Skip to main content

House leadership making unprecedented assault on public transit

A key House Committee is threatening to kill three decades of successful investments in mass transit — originally started under President Ronald Reagan — by ending the guarantee for dedicated funding for public transportation, leaving millions of riders already faced with service cuts and fare increases out in the cold.

In a stunning development late last night, House leadership and the Ways and Means committee made a shocking attack on transit that would have huge impacts for the millions of people who depend on public transportation each day.

They proposed putting every public transportation system in immediate peril by eliminating guaranteed funding for the Mass Transit Account and forcing transit to go begging before Congress for general funds each year — all while highway spending continues to be guaranteed with protected funds for half a decade at a time.

Get involved. Can you take just a moment and tell your representative that this short-sighted idea is intolerable for their voters?

This incredible move would roll back 30+ years of bipartisan federal transportation policy and reverse a decision made by President Reagan in the 1980’s to fund our nation’s transit system out of a small share of gas tax revenues. This change would mean no more guarantee of funding each year and no long-term stability for public transportation. States, cities, communities and their transit systems could lose billions.

We released a statement earlier today decrying this unprecedented attack on transit.

“We are deeply concerned that if this measure passes, Americans who use public transportation, or who would like that option in the future, will be thrown under the bus,” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America. “This couldn’t come at a worse time for people who need an affordable, reliable way to get to work, or for employers who need workers.” Corless noted the demand for transit has been rising as the economy slowly recovers and people are using public transportation to get to jobs and to avoid volatile gas prices. Over the course of the five-year transportation program, America’s population will continue to age rapidly, and a growing number of seniors will be looking to transit services maintain their independence.

It’s not just us, though. Even the association of state DOT heads submitted a letter to the committee urging them to reconsider their ill-advised plan.

The Mass Transit Account has been in existence since 1982 and AASHTO has continuously supported this account as a critical component of the Highway Trust Fund. AASHTO has long supported the principle that 20 percent of the gas tax revenues that have been put in place since 1982 be allocated to a dedicated mass transit account. We believe that the two complementary accounts need to be maintained in order to support a well-funded, multimodal transportation system.

We respectfully request that the current Highway Trust Fund structure with its two accounts and respective revenue allocations be retained.

Transit is unquestionably a critical component of our nation’s transportation system, and one that millions of people (or voters, if you’re reading, committee members) depend on each day to get around. More people on transit means less congestion, less pollution, and fewer cars on the road.

Tell your representative that this unprecedented attack on transit won’t stand.

Sec. Ray LaHood answers a few of your questions

We asked you to submit questions for Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, and here is the resulting segment of “On the Go”, his regular web video series where he answers a handful of transportation questions. This time, he asked us at T4 America to gather supporters from our thousands of supporters across the country.

In the video, he talked about high-speed rail, trucking, and biking and walking, reminding all of us that in his travels across the country, he keeps hearing that people “want the opportunity for walking and biking paths.” “…These kinds of programs really enhance communities and help provide options.”

Sec. LaHood also reiterates his optimism about the prospects of Congress passing a transportation bill in the coming months — after a momentary bout of pessimism last week. In contrast to a House bill coming out today that could have difficulty getting bipartisan support due to some controversial revenue sources, he praised the efforts of Senators Boxer and Inhofe in the Senate for their bipartisan bill that passed out of committee with its full support.

Without much ado, here is the video, including a few shout-outs for Transportation for America.

Congratulations to “saxman66”, “Conservative Values”, and Peggy Da Silva for getting their questions addressed in the video.

Smart questions submitted for Secretary LaHood to answer

Last week we asked you for questions for U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, and you came through with some great questions and topics that he’ll hopefully consider for his next edition of “On The Go,” his recurring video segment where he answers questions and discusses transportation topics at a little more length than he can in his daily blog or regular tweets.

We wanted to take just a moment to thank everyone who sent in their questions, via comments, email, twitter and pack mule. Okay, okay, we didn’t get any questions by mule but they certainly came in every other possible way.

US DOT folks have told us that they’ll probably tape this next episode later this week, so we’ll have to wait at least a week or so before we discover which questions Sec. LaHood decided to answer, but below are just a few of the strong questions that were submitted for him to consider. Anyone want to take your own stab at some of these in the comments?

We’ll be sure to post the video as soon as they release it. Thanks so much to everyone who took the time to write down a question and pass it along.

—-

Secretary LaHood: Thank you for your leadership. After two decades of consistent progress on walking, bicycling and livability initiatives, what can be done now to keep the current Congress from going backwards and eliminating or reducing key programs such as Safe Routes to Schools, Transportation Enhancements and Recreational Trails?  The United States need more resources for pedestrians, bicyclists and active transportation, not less.

Jeff Olson, R.A. – Principal
Alta Planning + Design

—

The High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail program was (and is, through its remaining trickle of funds) one of the most exciting and potentially transformative initiatives of the Obama administration. I know you yourself have expressed a deep commitment to this program as well. What’s your strategy for getting the program back on track, if you’ll pardon the well-used pun, and for changing the “death of high-speed rail” narrative to a “high-speed rail’s next steps” narrative?

Andrew Guthrie
Minneapolis, MN

—

In what areas could advocates do a better job making the case for federal funding for active transportation projects?

@ellyblue
Elly Blue
Portland, OR

—

The interstate highway system continues to provide the nation with remarkable interregional mobility. However, is it possible that constructing freeways through the hearts of our major cities was a mistake? Would the federal government consider enhancing its role in helping cities assess whether communities might be better off converting some of these highways into surface streets or even parks, housing, etc? Thank you, and keep up the great work.

Commenter “Clutch J”

Do you have a burning question for Secretary Ray Lahood?

I hope so, because the U.S. Secretary of Transportation wants to answer yours!

Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood has asked Transportation for America’s many partners and supporters to submit questions for him that he’ll answer in his next edition of “On the Go,” a monthly video segment with the Secretary where he answers a few in-depth transportation-related questions. Here’s the December edition of the show:

His office has asked us to gather a collection of questions from T4 America partners and our thousands of supporters from all across the country. So ask away! Do you want to know about the prospects of the transportation bill or what the administration is doing to get it passed? Curious about the future of the high-speed rail program after recent cuts? Whatever you’d like to know, you can ask it here and it’ll land on the Secretary’s desk — though no guarantees on which questions he chooses, of course.

You can submit your question a few different ways:

  1. Leave it right here on this post in the comments
  2. Ask it on Twitter by including the hashtag #q4ray at the end of your tweet
  3. Email it directly to us at info [at] t4america.org and we’ll pass it along.
So get your questions in by next Tuesday, January 17th.

Supercommittee failure to reach agreement could lead to deeper transportation cuts

The so-called deficit supercommittee, a bipartisan group of 12 lawmakers tasked with agreeing to $1.2 trillion in spending cuts, was supposed to unveil its recommendations this week for an up-or-down vote in Congress.

But the group, established in a down-to-the-wire debt ceiling deal between President Obama and Congressional Republicans this past summer, looks like it will have nothing to offer. The divide between the two parties, particularly over high-end tax rates, appears irreconcilable.

But the consequences for failure go beyond just another black eye for an unpopular Congress. When the supercommittee was created, it came with a “trigger” of automatic cuts if members failed to come to an agreement. A portion of that $1.2 trillion trigger will target defense and Medicare reimbursements, but a significant chunk encompasses yet-to-be identified discretionary spending.

That means the budget for the U.S. Department of Transportation, which just emerged from a tough battle over 2012 funding levels, is back on the chopping block.

Last week, the House and Senate passed and President Obama signed a “minibus” budget for 2012 that largely kept funding for transit, Amtrak and TIGER grants intact, while zeroing out high-speed rail. Many of these same programs would likely be subject to further cuts under a trigger scenario, though the new cuts would not materialize until the 2013 calendar year.

The six Republicans and six Democrats on the supercommittee — three of each party from the House and Senate, respectively — technically have until Wednesday to make recommendations, but in order for Congress to have a chance to vote and meet disclosure terms, they needed to send their proposal to the Congressional Budget Office Monday evening for scoring.

That deadline has come and gone.

Under a failure scenario, it would fall to members of the House and Senate appropriations committees to draft specific cuts, likely a contentious outcome given split party control. There is also the possibility that discretionary spending like USDOT programs could take an even larger hit if members follow through with plans to reverse the trigger-outlined cuts to defense, a politically-sensitive area for Republicans and Democrats alike. (President Obama has signaled his intent to veto any attempts to undo the automatically-triggered cuts that were part of the committee’s creation unless equivalent savings are identified).

Members could also vote to eliminate the trigger all-together, but that seems less likely given that House Republicans have emphasized spending cuts since taking the majority this year.

Visionary group in Montana tells us their rural transit success story

This group we visited with last week in Montana, Opportunity Link, received a welcome shot in the arm, announced just this morning: they received a $1.5 million grant from the Department of Housing and Urban Development as part of the 2011 Sustainable Communities regional planning grant program. 468 applications requesting more than $500 million in funding were received by HUD, and only 56 communities and regions were selected for the grants.

If you ever doubt the need for public transit in rural areas, or need reaffirmation of the resilience and ingenuity of frontier America, make a trip to Havre, Montana (or second best, watch the short video below.) We had a chance to make that trip this week and, man, was it inspiring.

A group of us from T4America and the American Public Health Association traveled to Montana to meet with people working in health, transportation and local government in the state’s small cities and rural areas. They are vitally interested in the federal transportation bill because in many cases it literally could determine whether these places live, thrive or die.

One of those places is Havre, Montana, a town of about 10,000 roughly 30 miles from the Canadian border, nestled between two Native American reservations, Fort Belknap and Rocky Boy’s. There we met Barbara Stiffarm, the executive director of a scrappy organization called Opportunity Link. The aptly named group’s mission is to connect people in the isolated communities of north central Montana to jobs, job training, affordable housing, medical care and other services that help residents of small towns and reservations “achieve independence, prosperity and a better way of life.”

“We quickly discovered that we can’t do any of that without transportation service,” Stiffarm told us. Working with numerous local communities and the reservations, Opportunity Link has cobbled together federal resources, private grants and scant local funds to connect several different transportation services into an integrated network. To fill gaps in service, Opportunity Link two years ago led the creation of North Central Montana Transit.

NCMT is miraculous for a number of reasons.

First, it offers fixed-route service. Many rural transit services are “on demand” – covering the vast distances separating communities from employment, education and health care centers.

“Every day we cover an area about the size of the state Maryland,” said Jim Lyons, the director of NCMT. They started the service with modest expectations for ridership, but have been blown away by the unmet demand they discovered. Rather than riders in the low hundreds per month, they are instead into the thousands; one in ten is an elderly person who simply could not get to health care, activities and other services without it.

IMG_4340 Originally uploaded by Transportation for America to Flickr.
The Dean of Montana State University-Northern shows off some of the seeds used to make the biodiesel for the NCMT buses during last week’s tour in Montana. They hope to use these seeds to help refuel trains passing through Havre from Seattle to Minneapolis.

Second, they also discovered they were being eaten alive by fuel costs, and they were disturbed by the effect that burning all that fuel had on their desire to be a “green” operation.

That led to an exciting research and development project with Montana State University-Northern to grow their own biodiesel fuel. The idea is to get local wheat growers to rotate in crops of an oil-seed plant known as camelina. A recent break-through in the local research effort has raised hopes that camelina, which has the advantage of being an extremely hardy, non-food crop, can produce biodiesel that can fuel buses as well as the freight trains that use Havre as a refueling stop between Seattle and Minneapolis. More exciting still, a by-product of that process could also be a component in jet fuel.

And all because an ingenious local group set out to connect people to opportunities through rural transit!

As inspiring as it was, an eye-opening aspect of our trip was to see just how vulnerable these communities are, and how large a role the federal transportation bill plays in their operation.

The local leaders and service providers we met in Montana are mindful that changes to programs being considered in Congress could strengthen such services, and lead to greater coordination and efficiencies, or throttle them altogether. As one tangible example, the HUD Sustainable Communities program that awarded Opportunity Link the $1.5 million grant today was axed last week in the budget for 2012. They also are deeply concerned that changes to programs such as transportation enhancements, now being considered in the Senate’s MAP-21 version of the bill, could leave them no way to fund the community projects that have been vital to economic development and safety.

Further changes would reduce the input that these communities have into how the state sets transportation priorities and allocates funding. The level of alarm was high, and it served to strengthen our commitment as a coalition to continue to emphasize the needs of rural and frontier America and push for measures that will help them, as the bill makes its way through the House and Senate.

IMG_4316

Transit and TIGER funding preserved in compromise spending bill

Leading negotiators in the House and Senate released a compromise spending bill to fund the U.S. Department of Transportation, alongside several other departments, through the end of the current fiscal year in September 2012. The measure is known as a “minibus” because it collapses several appropriations bills into one package,

The conference agreement between the two chambers preserves funding for transit and the innovative TIGER grants program, while zeroing out high-speed rail. The Federal Transit Administration is provided a total of $10.608 billion. Amtrak, with $466 million for operating and $952 million for capital, would be funded at a level lower than what the Senate requested but higher than the House-proposed amount. But Amtrak did receive more capital funding than either the House or Senate originally proposed.

$500 million for TIGER constitutes a 5.1 percent cut from current levels, but is a significant improvement over the House proposal to eliminate the program entirely. Every round of grant applications for TIGER has yielded far more interest from communities that USDOT has been able to accommodate, and the program rewards projects that meet local needs. Streetsblog is reporting that the third round of TIGER applications outstrips the available grant amount by 27 to 1.

The New Starts program receives $1.95 billion. New Starts is a key funding source for transit projects across the country, particularly in large metropolitan areas. The WMATA transit system in Washington, DC gets $150 million.

Traditional highway funding under the Federal Highway Administration is funded slightly below current levels, with $39.143 billion.

In a disappointing move, negotiators did not include funding for Partnership for Sustainable Communities grants. The partnership is a joint venture between USDOT, the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. While no new grants will be awarded under this agreement, the office will remain open and negotiators notably refused to include House-proposed language that would have disallowed the three departments from working collaboratively.

Both chambers will need to pass the “minibus” agreement by Friday to avoid a government shutdown. With bipartisan sign-off on these funding levels, passage is almost assured.

Check out the chart below, which compares the 2010 budget, 2011 budget and the House/Senate proposals that got us to the proposed 2012 budget.

Federal Transportation, Housing and Urban Development Budget: Highlighted transportation and sustainable communities programs.

Program 2010 Budget 2011 Budget House 2012 Proposal Senate 2012 Proposal Final 2012 Budget Difference: 2012 vs 2011
Federal-Aid Highways ~$42B $41.1B $27.7B $41.1 B (FY 2011 enacted) $39.14 B (equal to MAP-21) —$2.B
Transit Formula Grants ~$8.3B $8.34B $5.2 $8.36B $8.36 B +$20M
High Speed Rail $2.5B $0 $0 $100M $0 —
TIGER $600M $527M $0 $550M $500M —$27M
Partnership for Sustainable Communities Grants $150M $100M $0 $90M $0 —$100M
Amtrak Capital $1.002B $922M $898M $937M $952M +30M
Amtrak Operating $563M $562M $227M $544M 466M —$97M
Transit ‘New Starts’ $2.0B $1.6B $1.55B $1.955B $1.955B +$355M
TIGGER (energy efficiency grants for transit agencies) $75M $50M $0M $25M $0 —$50M

EPW Committee approves transportation bill by voice vote, moves it out of committee

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved its two-year highway reauthorization bill this morning and moved it out of committee by a bipartisan, unanimous 18-0 vote. (Read our statement here.)

The committee markup was short, as compared to a typical markup of such a large bill, but that was a testament to the work done behind the scenes by Senators Boxer, Inhofe, Baucus and Vitter to get consensus among the four of them on the major policy points.

At the markup, a single package of amendments, known as a manager’s amendment, agreed to ahead of time by the four key Senators, was approved by a unanimous voice vote. No other amendments were voted on, though many others were filed.

After that amendment package was approved, Senators took turns talking about other amendments that they had drafted but weren’t formally proposing, in order to preserve the bipartisan vote and also because the four committee leaders made it clear they would oppose any other amendments, effectively ensuring no amendments would pass — a process known as “offer and withdraw.”

Senators talk about their amendment, offer it, and then note that they’re not calling for a vote and withdraw the amendment. The idea behind this is to indicate the Senator’s desire to continue to push an issue and work with the Committee to find ways to incorporate concepts into the final bill as it moves to the floor.

There were a few smart, notable amendments offered in that way, and a handful of others that were not offered. Sen. Gillibrand talked at length about a program that would help train low-income workers, but we’ll be talking more about those amendments in the days and weeks to come as the bill moves forward.

Here’s a summary list of the amendments that were approved in the manager’s package. Some other small changes to the bill were made in an amendment written and approved by the four committee leaders, but that text is not yet available. Additional explanatory notes from T4 America are in italics.

(Amendment data derived in part from Transportation Weekly and Jeff Davis.)

Senator, Amendment # Description
Barasso #2 as modified National Freight Program flexibility for rural roads
Barrasso #4 as modified Limits the number of performance measures, directing the Secretary to study and establish only the “most effective” performance measures.
Boozman #1 as modified CMAQ accountability study. Co-written with Sen. Carper.
Cardin #4 as modified FHWA to FTA flex used to enhance level of service. This amendment will make it easier to use funds from the new National Highway Performance Program (generally dollars for interstate and national highway system funds) on transit projects. This amendment lowered some of the hurdles that made it hard to flex that money, as MAP-21 was written.
Carper #3 as modified Clarify off-road diesel PM2.5 rules and funding
Crapo #2 as modified Directs states to “consult” rather than “cooperate/coordinate” on transportation planning with rural areas and small urban areas under 200,000.
Crapo #3 as modified State DOTs that have a current statewide long-range transportation plan will be exempt from having to do performance planning for four years. States that developed policy plans can keep using those plans for 4 years, without having to write a new long-range plan. Does not cover MPO planning, only states.
Gillibrand #1 as modified Freight rail improvement within 5 miles of Mexico, Canada borders
Johanns #2 State comment process on DOT standards for National Highway Performance Program
Johanns #3 Require DOT to give tech support to states for data modeling
Johanns #5 Narrow scope of fines in sec. 2210 of bill
Merkley #3 as modified Require MPO alternate scenarios to be fiscally constrained
Sanders #1 as modified Increase ER fed share to 100 percent in certain circumstances
Sanders #3 DOT report on potential electric car charging network
Udall #1 as modified Define border roads as within 10 miles of border
Udall #2 Use of crash rate as a safety analysis/planning factor. This provision ensures that rural roads with high crash rates receive equal attention under the Highway Safety Improvement Program. Rural roads may have few crashes relative to busier roads, but far less traffic, resulting in a higher rate. Using crash rate as a planning factor should help dangerous rural roads see increased safety funding.
Udall #3 Eligibility for alternate roads along a corridor when its more cost effective than improving primary route.

Transportation for America Response to Senate EPW Reauthorization Bill

After the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee moved their draft transportation bill (MAP-21) out of committee with a successful bipartisan vote this morning, T4 America Director James Corless offered this statement:

“The bipartisan passage of the MAP-21 bill in the Senate EPW Committee this morning provides a significant opportunity to move forward on a long overdue authorization of federal transportation policy with full funding to ensure we invest in America’s infrastructure. Key reforms in the bill would place a stronger emphasis on repairing and rebuilding our roads and bridges, while instituting performance measures that will help hold agencies accountable for the maintenance and operations of our transportation network.

“We will work with Chairman Boxer and Ranking Member Inhofe and the rest of the Committee to ensure that there is dedicated funding that prioritizes bicycle and pedestrian projects, strong workforce development provisions and smart transportation planning reforms. We are eager to address these issues so we can put the full strength and weight of our coalition behind the bill as it moves forward in order to make the most of our federal transportation dollars, put people back to work and deliver the transportation system that Americans need.”

Summary of the Senate MAP-21 transportation bill proposal

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee released a draft of the transportation bill late last Friday. The EPW committee’s portion of the bill covers what’s known as the “highway” title. (The Banking Committee is responsible for writing the “transit” title and the Commerce Committee covers rail and safety. Those sections of the bill have not been released yet.)

We’ve prepared a short few pages on what MAP-21 means for the federal transportation program. This top-line analysis is a bit on the wonky side, but hopefully it’ll be helpful if you’ve been trying to summarize the 600 pages of bill text.

One of the most visible changes MAP-21 makes is to restructure seven core highway programs and 13+ formula programs into just five core highway programs. This graphic below illustrates those changes. Read on for the full summary, which you can also download here. (pdf)


Click to enlarge the graphic.

MAP-21 consolidates numerous FHWA programs into five core programs. The new program structure is as follows.

National Highway Performance Program (NHPP): ~$20.6 billion

This new program focuses on repairing and improving an expanded National Highway System (NHS). The NHS is expanded from ~160,000 miles to ~220,000 miles. States are required to develop asset management plans and as a part of these plans establish performance targets for the condition of roads and bridges and the performance of the system. In addition, the program includes provisions to hold states accountable for the repair of Interstate pavement and NHS bridges by requiring that they spend a certain amount of funding on the repair of those facilities if they fall below minimum standards established by USDOT.

Transportation Mobility Program (TMP): ~$10.4 billion

TMP replaces the existing Surface Transportation Program (STP) and allows states and regions to invest flexible dollars in a broad set of highways, transit projects, freight rail projects, and bicycle and pedestrian projects, as well as other activities like travel demand management. Fifty percent of these funds are suballocated to areas in the state based on their population. While this percentage is lower than the current 62.5 percent, the absolute amount of funding to be suballocated will remain the same due to an increase in program size.

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP): – $2.5 billion

Funding is provided to states to improve safety for all road users on all public roads. A road user is defined as both motorists and non-motorized users. States are required to collect extensive data on crashes and create a database containing information on safety issues for all public roads including identification of hazard locations. (8% of all funds in this program are set-aside for data collection.) States must also develop a strategic highway safety plan using the data collected. If states do not develop a strategic highway safety plan within a year using a process approved by USDOT, they are required to spend additional funding on safety projects. States are also required to develop performance targets on fatalities and serious injuries.

Congestion Mitigation Air Quality Program (CMAQ): ~$3.3 billion

In the CMAQ program there are two pots of funding – one that funds typical CMAQ projects and another “reserved” fund.

CMAQ pot. Funds are provided to states and tier I Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs) to address the impacts of the transportation system on national ambient air quality standards. In states with non-attainment or maintenance areas, 50 percent of the funds are suballocated to tier I MPOs based on the area’s status with national ambient air quality standards. Funds cannot be used to construct new travel lanes except for HOV or HOT lanes. USDOT is required to develop performance measures for air quality and congestion reduction. Tier I MPOs that receive funds under this program are required to develop a performance plan that outlines baseline conditions, targets for each of the performance measures developed by USDOT, and a description of projects to be funded, including how those projects will help meet the targets.

“Reserved” pot. This pot of funding is equal to the amount of funds provided for the Transportation Enhancements set-aside in FY09. Eligible activities under this pot include the following: transportation enhancements, safe routes to school, recreational trails, environmental mitigation, and certain types of road projects (including street redesigns and HOV lanes). States are allowed to use these funds for CMAQ projects (the first pot) if they build up an unspent balance of year and a half worth of funds.

National Freight Program: ~$2 billion

USDOT is directed to establish a primary freight network consisting of 27,000 miles of key freight corridors. States can use funds for highway projects that improve freight movement with a focus on the primary freight network and key rural freight corridors. A state may use up to 5 percent of funds for rail or maritime projects subject to certain conditions. USDOT must also develop a National Freight Strategic Plan, which will analyze performance and conditions on the primary freight network, identify bottlenecks, estimate future freight volumes and identify best practices for mitigating impacts of freight movement on communities. USDOT shall publish a Freight Condition and Performance Report on a biennial basis. States must establish performance targets and report on progress every two years.

Other key components

TIFIA program – $1 billion. MAP-21 expands the TIFIA program from $122 million to $1 billion and modifies the program from a competitive application process to a rolling application process. Provisions have been added that allow for applicants to enter into master credit agreements to provide funding for a suite of projects at once. In addition, there are modifications that make it easier for public transportation agencies with dedicated revenue sources to apply for TIFIA loans.

Planning and Performance. MAP-21 creates performance measures for conditions on the National Highway System (NHS), NHS performance, safety, freight, congestion mitigation and air quality. As part of the development of the plan, states and large MPOs shall analyze the baseline conditions for the performance measures and establish performance targets for each performance measure. The plan must include the future performance of their transportation system with regards to these performance measures including whether or not they will achieve their performance targets. Large MPOs may undertake scenario planning as a part of the development of their long-range plans. Smaller MPOs are required to develop long-range plans and USDOT will establish rules that provide for the standards they must meet regarding the performance measures required for the larger MPOs.

Statewide transportation improvement programs (STIPs) and metropolitan transportation improvement programs (TIPs) must include performance measures and targets used in assessing the existing and future performance of the transportation system. A system performance report must include progress toward achieving state performance targets.

Project Delivery. MAP-21 includes numerous provisions intended to accelerate project delivery. Most of these provisions relate to administrative actions to be taken by USDOT. There are also provisions that relate to expanding the types of projects that can be undertaken through a categorical exclusion (a more limited environmental review). In addition, it allows for the earlier acquisition of right-of-way.

Senate EPW Committee releases their bill text

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee released text of their portion of the transportation bill late last Friday evening. Our staff is still chewing through the details of the 600 pages and we hope to have some sort of analysis and statement ready later today.

It’s a good time to remember that this committee is responsible only for what’s known as the “highway” title of the bill. While it does contain a funding amount, proper details on revenue and revenue sources are the jurisdiction of the Finance Committee, and any information about rail or transit will come from what the Banking Committee, when they write that title. So this is just one part of the full bill — albeit the part that sets policy for spending the majority of the money.

Check back later today for more information, or follow us on twitter. This bill is scheduled for a markup in committee in two days, on Wednesday, November 9th.

Here’s what the the EPW committee pulled out as highlights in their bill summary document.

Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) reauthorizes the Federal-aid highway program at the Congressional Budget Office’s baseline level—equal to current funding levels plus inflation—for two fiscal years.

MAP-21 consolidates the number of Federal programs by two-thirds, from about 90 programs down to less than 30, to focus resources on key national goals and reduce duplicative programs.

Eliminates earmarks.

Expedites project delivery while protecting the environment.

Creates a new title called “America Fast Forward,” which strengthens the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Program (TIFIA) program to leverage federal dollars further than they have been stretched before.

Consolidates certain programs into a focused freight program to improve the movement of goods

T4 partners meet President Obama, talk about transportation and infrastructure

Three T4 America partners were invited to join us at the White House Monday to meet the President of the United States and talk about transportation funding, specifically the infrastructure portion of the President’s American Jobs Act. The President’s plan, which failed to make it to a final vote yesterday in the Senate, would have invested $60 billion into infrastructure.

White House staff contacted T4 America to invite a few of our local partners out there with boots on the ground working hard to get their local, state and congressional leaders to start making smart, solid investments in transportation to help boost the economy and get people back to work.

Brian Imus of Illinois PIRG, Scott Wolf of Grow Smart Rhode Island, and Arnold Weinfeld of the Michigan Municipal League (pictured, standing right) were invited guests of the President for his Monday working group meeting in the White House to talk about the urgent need for America to invest more dollars, wisely, in our aging transportation system.

Arnold Weinfeld got a chance to stand up at his front row table a few feet from the President and tell him the same thing that we highlighted on our blog last week, that fixing bridges and building transit and passenger rail are bipartisan issues in Michigan. Tired of waiting on Washington to act — similar to the President’s motivation for the jobs bill — Governor Rick Snyder has put forth an ambitious plan to invest in all kinds of transportation for the state.

Michigan citizens and local partners like the Michigan Municipal League or the Michigan Suburbs Alliance know that a successful future for Michigan hinges on making smart investments in transportation to keep people and goods moving quickly and safely, whether in a car over a repaired bridge, on foot to the corner store, or in a new light rail vehicle on the Woodward light rail line underway in Detroit.

We desperately need the fresh infusion of money into our deficient bridges and aging transit systems that the American Jobs Act would have provided. Unfortunately, the Senate failed to get the necessary 60 votes for cloture in the Senate to vote on the transportation portion of the American Jobs Act. But that doesn’t mean that it’s the end of the road for transportation funding. Far from it.

Attention in the Senate will now turn to the long-term transportation bill that’s seemingly been just over the horizon for months now. The Environment and Public Works Committee is expected to release their part of the bill this afternoon, for markup next Wednesday.

Though we do need the kind of infusion that the jobs act would have provided to get things rolling today and put people to work, we really need the certainty of a long-term reauthorization bill, new policies and clear reforms to make sure that we make the best use of our transportation dollars.

AP says attacks on transportation enhancements are “exaggerated and misrepresented”

On Friday, we highlighted the disingenuous attempt from some in Congress to tie the need to repair our bridges to the elimination of a tiny program to make it safer to walk or bike on our streets and roads.

Senators Rand Paul of Kentucky, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma and John McCain of Arizona have been targeting the transportation enhancements program, a mere 2 percent of the federal transportation budget. They say eliminating the set-aside would make it easier for states to repair bridges, even though many states have failed to prioritize maintenance when they can spend the bulk of their transportation funds however they want.

The Senators and their supporters seem to have gotten a good chuckle out of some particular projects. They point to, among others, roadside snack stand in Pennsylvania shaped like a giant coffee pot and a lighthouse renovation in Toledo, Ohio.

“We picked some of the more interesting and exciting ones to get our colleagues’ attention,” McCain reportedly admitted.

But exciting as they might be, the claims about the projects are “exaggerated and misrepresented,” according to a fact check feature in the Associated Press this past weekend.

That roadside coffee pot? AP’s Joan Lowy reports:

No transportation aid was spent on the coffee pot’s $100,000 restoration, said Olga Herbert, executive director of the Lincoln Highway Heritage Corridor. The money was raised entirely from preservation and civic organizations and local supporters”

“We did not use any of this $300,000 award for anything to do with the coffee pot,” she said. “It’s interesting that nobody from Senator Coburn’s office called me about this.”

As for the lighthouse in Toledo:

Actually, no transportation dollars have been authorized or awarded. The lighthouse renovation is among projects community officials tentatively hope to get around to in 2019.

Senator Paul has also repeatedly cited a supposed “turtle tunnel” project. But the project he referenced on U.S. 27 in Florida was a significant safety issue for motorists, many of whom were forced to swerve when alligators, turtles and other creatures crossed the highway from adjacent Lake Jackson. While Coburn claimed the project would require $6 million or more to finish on an undefined timeline, in fact, USDOT told Lowy the project was completed in September 2010 at $3 million, under budget and $3 million less than Senator Coburn claimed.

Streetsblog Capitol Hill has more.

The takeaway? At the least, members of Conrgess should do a better job fact-checking. While they’re checking the numbers, they might look to see how long it would take to repair bridges relying solely on this relatively tiny share of funds. It would take Paul’s home state of Kentucky 66 years of bike and pedestrian funding to achieve a state of good repair for their bridges. Pennsylvania wouldn’t catch up until sometime during the 24th century.

Safe to say, this isn’t the serious proposal for bridge repair that we urgently need. If Paul, Coburn and McCain are serious about fixing bridges and not just scoring political points, they’ll come back with something better.

Photo courtesy of the Associated Press.

Late update: Senator Rand Paul’s amendment to cut money for walking and biking and direct it to bridge repair failed in the Senate today, by a 60-38 count.

A real plan to fix bridges, or a reprise of attacks on pedestrian safety?

Our reports calling attention to our nation’s deficient bridges have gained enormous traction in recent weeks, to the point that members of Congress and the White House are citing our data in demonstrating the need for infrastructure investment. Unfortunately, some are using them to make disingenuous attempts to eliminate a small program they’ve been trying to put on the chopping block for years.

A New Trail Originally uploaded by M.V. Jantzen to Flickr.
Safe travels for people on foot, on bike and in cars on the new Wilson Bridge in Washington, D.C. Should we really have to choose?

The small Transportation Enhancements program represents less than 2 percent of all transportation funding, and more than half of that 2 percent is used to help make walking and biking safer — a worthy expenditure considering 10 percent of trips are taken on foot and 47,700 people on foot were killed from 2000-2009.

Senator Rand Paul is expected to offer an amendment next week to take all of the TE money and put it toward bridge repair. And a handful of others in Congress have been trying to kill this program for years, well before the current talk of austerity.

Sen. Paul’s proposal doesn’t represent a sincere plan to repair our bridges, but unfortunately, a handful in the media are still taking the bait.

The question is this: With the nation facing a transportation crisis that has gotten little attention outside of policy wonks and Washington, should the federal government continue to mandate that states spend federal dollars on pedestrian safety, bicycling trails, landscaping and historic preservation?

When you ask the wrong question, you often get the wrong answer. And this question in particular has been manufactured by those who would capitalize on the sense of urgency about our bridges to eliminate a program they’ve been after for years.

We’ve covered before how the money spent on walking and biking safety won’t actually do anything to address the bridge backlog. It would take Kentucky 66 years of bike/ped money to fix all of the bridges that are deficient today. And as we wrote in National Journal, “So what if we decided to ignore the significant safety issues faced daily by pedestrians and cyclists, and spent that money instead on bridge repair as some have suggested? We could indeed fix all the currently deficient bridges in the state of Missouri, for example. We’d just need to be patient because it would take 82 years. The State of Washington could get to its backlog in 164 years. And Pennsylvania could finish up with its deficient bridge list at the start of the 24th century.”

Raiding these safety funds to fix our bridges is like trying to stop a freight train with a BB gun. Beyond that, it’s false — and cruel — to suggest that we have to even decide between safety on our bridges and safety on our streets.

We have often pointed out the fact that states have the flexibility to spend up to half of their bridge repair money elsewhere, regardless of the condition of their bridges. But they also have the flexibility to spend most of their Surface Transportation Program dollars, usually the biggest pot of transportation funding, on almost anything they want. They could fix bridges, build transit, highways, bridges, sidewalks; it’s all eligible, and totally up to the states for how they spend it. No mandates from Washington.

Despite false assertions that we require states to build museums or turtle tunnels instead of repairing their bridges, there’s nothing stopping states from getting on top of their deficient bridges. Just like nothing has stopped Florida from spending their TE money each year while also setting up a bridge repair program to target funds first and foremost to bridges that need attention, resulting in some of the best bridges in the country. Meanwhile, Senator Paul’s state of Kentucky, with more than 2,700 deficient bridges, spends $6.50 on new highway capacity for every dollar they spend on bridge repair.

We don’t have to choose between being safe when we walk or being safe when we drive over a bridge. Anyone who tells you otherwise has their own agenda; an agenda that has very little to do with actually repairing our bridges.

It’s time for serious proposals from Congress to fix our crumbling bridges and infrastructure, rather than making a large percentage of people less safe in the name of grabbing a few extra bucks for our bridges.

Along these lines, a good step would be Senator Cardin’s “Preservation and Renewal of Federal-Aid Highways Act.” Tell your Senators to support this important piece of legislation.

With Congress in limbo, Michigan Governor Rick Snyder puts promising transportation ideas on the table

More state and local officials are coming to grips with the fact that they cannot wait for Washington to act on infrastructure investment and repair. After two years of short-term extensions, a new transportation bill may or may not happen in the next six months. From a vantage point closer to their constituents, local leaders of all political stripes see the need for more immediate solutions — and know that the potential impact on the economy is too important to be ignored because of partisan squabbles.

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder (pictured at right), a Republican elected in 2010, is one of those leaders. And his new $1 billion blueprint for the state’s infrastructure, released earlier this week, does a commendable job of ditching ideological gestures in favor of common sense.

One of the more ground-shifting components of Snyder’s plan is his preference for rapid bus service in the Detroit area to complement and expand on the Woodward light-rail line already in the pipeline. As the Detroit Free Press discussed in an editorial this morning, it is likely that some will dismiss bus service as inferior to rail. That distinction is for Michiganders to decide, but Snyder’s willingness to consider a medley of transportation options should induce a healthy discussion.

He’s also willing to discuss revenue, which remains the most major hold-up in Congress. Under Snyder’s proposal, voters would get to decide at the local level whether to raise vehicle license fees by $40. Allowing for local debate and deliberation would likely increase the chances of new revenue being secured.

Snyder would also shift Michigan’s current gas tax to a levy as percent of the price per gallon, rather than a flat fee, a shift that is expected to increase overall receipts.

The additional revenue from both of these measures would fund road repair and public transportation, including enhanced bus and rail service in Detroit and its surrounding suburbs.

Now that Snyder has outlined his preferences, it is up the state legislature to make the next move. As the Free Press put it:

The governor has not solved southeast Michigan’s transportation problems. But in laying out a practical plan for providing — and paying for — rapid transit service, he has given leaders a road map to a better transportation future.

Photo courtesy of AnnArbor.com

Events across the country last week bring sense of urgency to bridge repair

Many communities are taking a close look at Transportation for America’s deficient bridge rankings by metro areas released last week. People are telling their representatives to invest in our infrastructure — and Washington is listening, with President Obama and rank-and-file members of Congress expressing urgency about repairing our crumbling assets.

At an event held at the Route 16’s Mabscott Overhead Bridge in Beckley, West Virginia, (pictured right) Representative Nick Rahall made a strong case for repair while surrounded by labor partners carrying “America wants to work” signs. The local NBC, ABC and CBS affiliates were on hand, alongside the Associated Press and Beckley Register-Herald, the region’s largest daily newspaper.

“It should not take a major catastrophe to bring this home to America. This horrific and tragic example shows how America’s decaying infrastructure is a disaster waiting to happen,” Rep. Rahall said, citing past tragedies that could have been prevented with greater foresight and investment

Rahall added that putting Americans to work was also a “deficit reduction issue” because it means more people paying taxes and putting money back into the economy.

Gary Zuckett, executive director of West Virginia Citizen Action and T4 America’s chief organizer in the state, played a key role in making the event happen.

IMG_3536At a similar event under a 78-year-old bridge at Chicago’s Lakeshore Drive and Wilson Ave. last Wednesday, Representative Jan Schakowsky joined labor groups, the Illinois Chamber of Commerce and other groups in highlighting unsafe bridges in their area. The local affiliates for ABC, CBS and FOX all picked up the story, alongside print media and several blogs.

“Don’t my colleagues and their families and their children drive over bridges like this? Isn’t this a priority?” Schakowsky, a Democrat from Illinois’ Ninth Congressional District, said during the event. Brian Imus, the state director of Illinois Public Interest Research Group, pictured at the lectern, also addressed members of the press and public.

West Virginia has more than 2,500 bridges rated as structurally deficient, while Illinois has more than 2,200.Portions of West Virginia are also part of the Washington, DC metropolitan area, which has 215 structurally deficient bridges, or 5.7 percent of total bridges.

9.4 percent of the bridges in the Chicago-Naperville-Joliet metropolitan area are structurally deficient, for a total of 481 deficient bridges.

The deficient bridges in our largest 102 metro areas carry three-quarters of all traffic that crosses a deficient bridge each day. Check out how your area stacks up here.

Update on Raquel Nelson: petition delivered to Cobb County

UPDATE below. More than 5,200 of you signed our petition to push for freedom for the Atlanta mother who was charged in her son’s death when he was killed by a hit-and-run driver while crossing a street in front of their apartment complex. Raquel Nelson is due back in court next week, but we wanted to let you know — especially those of you who signed that petition — that we were able to deliver that petition to the Cobb County Solicitor’s Office a few weeks ago.

With the help of a terrific partner group in Atlanta called PEDS, we had the petition delivered to the Solicitor’s office. Sally Flocks, the executive director, and Liz Coyle with PEDS were kind enough to take a trip out to Cobb County to deliver your names in person.

Unfortunately, Solicitor General Barry Morgan refused to take a few moments to meet with PEDS, a well-respected group in Atlanta, to accept the petition and hear a little more about the underlying problem of streets that aren’t safe for people on foot or bike.

Here is a few notable thoughts from Sally Flocks and PEDS about delivering the petition.

Solicitor General Barry Morgan’s refusal to meet with representatives of PEDS to accept the Transportation for America petition disappointed us. By meeting with us, Morgan could have learned why members of Transportation for America – as well as over 5,000 petitioners, believe Raquel Nelson should be pardoned of all charges. When we arrived in Marietta, the receptionist would not allow us to enter Morgan’s office to hand the petition to his assistant. Instead, she came to the receptionist’s desk to pick up the petition we had handed him.

On our way to the Solicitor General’s office, we drove by the Marietta [bus] Transfer Center (pictured below), where fences block access to the street for over ¼ mile. The closest signalized intersections are over a half mile apart. Victory Drive intersects South Marietta Parkway between the signalized intersections, which means it’s legal for pedestrians to cross anywhere they want. Yet “no pedestrian” signs have been installed to discourage pedestrians from crossing a high-speed five-lane street.

If I could wave a magic wand, the Solicitor General would have joined me for a bus ride to visit the location where Raquel Nelson and her family had attempted to cross the street.  To catch a bus back to his office, we would have had to cross the street.  Perhaps then the Solicitor General would understood why Cobb County needs to stop treating pedestrians as second class citizens.

Well said, Sally. We especially want to recognize all of you who added your names to this petition. Though we wish we could have gotten that meeting and bus ride with the Solicitor General and put your names directly in his hand, you can be sure that the calls and emails and petitions that have flooded into that office in the last few months have made a significant difference in this case, and helped to publicize the larger issues at hand nationally.

We can’t thank you enough for your support. We’ll continue to keep tabs on this story in the coming weeks.

UPDATED 10/24/11 2:30 p.m.: The Atlanta Journal Constitution reports that her second trial is starting tomorrow. It also includes that apt nugget to describe her situation:

With interviews on ABC’s Good Morning America and news outlets CNN, Reuters and the BBC covering her initial trial and sentencing, Nelson became the face of public transit users and perpetual pedestrians whom a sprawling suburbia has left behind.

New Report Ranks Deficient Bridges by Metro Areas

A new look at structurally deficient bridges in metropolitan areas finds that just a quarter of U.S. bridges, located in our largest metropolitan areas, carry 75 percent of all traffic crossing a deficient bridge each day.

Click to learn more or download the full report, which includes data for all 102 metropolitan areas over 500,000 people.

On the heels of the sudden closure of a major commuting bridge in Louisville, KY, a new report shows that more than 18,000 of the nation’s busiest bridges, clustered in the nation’s metro areas, are rated as “structurally deficient,” according to this new report from Transportation for America.

In Los Angeles, for example, an average 396 drivers cross a deficient bridge every second, the study found. The Fix We’re In For: The State of Our Nation’s Busiest Bridges, ranks 102 metro areas in three population categories based on the percentage of deficient bridges.

The report found that Pittsburgh, PA had the highest percentage of deficient bridges (30.4 percent) for a metro area with a population of over 2 million (and overall). Oklahoma City, OK (19.8 percent) topped the chart for metro areas between 1-2 million, as did Tulsa, OK (27.5 percent) for metro areas between 500,000-1 million.

At the other end of the spectrum, the metro areas that had the smallest percentage of deficient bridges are: Orlando, FL (0.60 percent) for the largest metro areas; Las Vegas (0.20 percent) for mid-sized metro areas; and Fort Myers, FL (0.30 percent) for smaller metro areas.

“There are more deficient bridges in our metropolitan areas than there are McDonald’s restaurants in the entire country,” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America, 18,239 versus roughly 14,000 McDonald’s. “These metropolitan-area bridges are most costly and difficult to fix, but they also are the most urgent, because they carry such a large share of the nation’s people and goods.”

Nearly 70,000 bridges nationwide are rated “structurally deficient” and are in need of substantial repair or replacement, according to federal data. Metropolitan-area bridges carry 75 percent of the trips that are made on structurally deficient bridges, he noted.

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) estimates that the backlog of potentially dangerous bridges would cost $70.9 billion to eliminate, while the federal outlay for bridges amounts to slightly more than $5 billion per year.

“The recent shutdown of the Sherman-Minton Bridge between Kentucky and Indiana was yet another reminder of the urgent need to repair our nation’s bridges,” Corless said. “A sincere initiative to fix these bridges would put thousands of people to work while ensuring that these critical links continue to carry people safely to work and that goods can make it to market, now and well into the future.”

Congress has repeatedly declared the condition and safety of America’s bridges to be of national significance. However, the current federal program falls short of the need, even as it allows states to shift funds from maintenance toward new construction, whether or not they can show progress toward rehabilitating deficient bridges.

Some states have worked hard to address the problem and have seen their backlog of deficient bridges shrink in number. However, two problems continue to persist: Existing federal programs offer no real incentives or assurances that aging bridges will actually get fixed; and the current level of investment is nowhere near what is needed to keep up with our rapidly growing backlog of aging bridges.

Last month, President Obama introduced his jobs bill before the Brent Spence bridge in Cincinnati, OH, just weeks after engineers shutdown the Sherman-Minton Bridge due to cracks in the bridge supports, and also identified potential faults in the nearby Kennedy Bridge. Since then, the President has regularly highlighted the poor state of our nation’s bridges and the need to pass a jobs bill that will put construction workers and engineers back to work repairing our bridges and highways.

“The poor condition of our bridges is a problem that is not going away,” said Andy Herrmann, president-elect of the American Society of Civil Engineers, “Most of the nation’s bridges were designed to last 50 years, and today, roughly a third are already 50 years or older.”

In order to prevent future catastrophes on our nation’s roads and bridges, the report recommends that Congress should:

  • Provide states with increased resources to repair and rebuild. States need federal support to back their efforts to prioritize repair and maintenance.
  • Ensure that funds sent to states for bridge repair are used only for that purpose, unless a state can show it has addressed its repair needs.
  • Require that new or rehabilitated be built so that they are safe for everyone who uses them, whether they are in vehicles, on foot or bicycle, or using public transit.

Transit benefit once again slated to be cut in half — tell Congress to move

Last November, we posted an action alert on the potential for millions of Americans to see the cost of their commute suddenly rise. Congress wisely chose to extend to $230 per month tax benefit for transit as part of the 2010 package extending the Bush tax cuts, continuing transit parity with the $230 deduction available for parking. Before that parity was put in place, the federal government was effectively subsidizing employees who drive alone to work — picking winners and losers rather than leveling the playing field for all travel options.

The clock is now ticking once again, and absent Congressional action, the $230 per month benefit will revert back to $120 per month on December 31. Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Congressman Jim McGovern (D-MA) have introduced legislation to make the benefit permanent.

Tell your member of Congress that you support parity for all travel modes. Commuter Benefits Work For Us, an advocacy coalition supporting the Schumer-McGovern legislation, makes it easy for you to let your representatives know where you stand.

It’s a matter of fairness — and Congress needs to move.