, WA. (The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released guidance for transit agencies on keeping personnel safe, but they know more guidance is needed—which is why they have invited transit agencies to submit feedback on improving these safety protocols.) 

The $25 billion in federal emergency assistance for transit agencies will certainly help agencies weather this unprecedented crisis, but with TransitCenter estimating that COVID-19 will cost public transportation between $26-$38 billion, agencies will almost certainly need more. A lot more. 

Transit agencies, please tell your Congressional delegation what COVID-19 is costing you. Tell them if funding from the CARES Act is or isn’t enough to get you through this crisis. Tell them about staff illness and quarantines, and what you need to get essential workers to jobs. Tell them what you’re doing to protect employees and the public, and what you need to keep them safe. Tell them that frankly, you don’t know what COVID-19 means for your agency. Just talk to Congress. They need to hear from you. 

If you’re not a transit agency but still want to tell Congress that transit is important, send Congress a thank you message for providing transit agencies with $25 billion in emergency assistance—and a reminder that more is needed.

Two bills put “access” at the heart of transportation policy

For too long, the focus of the federal transportation program has been vehicle speed, not helping Americans access jobs, schools, grocery stores and more. It’s time to focus our funding on improving people’s access to jobs and services—and U.S. Rep. Chuy García’s (IL-4) two new bills will do exactly that. 

An “L” underpass in Chicago.

Transportation is fundamentally a means for getting people and goods where they need to go. Making sure you get your children to school on time, and yourself to work; having a safe, convenient and affordable way to reach grocery stores and healthcare. 

But our federal transportation program doesn’t make improving these connections its goal. U.S. transportation policy focuses on avoiding any delay to vehicles, making our roads wider and our communities more spread out and disconnected in the process. As a result our transportation system is in crisis. Americans are stuck in congestion on crumbling roads and transit systems, often forced to travel further and further because our system fails to provide safe and convenient choices other than a car trip. 

That’s where two new bills from Representative Jesús “Chuy” García (IL-04) come in. Today, Rep. García—along with his two co-chairs of the Future of Transportation Caucus—introduced the Improving Access to Jobs Act and Improving Access to Services Act to Congress with 12 co-sponsors, including Representatives Ayanna Pressley (MA-07), Mark Takano (CA-41), Rashida Tlaib (MI-13), Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-03), Steve Cohen (TN-09), Jan Schakowsky (IL-9), Nanette Diaz Barragán (CA-44), Bennie G. Thompson (MS-02), Jahana Hayes (CT-05), Bobby L. Rush (IL-01), Ann Kirkpatrick (AZ-02), and Darren Soto (FL-9). 

These two bills would finally align federal spending with how people intuitively think about transportation: whether or not they can access their destinations. 

“Our transportation systems are failing Americans who face growing congestion, roads and transit systems in disrepair, and long-standing inequities that disproportionately hurt marginalized communities,” said Rep. García. “Any future transportation policies must make smarter investments to improve access, cut travel times, and lower the financial barriers to mobility for all.”

The two bills will create performance measures that make improving access the goal of federal transportation policy, and hold states accountable to improving access by all modes of travel. The bills would prevent metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) from increasing the ratio of automobile to non-automobile access in urbanized areas, empowering MPOs and states to balance transit, bike, and pedestrian investments alongside new roadway investments over an entire region. This would guarantee that any new roadway investments do not degrade transit, bike, and pedestrian access. 

If states fail to improve access, they must invest 10 percent of federal transportation funds apportioned to a state from the previous fiscal year into efforts to improve access overall. This requirement is in effect until the Secretary of Transportation certifies that a state is in compliance.

This intuitive concept—prioritizing access, not speed—is revolutionary in the world of transportation policy, which adopted speed as a metric for success before we had technologies like cloud computing and GIS that make measuring access possible. Some states already use access to allocate state transportation funding, like Virginia DOT. 

Two bills, one goal

There’s an important reason why Rep. García introduced these transformative performance measures as two seperate bills, though: People perceive commutes to work and trips to services differently. This has implications for transportation planning. 

People generally have a higher tolerance for longer commutes to work. Tolerance is lower for long trips to services—like grocery shopping, doctor’s appointments, recreation, and more—because they are often linked in one trip, rather than multiple round-trip journeys to and from homes. So while people might consider a 30-minute commute to be manageable, an area that’s 30-minutes one-way to the grocery store qualifies as a food desert—hence the need for different performance measures. 

Together, these two bills are one huge step towards prioritizing access in federal transportation legislation. But there are additional actions the federal government can take to truly make access a priority. T4America has called for the U.S. Department of Transportation to develop a national assessment of access to jobs and services and set national goals for improvement; to phase out outdated metrics such as level of service; and to provide accessibility data to states, MPOs, and local communities. (You can read our full recommendations here.) 

Proposing a new way of doing things is never easy, particularly when it challenges how America fundamentally measures the success of our transportation system. We thank Rep. García for leading this effort toward a better, more accessible future.

Here’s what Transportation for America has been up to this March

With COVID-19 throwing public transportation into an existential crisis, Transportation for America mobilized to preserve America’s most essential transportation service—and we did, with Congress agreeing to $25 billion in emergency assistance for transit operations last week. But while the news has understandably been consumed by COVID-19, the pandemic hasn’t been the only thing on our plates. 

March Madness might have been cancelled, but it’s certainly been a crazy month in America—and crazy busy at Transportation for America. We started the month in report-a-palooza, gearing up to release two landmark reports—and then the global pandemic struck the United States. 

Even though we’ve been working from home, we’re still laser-focused on our mission: to work towards a transportation system that safely, affordably and conveniently connects people of all means and abilities to jobs, services, and opportunity through multiple modes of travel. So here’s what else we’ve been up to. 

Exposing the congestion con

The U.S. spends billions every year to “relieve congestion.” But building new and widening existing highways only makes traffic worse. 

The Congestion Con, our report released earlier this month, found that congestion increased in regions that built new and widened existing freeways, regardless of population growth. Between 1993 and 2017, the U.S. increased the number of lane-miles in the largest 100 urbanized areas by 42 percent on average, significantly outstripping the 32 percent population growth in those regions over the same period. Yet this strategy has utterly failed to “solve” the problem at hand—delay is up in those urbanized areas by a staggering 144 percent.

You can read our full report or check out our webinar on the report with T4America Director Beth Osborne, Strong Towns Co-Founder and President Chuck Marohn, and Los Angeles DOT Transportation Planner Mariana Valdivia. 

A Green New Deal for Transportation 

The original Green New Deal, released in February 2019 by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY-14) and Senator Ed Markey (MA), catapulted discussion about an equitable transition to a carbon-neutral economy into the mainstream. But it had one glaring omission: how federal transportation policy and development patterns make it impossible to reduce transportation emissions. 

A new report—A Green New Deal for City and Suburban Transportation—fills those gaps. Co-written by T4America, TransitCenter, Data for Progress and the Ian L. McHarg Center for Urbanism and Ecology, this Green New Deal gives transportation policy the same visionary makeover other sectors received in the original plan to show what we could achieve if our transportation and climate goals were aligned. Download the full report.

New polling shows that Americans support expanding public transit by 77-15 margin

What we always knew to be true is now backed up with polling: Voters want more transportation options. This month, T4America—alongside the same partners behind the Green New Deal for Transportation—released a new polling memo that found exactly that. 

The data reinforces many of the same results we’ve seen in our polling over the years: voters are prepared to spend more on public transit and want to orient government spending toward improving existing infrastructure. While many rely on cars, a majority said they want to have other options to get around each day. Democrats and Republicans agree that the government should be prioritizing fixing our roads and helping with congestion in our cities.

You can download the full polling memo here, and get the highlights in this post from  Emily Mangan.  

Congress heard you: deal struck with $25 billion in emergency funding for transit

Members of Congress never hear thank you enough for a job well done. Let’s change that. Please send a thank you to your members of Congress today—and remind them to continue prioritizing transit in the months ahead.

Early yesterday morning, congressional leaders and the White House agreed to a $2 trillion COVID-19 economic stabilization plan that includes $25 billion emergency direct assistance to transit agencies, at a time when agencies’ revenue is plummeting, as well as more than $1 billion for passenger rail. This is a huge victory, and it wouldn’t have been possible without your thousands of messages and calls to Congress and our letter to House and Senate leadership. But there’s still more work to do. 

A Chicago “L” platform. Photo by Paul Sableman on Flickr’s Creative Commons.

When the Senate first released a draft of its COVID-19 economic package, airlines got emergency funding. But public transportation—the bedrock of our transportation infrastructure that connects millions of Americans to jobs, schools, services and opportunities every single day—got nothing. But it didn’t stay that way for long. Thanks to an outpouring of advocacy, early yesterday morning Congress agreed to a deal that includes $25 billion in direct, emergency assistance to transit agencies. 

Without this infusion of emergency funding, transit would be unlikely to survive through the pandemic. We can’t afford for transit to stop running—especially now, as transit plays a huge role in connecting millions of people to their jobs in healthcare, grocery stores, and other essential businesses. In fact, 36 percent of transit riders are workers in essential industries, such as nurses and medical technicians. And any long-term economic recovery will be nearly impossible without transit service to help people get back to work after this unprecedented crisis subsides.

This critical emergency funding would never have been included without your voices saying that “transit is essential.” Many of you were part of sending thousands of messages and calls to Congress through our action. Our letter to House and Senate leadership with the Union of Concerned Scientists was signed by 248 elected officials, local governments and organizations in less than 24 hours. 

The $25 billion will be given to transit agencies based on the existing formulas that are used to give out annual capital funds. The bill clarifies that these funds are intended specifically for operating expenses related to the coronavirus public health emergency beginning on January 20, 2020, and should be used for operating costs to maintain service, lost revenue due to the coronavirus emergency, as well as the purchase of personal protective equipment, and paying for the administrative leave of operations personnel due to loss of service. The $25 billion includes $13.9 billion for urban areas and $1.8 billion that will go to transit in rural areas, with additional funds for state of good repair and high density cities, largely in the northeast. Some have estimated the amounts potentially going to each city based on recent allocations, though stay tuned for concrete details. This post from Jeff Davis at Eno is a helpful breakdown of all transportation funding in the package. 

But we’re not done yet, and more will be needed. A new report from TransitCenter estimates that transit agencies will experience losses this year anywhere between $26-$38 billion—potentially much higher than the emergency funding in this deal. Transit agencies will need more operating funds to guarantee that they can run enough trains and buses to avoid overcrowding and maintain social distancing. We can’t put America’s frontline workers at increased risk. 

Congress is already considering another bill to stimulate the economy. We will continue to work hard to ensure that public transportation receives more operating support in this bill. 

We’ll have more information soon on how you can help guarantee that public transportation receives the funding it needs to connect Americans to jobs, services and opportunities now and when this pandemic is over. Keep in touch with us: Subscribe to our email list and follow us on Twitter.

COVID-19 will cost transit agencies $26-$38 billion, TransitCenter estimates

We need you to take action to save transit: Please email and call your member of Congress asking them to support emergency funding for transit agencies. It only takes a minute.

In a new report, TransitCenter estimates the gargantuan funding shortfalls that U.S. transit agencies will experience due to impacts from the COVID-19 pandemic. Unprecedented drops in ridership, reduced economic activity, and increased costs to keep personnel and essential riders (including healthcare workers) safe are driving a funding gap that is only projected to grow. 

Transit agencies are doing a lot to slow the spread of COVID-19: They’re connecting healthcare workers to their jobs, urging non-essential workers to stay home, and cancelling fare collection in order to keep operators safe. And they’re bleeding money doing so. 

In a new report, public transportation foundation TransitCenter estimates that impacts from COVID-19 will cost U.S. transit agencies $26-$38 billion annually. This huge shortfall is being caused by rapidly decreasing revenue (a combination of low ridership and reduced sales tax receipts from an economy quickly coming to a standstill) and increased costs to combat the virus. 

TransitCenter calculated low-end and high-end estimates of what COVID-19 means for agencies’ budgets. The low-end estimate anticipates 75 percent decline in fare revenue; and high-end, 100 percent. 

The reality for many American transit agencies will be somewhere in the middle of these two estimates. Ridership on Washington, DC’s Metro dropped 85 percent, and the agency projects an unprecedented loss of $52 million a month. Chicago’s transit system saw rail ridership down 75 percent and bus use down 59 percent. BART in San Francisco says a sustained ridership loss of 85 percent and a 50 percent reduction of economic activity could reduce BART’s monthly revenues by $55 million. And New York City’s MTA is requesting $4 billion to stay afloat. (Trip-planning app Transit is documenting the unprecedented drops in ridership all over the world.) 

But service cuts won’t cut it, especially as transit agencies “must operate enough service so that riders are not subject to crowded vehicles,” according to the report. 

This means one thing: Congress cannot hesitate and must provide transit agencies with immediate emergency funding. Without emergency funding, transit agencies will be unable to get back to work once this crisis is over. That means millions of Americans will be stuck in place, even when we no longer have to stay at home, making it even harder for our economy to recover.

TAKE ACTION NOW

The time to rescue transit is now. The economic impacts will be far worse if we stand by and let it burn to the ground first and try to rebuild it tomorrow.

Transit agencies sound the alarm: COVID-19 is a long-term threat to service

We need you to take action to save transit: Please email and call your member of Congress asking them to support emergency funding for transit agencies. It only takes a minute.

The COVID-19 pandemic is decimating transit agencies’ budgets. Without emergency assistance from Congress, public transportation won’t be there when this crisis subsides—yet the Senate Republicans’ proposed stimulus bill doesn’t give transit a cent. Join transit agencies across the country and tell Congress that transit needs emergency funding. 

“Empty Metro” by Mike Maguire on Flickr’s Creative Commons

Transit ridership is plummeting as millions of Americans practice critically important social distancing to slow the spread of COVID-19—and transit agencies are happy about it. Both Washington, DC and New York City’s subway systems tweeted rapidly falling ridership numbers with joy, praising people for taking social distancing seriously. 

But despite the praise, transit agencies also know that this loss of ridership is devastating their budgets. New York City’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) and the Washington, DC region’s Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) know that this is a recipe for long-term service reductions. Both agencies are calling for emergency funding from Congress, with the MTA specifically calling for $4 billion. “No agency of our size can find additional billions in savings equivalent to the damages we have and will sustain as a result of this pandemic,” MTA CEO Pat Foye said in the letter to New York’s Congressional delegation. “This is a national disaster that requires a national response.” Washington’s Metro is projecting a $52 million a month operating deficit.

Revenue from local or state sales taxes make up the other biggest portion of transit agencies’ budgets, and with the local economy being virtually shut down in many places, those funds will be rapidly dwindling as well. Increased costs from additional cleaning and measures to protect employees, such as the purchase of gloves, face masks, hand sanitizer, and other protective equipment, are evaporating funds faster than normal, too. 

That’s why with only 24 hours’ notice over 220 elected officials, cities, transit agencies and organizations across the country signed a letter written by T4America and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) urging Congress to provide transit agencies with nearly $13 billion in emergency funding. We’re thrilled that so many people stepped up to save transit with such short notice. But it isn’t enough: the Senate Republicans’ stimulus bill was released yesterday, and it includes not one dollar for transit or Amtrak. 

We need you to step up for public transportation. Please call and email your members of Congress today. Demand them to support emergency funding for transit. 

TAKE ACTION NOW

Without federal financial assistance, many transit agencies and paratransit service providers will be forced to dramatically reduce or eliminate critical service. This could cut off health care and other workers from jobs, and make it even harder for the economy to recover once this crisis subsides. 

Please take action today. Transit needs you.

Four years ago, Gulf Coast rail was a dream. Now it’s closer to reality thanks to the City of Mobile, AL

At long last, the City of Mobile, AL approved a resolution that brings passenger rail to New Orleans closer to fruition. The timing is fitting: February marked the fourth anniversary of the first passenger train to roll through the Gulf Coast since Hurricane Katrina. That was just a one-time ride, but not for much longer: In 2022, there will be four trains a day. 

Mobile, Alabama. Photo by Steve Davis / T4America

This February, the City of Mobile, AL took a bold step toward restoring passenger rail service to New Orleans: the city approved the funding necessary to apply for a $8 million grant from Federal Railroad Administration’s Restoration and Enhancement (R&E) program. If the FRA awards this grant, the funding approved by Mobile will be combined with existing funding from Mississippi, Louisiana, and a previous R&E grant to provide operating support for the first three years of restored rail service. 

By a 6-1 city council vote in favor of funding, the City of Mobile demonstrated it understands the tremendous economic and mobility opportunity this passenger rail service represents. This is one of the final pieces of funding necessary to restore service, and we at T4America are thrilled to see the City of Mobile take this action.   

But none of this was imaginable four years ago. In February 2016, an Amtrak train left New Orleans and headed east towards Bay St. Louis, a beautiful town on the Mississippi coast, for the first time since Hurricane Katrina. 

Eleven years earlier, Katrina devastated many cities and towns along the Gulf Coast. By 2016, freight rail had been restored for almost a decade, but not the Amtrak service that ran between New Orleans and Mobile. Bringing the service back after so long took some convincing: the FRA conducted a feasibility study, and the Southern Rail Commission, the  University of Southern Mississippi, and the University of Alabama conducted fiscal analyses that showed the potential impact of bringing the train back. The University of Southern Mississippi study even found that for every dollar invested in restoring passenger service, $15 to $20 would be generated in the regional economy. 

These detailed studies undoubtedly played a huge role in winning a $33 million grant from the FRA to bring back passenger rail to the Gulf Coast. But sometimes, people have to see something in action to believe that it will work. That’s where the inspection train came in. 

Amtrak, in partnership with freight rail operator CSX and the Southern Rail Commission, ran a train full of elected, civic and other local leaders from the Gulf Coast and beyond from New Orleans to Jacksonville, FL to assess the feasibility of restoring passenger service, as well as the popularity of such a route. And the popularity was astounding. 

“I was on that train, and I will never forget the moment we rolled into Bay St. Louis for the first stop after departing New Orleans,” T4America’s communications director, Steve Davis, later wrote. “Conversations halted immediately as we were taken aback by the overwhelming sights and sounds of Bay St. Louis. Schools were closed, bands were playing, costumes were donned, and it seemed like the entire city had turned out to see the first passenger train in 11 years.” 

It wasn’t just Bay St. Louis. At every station between New Orleans and Jacksonville, the train was greeted by thousands of cheering supporters. Administrator Sara Feinberg of the FRA was clearly taken aback as she stepped off the train, shaking hands with excited residents lining the train platform and pulling out her phone to take pictures of her own. Louisiana Department of Transportation and Development Secretary Shawn Wilson posed for pictures with smiling and yelling residents like he was a rock star.

“I knew there was pent up enthusiasm for passenger rail, but I think all of us were astonished by the size of the crowds,” said John Robert Smith, the chair of T4America and a former Mississippi mayor.  “The crowds were so diverse: old, young, all ethnicities, and all economic abilities. Everyone on that train walked away with the sense that this passenger service will not only work but thrive, because it links two big cities with the smaller, equally important cities on the Gulf.” 

Four years later, that inspection train wasn’t just a test: it was a taste of what’s to come. Mississippi Republican Senator Roger Wicker led the creation of two important rail grant programs—the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) and the R&E grant that Mobile just applied for. The Southern Rail Commission won grants from both programs in 2019 to bring back Gulf Coast passenger rail, but they also needed commitments from the states and cities involved, like Mobile, to make it happen. 

Mississippi, Louisiana, and now Alabama have followed suit, with the City of Mobile committing $3 million, Mississippi matching the federal grants, and Louisiana providing priority funds. Amtrak estimates that service will be restored in two years, running four trains every day between New Orleans and Mobile. 

“Think about what this means for Mobile,” said Smith of Mobile’s recent commitment to restoring passenger rail. “The Gulf Coast is celebrating Mardi Gras right now. New Orleans gets most of the attention, but Mobile hosts a huge Mardi Gras celebration too. With passenger rail, the thousands of tourists to New Orleans can visit Mobile’s Mardi Gras celebration.”

At T4America, we’re still thrilled that the inspection train—and all of the hard work from advocates, community members, business leaders, and elected and government officials—led to something permanent. And we hope that other regions of the country can do the same.

The NTSB recommends safety standards for AVs. But Congress isn’t listening.

Update, 4/10/20: Republican staff of the House Energy and Commerce committee published a blog post arguing that the COVID-19 crisis is a great opportunity to pass automated vehicle legislation that prioritizes vehicle deployment over safety. To be clear, ventilators and personal protective equipment save lives during pandemics, not AVs. Don’t exploit a crisis to advance legislation devoid of any meaningful safety standards.

The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) found in two investigations that the lack of safety standards contributed to fatal automated vehicle crashes. And polling shows that Americans overwhelmingly want these safety standards. There’s both evidence that safety standards are needed, and a desire among the public to establish them: so why isn’t Congress including safety standards in its draft automated vehicle (AV) legislation? 

A traffic jam in Texas. Photo by Open Grid Scheduler on Flickr’s Creative Commons.

To hear some in the  automotive and technology industries tell it, the only way we can ever advance as a society and develop AVs—”innovate” as they say—is to do so in a Wild West regulatory state. No basic, minimum performance standards to keep people safe. 

And that’s exactly what Congress is planning to gift to the automated vehicle industry. Congressional committees across party lines are writing legislation that allows AV manufacturers and developers to put this new technology on the road before it’s proven to be safe. 

This is incredibly disturbing in light of new findings from the National Transportation Safety Board, the U.S.’s premier transportation safety investigators. The NTSB found in not one but two investigations that the complete lack of federal safety standards contributed to fatal AV crashes. In its investigation of a fatal Tesla crash (released last week), the NTSB said that the main federal vehicle safety regulator “failed to develop a method for verifying that manufacturers … are incorporating system safeguards that are critical to ensuring the safety of the motoring public.” Translation: The federal government is doing nothing to check  that AVs are actually safe. 

The investigators at the NTSB aren’t the only ones highlighting the importance of safety standards: New polling from Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety found that Americans overwhelmingly want safety performance standards for AVs. 

Yet Congress is doing the exact opposite. For the last few months, a bicameral, bipartisan group of Congressional committee staff have been drafting pieces of a potential AV bill that deploys AVs before they are proven to be safe. In the drafts released publicly, the Secretary of Transportation has 10 years to set motor vehicle safety standards; in the interim, automakers must “self-certify” that their AVs are safe by submitting test results and data—but the Secretary is prohibited from banning AVs for sale based on any of those materials. 

These drafts directly contradict what the NTSB advises and what the public wants. The NTSB has now repeatedly recommended that the federal government verify that AV manufacturers include critical safety systems in their vehicles; but the draft AV bill sections doesn’t require that the federal government do this. The NTSB recommends that the federal government test AV technology themselves; the draft bill also doesn’t require this. The NTSB recommends that the federal government use “enforcement authority” to make automakers comply with safety rules, but the draft bill doesn’t give the federal government any imminent hazard authority—nor create any safety rules to comply with. Whether or not Congress adopts these specific proposals, it should concern us all that Congress is considering legislation which fails to include any safety standards before AVs are deployed. 

Safety standards are not a lot to ask for. Without safety standards, preventable crashes will happen; people will die. Yet it seems that Congress has fallen for the siren song of automakers and tech firms, believing the marketing tale the AVs are inherently safe. If that’s the case, then what’s the harm in enshrining that safety into law with minimum safety performance standards? 

AV technology is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to dramatically improve safety for all road users, not just people inside cars. And with more people dying while walking and biking than ever before, it’s an opportunity Congress would regret to miss. 

We’re not the only ones who want minimum performance safety standards. In August, we joined over 40 national advocacy groups to send a letter to Congress outlining what any AV legislation needs to guarantee safety and equitable access to this new technology. You can read that letter here.

Here’s how senators can turn their support for transit into real policy

At a Congressional hearing earlier this week, senators on both sides of the aisle expressed support for funding public transportation. As they begin to prepare legislation, we have six ideas on how to guarantee that transit is a priority. 

American Public Transportation Association president Paul Skoutelas testifying before the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs earlier this week. Photo credit: Banking Committee

Crafting transportation policy is a task split between four different Senate committees, and the Senate Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs is responsible for drafting the transit piece. As the current law of the land—the FAST Act—expires this September, the Banking Committee held a hearing earlier this week on “stakeholder perspectives” about public transportation policy.

It went pretty well: Both Democratic and Republican Senators on the Banking Committee spoke of their support for public transportation and their desire to improve it. We’re happy to hear it. But the Banking Committee must ensure that the final transportation bill makes transit a priority, not just a small part of a highway-centric bill. Simply maintaining the status quo is unacceptable. 

We have six policy ideas for both the House and Senate to guarantee that transit is a priority in the upcoming surface transportation reauthorization. Congress, take note:

1. Provide adequate resources for transit maintenance

Federal law allocates 20 percent of the Highway Trust Fund to public transit. Unlike in the highway program (which allows states to neglect their repair needs), these funds are primarily spent on maintenance. Unfortunately, this still underfunds our transit maintenance needs. In order to truly prioritize maintenance of public transit systems the federal government must provide the necessary resources.

Congress should substantially increase the formula public transit maintenance funds to a level that the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) estimates will reduce the maintenance backlog in half. As of the most recent conditions and performance report, the FTA estimated that the transit maintenance backlog was approximately $90 billion. 

2. Require roadway designs which provide safe and convenient access to transit

Public transit is most useful when streets are designed to provide people with safe and convenient access. Today, most roads—not just highways—are designed to move personal vehicles at the highest speeds possible, and are not designed for people walking, biking, or taking transit. Our dangerous streetscapes are a driving force behind the disturbing increase in pedestrian fatalities—occurring at the same time that the number of fatalities of people inside cars is going down. 

3. Develop a national assessment of access to jobs and services by all modes, including transit, and set national goals for improvement.

Instead of measuring success of the transportation system by looking primarily at the limited and blunt metric of congestion (which fails to measure people opting out of congestion via transit or walking and biking), we should measure access to jobs and services by all modes, including transit. This will allow an apples-to-apples comparison of the benefits of all projects and will place transit investments on equal footing with road investments. The first step toward adoption of this approach is to establish a national baseline so that we can set goals for improvement.

4. Provide operating support for public transit

While the federal government will help local governments and MPOs build new public transit, it provides limited support in rural communities and no support in urban areas to operate their systems. This is unlike some other modes of transportation where the federal government provides significant operating support. High quality operations including safe, frequent, reliable service are integral to a successful public transit.

5. Fund transit and roads equally

The federal funding distribution disincentivizes investment in transit in two ways. The first is that while funding for new roads is guaranteed to states thanks to over $40 billion annually in highway formulas (this will be over $50 billion if the Senate EPW Committee’s bill passes), transit is given just $2 billion in discretionary funds (that are not guaranteed) to build new or expand existing transit.

Second, the federal government will fund up to 80 percent of a road project (even 90 percent in limited cases), and only up to 50 percent of a transit project (though matches of less than 40 percent have been more common in recent years). This doesn’t just disincentivize investment in public transit: it creates the false perception that public transit is too expensive when compared to roads.  

6. Reform the transit Capital Investment Grant Program with more funding and new deadlines for USDOT

The Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program supports local communities that have chosen to expand or build new public transit systems. It is the primary program that transit project sponsors use to build or expand public transit. 

Funding for this program is discretionary and limited to $2.6 billion, which has failed to keep pace with increased construction costs and needs to address operational bottlenecks. Further, in recent years, the FTA has failed to communicate with Congress, project sponsors, and the public as to the status of the program and projects seeking funding, undermining the efficient operation of this program and placing a greater burden on local communities. 

There is a lot the FTA can do to improve CIG, but our big ask is this: Congress should allow the FTA to fund the same share of a new transit project as is allowed for new roadways (under current law that is 80 project), and require that the FTA provides annual assessments of projects expected to advance to the next phase of CIG project pipeline. 

Why this matters

Public transportation is key to our local, regional, and national economies and is essential to economic opportunity. But national transportation policy provides too little funding for transit, only covers half or less of the final project cost, and fails to properly integrate our transit and road networks. The federal government puts a thumb on the scale, making it near impossible for towns and cities to choose a transit solution to a transportation challenge.

It’s time for this to change. The Banking Committee can use the upcoming surface transportation reauthorization to make public transportation a national priority. The Committee can stand up for transit by working with their colleagues on EPW and in leadership to ensure our transportation network supports transit, and by approving a robust transit title that provides urban and rural transit agencies the resources they need to provide safe, efficient, and reliable service. 

We appreciate how hard Banking has fought to save transit in the Highway Trust Fund. Those fights were important. But now is the time to do more.