Skip to main content

Trump’s budget will hurt local communities

President Trump’s first budget request for Congress is a direct assault on smart infrastructure investment that will do damage to cities and towns of all sizes — from the biggest coastal cities down to small rural towns.

After months of promises to invest a trillion dollars in infrastructure, the first official action taken by the Trump administration on the issue is a proposal to eliminate the popular TIGER competitive grant program, cut the funding that helps cities of all sizes build new transit lines, and terminate funding for the long-distance passenger rail lines that rural areas depend on.

Tell your representatives that this proposal is a non-starter and appropriators in Congress should start from scratch.

The competitive TIGER grant program is one of the only ways that local communities of all sizes can directly access federal funds. And unlike the old outdated practice of earmarking, to win this funding, project sponsors have to bring significant local funding to the table and provide evidence of how their project will accomplish numerous goals. The TIGER grant program has brought more than three non-federal dollars to the table for each federal dollar awarded.

Eliminating the funding to support the construction of new public transportation lines and service is a slap in face of the millions of local residents who have raised their own taxes to pay their share. Like the voters in Tempe, AZ, who approved a sales tax 13 years ago that’s been set aside to pair with a future federal grant to build a streetcar. Or the voters last November in Indianapolis, IN, who approved an income tax increase to pay their share of a new bus rapid transit project, and in Atlanta, GA, who approved a sales tax increase in part to add transit to their one-of-a-kind Beltline project.

These local communities and scores of others who are generating their own funds to invest in transit will be left high and dry by this proposal, threatening their ability to satisfy the booming demand from residents and employers alike for well-connected locations served by transit.

Terminating funding for long-distance passenger rail service will hit rural communities especially hard, like the communities along the Gulf Coast who are even now demonstrating their commitment to restoring service wiped out by Hurricane Katrina by stepping up and pledging their own dollars to match or exceed any federal dollars to make it happen.

Our nation’s infrastructure serves as the backbone for economic growth and prosperity. The Administration’s proposed budget falls short of prioritizing investment in the local communities that are the basic building block of the national economy, and we need you to help stand up and send that message loud and clear to Congress.

President Trump’s budget request severely undercuts stated commitment to investing in infrastructure

press release

Earlier today, President Trump released his budget proposal for FY 2018 that cuts the U.S. Department of Transportation’s discretionary budget by 13 percent, ends the popular TIGER competitive grant program, eliminates the New & Small Starts transit construction program, and terminates funding for long-distance passenger rail funding, among other notable cuts.

In response, T4America Interim Director Beth Osborne offered this statement:

“This budget proposal severely undercuts the President’s stated commitment to infrastructure, and would leave behind many of the rural communities that supported him in November. After months of promises to invest $1 trillion in infrastructure, the first concrete action taken by the Trump administration on this issue is to propose drastic cuts to transportation programs that bring notable economic benefits to communities across the country, from small towns to large cities.

“Combined with the proposed elimination of the Community Development Block Grant program, this will put even more pressure on already overstretched local governments. This is a slap in face to the millions of local residents who have raised their own taxes — with the full expectation they would be combined with the limited pool of federal grants — to complete their priority transportation projects.

“The proposal completely eliminates the popular TIGER competitive grant program that has funded more than 400 transformational projects spanning all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The program leverages billions to accelerate key projects that drive local, regional and state economic development. Through the first five rounds of funding, TIGER projects brought 3.5 other dollars to the table for each federal dollar awarded. Despite the budget proposal’s recommendation for these communities to apply for funding from other freight programs, these programs are either not multimodal at all or have caps on the funding for non-highway projects.

“This budget also entirely eliminates funding for building new public transportation lines and service. While it will theoretically allow the small number of new transit construction projects with federal funding agreements already in hand to proceed, ending this program threatens the ability of local communities of all sizes to satisfy the booming demand for well-connected locations served by transit. Tempe, AZ, has set aside money from a voter-approved sales tax for 13 years to pair with a future federal grant to build a streetcar. In November, voters in Indianapolis, IN, approved an income tax increase in November to pay their share of a new bus rapid transit project and voters in Atlanta, GA, approved a sales tax increase to add transit to their one-of-a-kind Beltline project. These local communities and scores of others generating their own funds to invest in transit will be left high and dry by this proposal.”

“While preserving funds for the northeast rail corridor, it ‘terminates’ funding for long-distance passenger rail service. This will hit rural communities especially hard, like the Gulf Coast communities that have been working to restore passenger rail service between New Orleans and Orlando wiped out by Hurricane Katrina. These smaller communities are demonstrating their commitment to realizing the economic development that restored service will bring by stepping up and pledging their own dollars to match or exceed any federal dollars. Combined with the proposal to end the Essential Air Service program, rural communities could be more disconnected than ever before.

“Our nation’s infrastructure serves as the backbone for economic growth and prosperity. The Administration’s proposed budget falls short of prioritizing investment in the local communities that are the basic building block of the national economy. We urge leaders to uphold their promise to the American people and reinvest in our nation’s communities.

 

President Trump’s federal infrastructure priorities likely to be revealed this week

There’s no need to wait months for President Trump’s $1 trillion infrastructure package to discover the transportation priorities of this president — they’ll be clearly telegraphed with the release of his first annual budget later this week.

For months there’s been endless discussion of the President’s $1 trillion pledge to “build new roads, and highways, and bridges, and airports, and tunnels, and railways all across our wonderful nation.” And while industry groups scramble to divvy up funding or financing from a package that may or may not materialize, President Trump’s first real infrastructure effort should be considered his annual budget request with top-line numbers for transportation spending, which will tell us much about his priorities.

When the first look at that budget comes later this week, we’ll likely face the dissonance of a President rallying support for a $1 trillion investment in infrastructure at the same time he’s proposing billions in cuts to transportation investment to accompany his plan to increase defense spending by $54 billion.

While trade groups, members of Congress and local advocates are discussing what projects they want to include in this dream of a huge infrastructure package that may or may not come up later this year, they could see devastating cuts proposed for crucial transportation programs that fund smart transportation projects all across the country in less than 48 hours.

Melanie Zanona wrote about this inconsistency in The Hill today, noting that “the optics of slashing federal transportation funds in his budget proposal while pushing for a separate financing package underscores Trump’s challenge of balancing his promises of massive infrastructure investment and dramatic cuts in government spending.”

While many people — even staffers or elected reps on Capitol Hill — tend to think transportation spending decisions are determined by the long-term transportation bill that gets passed every few years, the money for new transit and rail projects still has to be appropriated by Congress each year through the budget process. 

This is an important point.

To get a big infrastructure package passed by Congress, the president will need the full coalition of transportation stakeholders, from those seeking funds for roads, to transit, rail and ports. But if there are cuts in the budget made to discretionary spending (i.e., programs not paid out of the highway trust fund), those cuts would fall disproportionately on funding for new transit construction (New and Small Starts) and multimodal and local priority projects (TIGER) — amongst other programs. Targeting parts of the infrastructure coalition with this budget now is a good way to make sure you have no coalition when you need it later.

President Trump had a meeting at the White House last week with some key transportation, real estate and infrastructure advisors about his priorities. Real estate developer Richard LeFrak talked to CNBC about what he heard in the meeting:

US 'behind the curve' on infrastructure upgrading: Richard LeFrak “One thing [Trump] said while we were in the meeting, he said ‘don’t bring me any projects that you want federal funding for that you can’t start and had completed the state approval processes,'” LeFrak said.

That’s because “‘most of these projects come from the state, in 90 to 100 days. If they’re not ready in 120 days, tell them to go back, get finished, and bring it back,’ [Trump said]. In other words, he’s not going to … devote the resources to things that he can’t implement immediately,” he added.

Of course, we’ve seen plenty of evidence that “shovel-ready” isn’t always the best qualifier to identify the best projects. Following 2009’s stimulus effort, we learned that many shovel-ready projects weren’t under construction for a reason, and many were just mothballed projects that had been sitting on a shelf for the last 20 years because they simply never merited moving forward.

Ed Mortimer from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce echoed that point while testifying alongside our Beth Osborne before a Senate Committee last week. Any new infrastructure package, he said, “should not be a replication of the Recovery Act [which focused entirely on shovel-ready projects.] Projects need to be selected to deliver long-term economic growth, not the speed at which they can be constructed.”

But not all shovel-ready projects are created equal, either.

Scores of local communities with well-conceived ready-to-go multimodal projects are eager to apply to the incredibly competitive TIGER grant program, and on average, winning TIGER projects brought at least three state or local dollars to the table for each federal dollar sought. There are transit projects all across the country that have already raised local or state funding and are literally just waiting on a check for capital dollars from the federal government to proceed, including “projects like Indianapolis’ Red Line bus rapid transit project which has already been promised more than $70 million in federal dollars to pair with nearly $20 million in local funds from an income tax increase that Indianapolis voters approved back in November at the ballot box,” as we noted last week.

USDOT has already promised over $6 billion to these shovel-ready transit construction projects that have local funding in hand and are ready to go. If this week’s budget does indeed cut (or even eliminate funding outright) for the New & Small Starts transit program which exists explicitly to help metro areas of all sizes build new transit systems, the projects in that pipeline could be immediately threatened, as will their promises of supporting economic development & improved mobility.

When any president starts talking about a big new investment in transportation, it’s natural for people to get excited — Congress has been begging, borrowing and dealing to keep federal transportation program solvent for the last decade.

But whether or not President Trump finds a way to successfully advance and pay for a massive investment in infrastructure, come hell or high water, there will be a budget for these crucial transportation programs this year. And it will tell us all we need to know about his priorities.


We’ll be breaking down the budget when it’s released and arm you with the information you’ll need to take action and weigh in with your members of Congress. Do you want to get this sort of information directly to your inbox? Sign up for email today.

Sign me up

Do our federal transportation priorities match the rhetoric we use to justify more spending?

Photo via WSDOT/Flickr https://www.flickr.com/photos/wsdot/8670279118

With the Trump administration readying both an annual budget and discussing a possible large infrastructure package, Transportation for America yesterday urged a key Senate subcommittee to protect the investments in programs that promote innovation, encourage collaboration and maximize benefits for local communities.

Photo via WSDOT/Flickr httpswww.flickr.com/photos/wsdot/8670279118

The President’s first budget will almost certainly propose big cuts to discretionary spending programs. While the bulk of annual federal transportation spending is sourced from the highway trust fund and should be more insulated from these cuts, discretionary cuts would fall disproportionately on funding for new transit construction (New and Small Starts) and multimodal and local priority projects (TIGER).

House and Senate appropriators will have two decisions to make: a) whether to appropriate the amounts prescribed by the current long-term transportation law (the FAST Act) for the core programs, which is uncertain as well, and, b) how much to allocate for these other discretionary transportation programs.

As expected, with the heads of a few national trade groups also testifying yesterday alongside T4America before the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, there was the usual rhetoric about America’s “crumbling” infrastructure amidst calls to invest more money overall in the federal transportation program.

And while T4America agrees on the need for greater levels of overall investment, T4A senior policy advisor Beth Osborne (pictured above) differentiated our overall position.

“As everyone testifying today will say,” she noted in her opening remarks, “we have great need to invest in our transportation system, including our roads, bridges, and transit systems. However, Transportation for America also believes that our problems run far deeper than just an overall lack of funding.”

When we have these discussions about the need to invest in infrastructure — especially in Washington — all sorts of ominous numbers are thrown around. Tens of thousands of deficient bridges. Pavement condition that’s worsening by the day. Backlogs of neglected maintenance and repair.

But where does the money go once we increase transportation spending and dole it all out to the states? Beth Osborne explained:

In fact, while we talk about the need for more funding to address our crumbling infrastructure, that is not necessarily where the funding goes. A 2014 report conducted by Smart Growth America called “Repair Priorities” found that between 2009 and 2011 states collectively spent $20.4 billion annually to build new roadways and add lanes. During that same time, states spent just $16.5 billion annually repairing and preserving the existing system, even while roads across the country were deteriorating. As we talk about large infrastructure packages, it’s only fair to ask that the priorities of our transportation program more closely match the rhetoric we use to justify more spending on it.

Why do we keep spending hefty sums on new roads and new lanes while repair backlogs get ignored? One reason is that transportation and development decisions are rarely well coordinated and we end up trying to address bad land use decisions with more transportation spending, and vice versa.

More from Beth:

I think about the two houses in Florida that are 70 feet apart but require a seven-mile drive to get from one to the other. Such a roadway and land use pattern seems almost designed with the express purpose of generating traffic snarls. But the problem is not categorized as a development or local road connectivity problem. It is put to the state and the federal government as a congestion problem that requires big spending to widen roads. Now no one is calling for the federal government to get involved in local land use decisions. However, there should be a way to reward cities and states consider these and take action improve outcomes and lower costs. Competitive programs can help to do that.

One of those competitive programs is the TIGER grant program, which could be one of the programs targeted for severe cuts — or elimination — in this looming budget proposal from the President.

TIGER has awarded more than $4 billion since 2010 to smart local projects, bringing 3.5 local dollars to the table for every federal dollar through just the first five rounds. Though only 5-6 percent of all applicants have successfully won funding, local leaders still love the programs, and the process encouraged applicants to try new strategies or approaches to be as competitive as possible to win funding — “like design-build project delivery or complete street designs or public-private partnerships,” Beth noted.

Rather than just sidling up to the table for their share of dollars allocated by some federal formula, communities have been trying to produce the best, most competitive applications that will bring the highest returns on both the federal investment and their local commitment.

This is the kind of innovation that Congress should be encouraging, not targeting for cuts.

In the New and Small Starts transit capital programs, there’s over $6 billion already promised to shovel-ready transit projects all across the country that have already raised local or state funding and are just waiting on capital dollars from the federal government to proceed. Projects like Indianapolis’ Red Line bus rapid transit project that has already been promised more than $70 million in federal dollars to pair with nearly $20 million in local funds from an income tax increase that Indianapolis voters approved back in November at the ballot box.

Indianapolis and a multitude of other communities small and large “are stretching themselves to raise their own funds and to innovate, but they cannot bring these important projects to fruition without a strong federal funding partner,” Beth said in closing this morning. “The programs that this committee funds are often the lynchpin for aiding states and localities in meeting these demands.”

We hope that this Senate subcommittee heard the message loud and clear and will stand up for these vital programs as the budget process moves forward. We’ll keep you updated.

President Obama releases robust final budget; summary included

Today, the White House released President Obama’s fiscal year 2017 (FY17) budget proposal, the final of his presidency. This budget adheres to the $1.07 trillion spending cap that resulted from the bipartisan two-year budget deal agreed to last November. The President’s budget proposal either falls in line with or exceeds FAST Act funding levels, increases transit and rail funding, and funds TIGER (the FAST Act does not authorize the program), among other programs. The budget also calls for the creation of a 21st Century Regions program, a clean communities competitive grant program and funds the President’s 21st Century Clean Transportation Plan.

Speaker Ryan (R-WI) has asked congressman to maintain the funding levels agreed to last November, though there are signals that some may seek additional cuts.

Read a more detailed analysis here.

Help make TIGER roar in this year’s budget

With the multi-year transportation bill is behind us, Congress is currently considering an annual transportation spending bill with $600 million for the competitive TIGER grant program — an increase of $100 million over existing funding amounts. We need to support it this week as Congress finalizes a new budget to carry us into next year.

The incredibly popular TIGER grant program is one of the only ways that local communities like yours can apply for and win funds from the federal government for important priority projects of almost any kind, helping to get the best locally-supported projects with a high return on investment off the ground. Because it was not permanently authorized in the FAST Act, TIGER is subject to budget battles each year, and this year is no different.

Can you urge your representatives in Congress to pass an appropriations bill with the proposed $600 million in TIGER grant funding, in addition to preserving other key transportation programs?

Whether for new multimodal passenger rail stations in Normal and Alton, Illinois to take advantage of improved passenger rail connections between Chicago and St. Louis, an overhaul of the downtown street network in Dubuque, IA to expand the tax base by $77 million, or an improvement to the West Memphis port to boost cargo capacity by 2,000 percent with only a $10.9 million award, the competitive TIGER program ensures the best projects receive funds, and provides a level of accountability and transparency not currently available in many statewide transportation programs.

In just the past few years, the House has proposed to cut TIGER funding entirely or add restrictions so that transit, bike and pedestrian and multimodal projects can’t apply — only highway projects. This year, the Senate is proposing to keep the program unchanged and add $100 million in funding (the most recent round had $500 million), while the House proposed to slash it to just $100 million.

In addition to TIGER funding, we’re supporting more funding for new transit construction and the Senate levels for Amtrak funding. Communities all over the country are clamoring to expand transit and passenger rail service to meet booming demand and it’s not the time to reduce funding for those programs.

We are counting on your vocal support to ensure that Congress protect and preserve funding that local communities count on in this spending bill to keep the government open and functioning past this Friday.

Send a message to your members of Congress today and let them know that these issues matter to you and your community.

US House approves bill by a thin margin that makes cuts to TIGER, transit construction and passenger rail

Late Tuesday night, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass their yearly transportation spending bill with just six votes separating the bill from defeat. While the cuts to TIGER, Amtrak and New Starts transit capital programs were unfortunately approved by the House, it’s unlikely this bill will become law any time soon. That’s because of the Senate’s likely inability to pass any annual spending bills this summer due to the parties’ lack of agreement on overall funding for the government this year.

First, to the thousands of you who sent messages to your representatives in the last week, we thank you for getting engaged on this crucial issue. Though the final vote was disappointing, there’s still hope. We do know that our voices were heard, as many amendments were rejected by significant margins that would have made further cuts to these important programs — reflecting that these legislators are indeed hearing about what their constituents value.

The bad news is that the final bill approved by the House still cut $200 million for all new transit construction, slashed the TIGER competitive grant program by 80 percent, and cut Amtrak’s budget by $240 million. These programs targeted by the House for cuts are precisely the ones that cities, towns and metro regions of all sizes throughout the country are depending on to help them stay economically competitive and bring their ambitious transportation plans to fruition.

The good news is that several short-sighted amendments were roundly defeated, including some to make these above cuts worse.

Rep. Grotham (R-WI) proposed an amendment to make the New Starts cuts even deeper by stripping the bill of all transit capital construction funding ($1.9 billion), which was rejected by voice vote with strong bipartisan opposition. Rep. Emmers (R-MN) proposed an amendment to cut all of the funds used to make transit stations easier to access, boosting ridership and making the service easier and more convenient to use, like projects to improve bike and pedestrian access or support for dense, walkable development near the stops. Transit lines don’t exist in vacuums — successful lines and stations are most often surrounded by other supportive infrastructure that helps connect them to their riders. This amendment was very close, but all House Democrats were joined by 32 of their Republican colleagues to kill the amendment 212-214.

Rep. Brooks (R-AL) proposed two amendments last week to essentially strip all capital and operating funding from Amtrak, and both were defeated by more than 125 votes with strong bipartisan opposition. Rep. Session (R-TX) proposed similar amendments that were both defeated as well. These votes are another reminder of the fact that communities of all kinds — small, large, rural, urban — depend on the service provided by the nation’s passenger rail system. Their constituents certainly don’t see the existence of an affordable transportation option as a partisan issue, to say nothing of the tremendous value provided by making valuable economic connections between metro areas large and small and rural areas throughout the country.

The House’s bill now moves to the Senate Appropriations Committee, where members are currently drafting their Transportation-HUD spending bill. We’re cautiously optimistic that at least a few of the cuts made by the House’s annual spending bill could be undone — at least partially — in the Senate. However, the only way to ensure that all of these cuts are removed and certainly the only way to increase funding over last year’s bill is for Congress to remove the poorly planned and unwise spending caps put in place by the 2011 sequestration.

One thing is certain: we’ll need your help to make that happen, and we will keep you posted as the annual transportation spending bill continues onto the Senate.

Additional insight from our policy team can be found for our logged-in T4America members below, including a full list of amendments that were voted on during Tuesday night’s debate.


[member_content]This information below is pulled from our members-only wrap-up of the vote that went up yesterday. Read the full post here. And visit t4america.org/members regularly to see these updates.

This final vote count is a sign of things to come.

The U.S. House and Senate Republicans are sticking to sequestration-level discretionary funding amounts for all of their FY2016 spending bills, established in the Budget Control Act of 2011. These spending caps limit funding for the regular appropriation bills in FY2016 to $1.016 trillion, a funding increase of just 0.29% over last year. We expect the House to continue to face uphill challenges in passing their bills and over in the Senate, with near, if not all-out, opposition from the Democrats expected for all 12 annual spending bills.

This issue will not likely resolve itself until the fall. Just yesterday, Senate Majority Leader McConnell (R-KY) rejected a call from Senate Democrats to hold a “budget summit” this month to resolve the differences between the two parties on top-line annual appropriations levels. Until this larger issue is resolved, we don’t expect the House Transportation-HUD bill that narrowly passed last night to become law any time soon.

Amendments that were considered Tuesday prior to the bills passage include:

Rep. Denham (R-CA) – An amendment to prohibit funds from the bill to be used for high-speed rail in California or for the California High-Speed Rail Authority. A similar amendment passed last year in the House by a vote of 227-186, but this amendment and others to restrict funding to the California high-speed rail project were not included in the final FY2015 transportation spending bill due to lack of support in the Senate

AMENDMENT ADOPTED BY VOICE VOTE

Rep. Bass (D-CA) – An amendment to make it easier for state and local transportation agencies to use local hire criteria for FTA procurement selection processes. A similar amendment was included in the final FY2015 transportation spending bill, and USDOT is currently implementing this through a one-year pilot. Read our take on that original provision from earlier this year.

AMENDMENT ADOPTED BY VOICE VOTE

Rep Emmer (R-MN) – An amendment to prohibit the use of funds to carry out projects to improve bicycle and pedestrian access on any FTA New Start (transit) projects.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 212-214 (Zero Democrats voted for the amendment — see roll call vote here)

Rep Meehan (R-PA) – An amendment to prohibit Amtrak from spending capital funds on projects other than the Northeast Corridor until Amtrak spends an amount equal to this year’s Northeast Corridor profits on Northeast Corridor capital construction. Amtrak’s profits from that line in FY2015 were $290 million.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 199-227 (see roll call vote here)

Rep Posey #1 (R-FL) – An amendment to prohibit funds from being used to take any actions related to financing a new passenger rail project that runs from Orlando to Miami through Indian River County, Florida. This amendment and Rep. Posey’s other two below were targeted at stopping and/or stalling the development of the private Florida East Coast Railway high-speed rail project.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 163-260 (see roll call vote here)

Rep Posey #2 (R-FL) – An amendment to prohibit funds from being used to authorize exempt facility bonds to finance passenger rail projects that are not reasonably expected to attain a maximum speed in excess of 150 mph.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 148-275 (see roll call vote here)

Rep Posey #3 (R-FL) – An amendment to prohibit funds from being used to make a loan in an amount that exceeds $600 million under the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 134-287 (see roll call vote here)

Rep Sessions #1 (R-TX) – An amendment to prohibit funds from being used by Amtrak to support the route with the highest loss, measured by contributions/(loss) per rider (would eliminate the “Sunset Limited” line from New Orleans to Los Angeles). Rep. Sessions has in the past made amendments similar to this and the following amendment.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 205-218 (see roll call vote here)

Rep Sessions #2 (R-TX) – An amendment to prohibit funds being used by Amtrak to operate any route whose operating costs exceed two times its revenues based on the National Railroad Passenger Corporation FY2014-2018 Five Year Plan from April 2014, targeting nearly all long-distance routes.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 186-237 (see roll call vote here)

Rep Blackburn (R-TN) – An amendment to reduce the overall appropriations for the Transportation-HUD bill by 1%.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 163-259 (see roll call vote here)

Rep Gosar (R-AZ) – An amendment to prohibit funds from being used to implement or enforce the rule entitled “Hazardous Materials for High-Hazard Flammable Trains”.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 136-286 (see roll call vote here)

Rep Lee (D-CA) – An amendment to strike provisions included in the spending bill that would prohibit USDOT from allowing flights or cruise ships to travel to Cuba.

AMENDMENT REJECTED BY VOTE 176-247 (see roll call vote here)

[/member_content]

House proposes cuts to TIGER and transit construction, stable funding for other programs for fiscal 2016

The House Appropriations Committee introduced a Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (T-HUD) bill for fiscal 2016 that, as in years past, features heavy cuts to TIGER, New Starts and Amtrak.

The bill, approved by the T-HUD subcommittee and headed back to the full Appropriations Committee for markup and a vote, maintains funding rates for federal highway and mass transit formula dollars, $40.3 billion and $8.6 billion respectively. Of course, these funding levels assume that Congress is going to act to find enough money to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent past this June or July, and also move to either reauthorize or extend MAP-21 after its May 31st expiration. Without either action, there won’t be any money for transportation past that deadline, much less for the entire next fiscal year.

Meanwhile, other key programs are facing heavy cuts.

TIGER: The overwhelmingly popular TIGER program would shrink from $500 million to $100 million. In addition, the size of grants would be far smaller, within a range of $2-15 million, down from last year’s range of $10-200 million. This year’s T-HUD also reduces the share that the federal government will cover for TIGER projects, from 60 percent to 50 percent, requiring more local or state money to be brought to the table.

The silver lining in all this is that the House did not repeat last year’s attempt to limit eligibility to only road and port projects, a move that would have left out the wide range of multimodal projects that have benefited the most from this innovative program.

New Starts & Small Starts: These programs that fund new rail, rapid bus and streetcar construction would receive $1.92 billion in funding, down from last year’s $2.12 billion in the final budget. The new bill would also reduce the federal government’s share of New Starts projects from 60 percent to 50 percent.

Amtrak: Amtrak would have a budget of $1.1 billion. The bill actually adds $39 million to the rail service’s operational costs, but cuts $290 million from its capital budget.

The Senate has yet to release its own budget, but for the last few years, the Senate has prioritized funding for many of these important programs. However, with the change in leadership in the Senate in this Congress, it’s unclear if things could play out similarly this year compared to years past.

Members can read our full summary memo on the THUD bill below.

[member_content] Members, you can read our full members-only THUD summary here. (pdf)

And, have you been to the new portal for all members-only content? https://t4america.org/members [/member_content]

House proposes a trust fund Band-aid through May, 2015, with key differences from Senate

House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI)

House Ways and Means Committee Dave Camp (R-MI)

A House proposal to shore up the transportation trust fund through May, 2015, is a good news, not-so-good news proposition.

Late yesterday, House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) proposed a $10.8 billion infusion to cover a looming deficit in the Highway Trust Fund. The money for the next few months would come mostly from an accounting maneuver called “pension smoothing” over the next 10 years. The remainder comes from extending some customs fees and transferring $1 billion from the fund for leaking underground storage tanks.

The good news is that both Houses are now moving to take seriously the increasingly urgent warnings of insolvency coming from the Congressional Budget Office and the U.S. Department of Transportation. Absent action to transfer money to the trust fund, the flow of dollars to the states will be curtailed as much as 28 percent after Aug. 1.

The not-so-good news is that the recent hope for a speedy, bicameral solution seems lost for the moment. The House is taking a different tack from the Senate, whose Finance Committee had delayed its own proposal in hopes of negotiation a bipartisan compromise within both chambers. The Camp proposal covers a different time period – through May 31 versus Dec. 31 in the Senate – and uses different “pay-fors”. The differences mean it will be that much harder to reach a solution before the long August recess.

The other less-than-good news is that the proposal to extend into May of next year would reduce the urgency to address a long-term solution, such as the bipartisan Murphy-Corker proposal to raise the gas tax and index it to inflation. By extending only through the end of this year, the Senate deadline raised the possibility that Congress might move immediately after the election, in a lame-duck session where members feel less political pressure.

“While it doesn’t provide as much funding as I would like – enough to get through the end of next year – it does give Congress and the tax-writing Committees ample time to consider a more long-term solution to the Highway Trust Fund,” Camp said in a statement. However, Camp also indicated he is opposed to tapping the most readily available revenue source, the federal gas tax, calling it “just about the worst tax increase Congress could hit hardworking Americans with.”

The House Ways and Means Committee is scheduled to consider the legislation Thursday at 10:00 a.m.

Summary of the President’s budget for transportation

The transportation budget proposal President Obama released yesterday went well beyond setting spending levels for fiscal year 2015, outlining a vision for rebooting our nation’s transportation program. While the dollar figures may be considered moot by the two-year bipartisan budget that passed the Congress in December, the principles that he and his Administration put forward are substantially in line with what we’ve been hearing from business, elected and civic leaders across the country.

“The budget clearly recognizes that investment in infrastructure is essential in laying the groundwork for our future prosperity over many years,” said T4America director James Corless in our official statement yesterday. “Many of the priorities expressed in the budget clearly point in the right direction: keeping our system in good repair, supporting local efforts to promote economic development, spurring innovation through competitive grants and eliminating freight bottlenecks.”

For a breakdown of the key changes the Administration is proposing, see our analysis here. (PDF)

Step one, of course, is to figure out how to raise the money for transportation to shore up the transportation fund and make the investments necessary to ensure a prosperous economy.

Just to extend MAP-21 at the same funding levels, the trust fund requires an infusion of $19 billion next year or $100 billion over 6 years. We know that finding that sort of money won’t be an easy task, but having that conversation is the first crucial step. The President and House Ways and Means Chairman Camp both deserve recognition for presenting their preferred approach of using corporate tax reform to plug the funding gap.

The President’s budget proposes a 4-year, $302 billion surface transportation reauthorization, which is an $87 billion increase over the current spending levels.

To ensure the money is invested well, the Administration proposes several key policy moves: The first would be bringing all the programs and modes together in a unified transportation trust fund. The budget sets a priority on “fixing it first” and creates a program dedicated to repairing our most worrisome needs. It would strengthen competitive grant programs that foster innovation, local control and transparency, and create incentives for projects that deliver strong economic benefits. Freight choke points in our busiest economic centers would get special attention, regardless of mode. Acknowledging the tremendous surge in demand, public transportation projects would get a 70 percent boost.

The Administration’s priorities should inform the reauthorization of the federal program as Congress takes up the matter later this year. We at T4America look forward to seeing the details of how the Administration proposes to accomplish these goals in the President’s promised four-year reauthorization proposal.

As for what’s likely to happen next, because the bipartisan budget passed by Congress in December also set top-line budget amounts for the year (FY15) to come, it’s uncertain if the House or Senate will introduce or pass their own budget resolutions this year.  Still, whether the ultimate legislative vehicle is the reauthorization of MAP-21 or appropriations bills later this year, it’s essential that Congress and the President come to agreement on a way to continue supporting communities’ efforts to maintain their transportation infrastructure and prepare for the future.

FY13 USDOT Appropriations (post sequestration)FY14 USDOT AppropriationsPresident's FY15 Proposed BudgetDifference between FY14 Approps and President's FY15 budget proposal
Federal-Aid Highways$39.62B$40.26B$47.32B+$7.06B
Transit Formula Grants$8.46B$8.6B$13.914B+$5.314B
Transit 'New Starts'$1.86B$2.13B$2.5B+$370M
TIGER$475M$600M$1.25B+$650M
High Speed Rail/High Performance Passenger Rail$0$00*-
Amtrak Capital$902M$1.05B0*-
Amtrak Operating$441M$340M0*-
Current Passenger Rail Service--$2.45B+$1.06B**
Rail Service Improvement Program--$2.325B+$2.325B
Freight Program--$1.0B+$1.0B
Critical Immediate Investments--$4.85B+4.85B
Fixing and Accelerating Surface Transportation (FAST)--$1.0B+$1.0B
Rapid Growth Area Transit Program--$500M+$500M

*The FY15 Budget consolidates existing rail programs into 2 new programs. 
**Compared to FY14 Appropriations for Amtrak Capital and Operations 

Graphic: Comparing the 2014 bipartisan budget to 2013

Just months after budget sequestration and a government shutdown put transportation funding at risk, Congress passed the first full budget in three years last night after the Senate vote that will provide stable or increased funding for key programs we’ve been fighting for over the last few years. The $1.1 trillion budget is with the President for his signature. Take a look at this graphic which shows the good news for transportation in this 2014 budget compared to FY2013 figures post-sequestration.

For this graphic and more, don’t miss our regular featured graphics on our Maps and Tools page.

2014 Budget Deal

 

(Note the comment on the graphic about Amtrak and Amtrak operations — those cuts are a bit deceiving. Also, Amtrak received a total of $1.39 billion in capital and operations for 2014 — as much as they’ve received in almost any recent budget.)

Cuts restored, progress possible in critical budget deal

Maine's application for a TIGER grant to replace the aging Penobscot River bridge has a benefit-cost ratio of 8.7

Maine’s application for a TIGER grant to replace the aging Penobscot River bridge has a benefit-cost ratio of 8.7

Updated 1/17/2014 at bottom. Positive news from Congress today! Yes, you heard right. Just months after budget sequestration and a government shutdown put transportation funding at risk, House leaders have agreed to a budget deal that would provide stable or increased funding for key programs that you’ve helped us defend over the last few years.

House leaders deserve recognition for this positive step for transportation funding. And they need to know that they’re on the right track.

It’s not over yet, but this is an important victory for T4America and all of you who think smart investments in transportation are key to economic prosperity.

The House and Senate reached a tentative agreement back in December and this new “omnibus” comprehensive budget bill to keep government functioning was drafted along that outline by House and Senate appropriators.

Most encouraging is that it wasn’t that long ago when serious proposals were floated in Congress for across-the-board transportation cuts of one-third, significant cuts to funding for Amtrak and new transit construction, as well as zeroing out the innovative TIGER grant program.

This budget deal includes $600 million for another round of grants for the TIGER program — a level not seen since 2010 — as well as an increase in the New Starts program that communities need to meet the demand for transit service. Amtrak also received what they need to continue operating their booming services while investing for the future.

 

Get Involved

 Tell your House representative that you welcome this deal, thank them for their work to make it happen, and urge them to pass the measure when it comes to the floor.

SEND A MESSAGE 

 

That means that commuters throughout the nation can breathe a sigh of relief that their transit route is less likely to be cut, rail cars and buses could be upgraded, and essential new service can begin the process of being added. With cuts to highway programs reversed, they also can know that their bridges and roads are more likely to be repaired and replaced. Riders who depend on Amtrak can breathe easy knowing that most service cuts are likely history.

So what’s next? A vote in the House perhaps as early as tomorrow (Wednesday) and then a subsequent vote in the Senate by this weekend.

After this important deal is approved, we hope Congress will turn its attention toward preventing the oncoming insolvency of our key transportation trust fund. For inspiration, they can look to our alliance’s proposal to raise enough revenues not only to avoid calamity, but to provide our communities the resources and latitude they need to reach their economic potential.

Our nation’s economy is only as strong as our local economies, and those depend on a reliable, safe, well-maintained transportation network.

Updated 1/17/2014 With a 359-67 vote in the House and a 72-26 vote in the Senate, the full $1.1 trillion budget for FY 2014 was approved by Congress and sent to the President for his signature. Here’s our statement on the final vote.

Budget deal avoids automatic cuts; focus shifts to appropriations committees

Barring a successful rebellion within one party or the other, it looks like Congress may have the first bipartisan budget agreement since 2010. That is good news for the economy, and it is especially welcome where transportation infrastructure is concerned.

Through a combination of fee increases, spending cuts, and other changes, the deal allocates nearly $63 billion to offset “sequestration” cuts – by half this year and about a quarter in fiscal 2015 – and to reduce the deficit by $23 billion. Most importantly for transportation, it provides the appropriations committees with the authority to adjust the funding levels within the new overall cap.

This flexibility opens the possibility of restoring cuts to transit construction projects under New Starts, to the oversubscribed program of competitive grants under TIGER and to Amtrak. Those programs faced cuts of at least 7 percent this year, on top of previous cuts.

Transportation cuts since 2010

The deal also includes a “reserve account” for infrastructure that gives Congress and authorizing committees permission to spend more on transportation and other infrastructure, provided they can pay for it either through cuts elsewhere or increased revenue – by, say, raising the gas tax.  This is good news, because, while it by no means guarantees positive action, the agreement at least indicates bipartisan acknowledgment that more investment in transportation may be warranted.

As we have explained in this space before, relying only on existing revenue from the federal gas tax would lead to massive cuts to highway and transit projects starting next fall.

That’s why we at Transportation for America are rallying local elected, business and civic leaders from around the country to a realistic proposal to raise and invest additional revenue. While one simple route would be to raise the federal gas tax to match inflation since the last increase in 1993, there are other, readily doable avenues available, as our proposal shows.

Raising an additional $30 billion per year – at roughly the cost per commuter of a doughnut and a coffee a week – would allow us to stabilize funding for the MAP-21 program Congress adopted last year and protect all modes of transportation – including New Starts, TIGER and Amtrak – from draconian budget cuts. At the same time, we could spur the innovation our economy needs to meet population growth and rising demand by funding competitive grants to local communities that come up with smart solutions.

The budget deal offers a glimmer of hope that members of both parties will understand what is at stake if transportation funding continues to be radically unstable. We hope that Congress can continue to work in a cooperative, bi-partisan fashion to address key needs like the impending insolvency of our federal transportation program.

The impacts of sequestration: comparing 2012 to 2013

If your head is spinning from trying to figure out what sequestration, the “continuing budget resolution,” and the myriad proposed budgets have on transportation funding, this simple chart is for you.

This helpful chart shows the notable recent spending plans and compares each of them to what was spent on transportation in 2012, for the key programs that we care about.

There’s still a lot there, so let’s break down what’s there and simplify it. The first column shows what was approved for spending in 2012. These appropriations bills were passed before MAP-21 passed last summer, so 2012 mostly represents the levels authorized by SAFETEA-LU. This is the baseline we’re using for comparing to the 2013 spending.

The second column is the 2013 budget proposed by the Senate in the last (112th) Congress.

The third column is the spending levels established by MAP-21. Keep in mind that the standing transportation law just “authorizes” funding levels — the money still has to be “appropriated” each year. But typically, appropriators follow the levels laid out within the current transportation law for the most part.

The fourth column is the important one to pay attention to, because this is where all the cuts that are part of “sequestration” have been made. This is the “continuing budget resolution” that the Senate and then the House passed in just the last few weeks. A CR, as its known, just extends spending authority ahead through a certain amount of time — usually when Congress can’t agree to write a proper new annual budget before the current one expires. It’s a stopgap measure. A CR usually keeps funding at the same level and almost never changes policy, but in this case, there are cuts in the CR, and most of these are due to sequestration, which required cuts to all discretionary funding.

The last column shows the difference between the funding for transportation in 2012 vs 2013, comparing the first column with the fourth. Hopefully this provides some clarity for a confusing issue.

Would you like to download this chart as a sharable PDF? Find that here.

Program2012 funding levelsSenate's draft 2013 proposal (112th Congress)MAP-21 authorized2013 CR (implements sequestration)Difference: 2013 v. 2012 funding levels
Federal-Aid Highways$39.1B$39.1B$39.7BB$39.7B$600M
Transit Formula Grants$8.36B$8.36B$8.5B$8.5B$10M
Transit Capital Grants (New Starts)$1.955B$2B$1.9B$1.86B—$95M
High Speed Rail/High Performance Passenger Rail$0 (HSR)$100M from PRIIAPRIIA has jurisidction$0$0
Amtrak Capital*$952M$1.05BPRIIA has jurisidction$904M—$48M
Amtrak Operating*$466M$400MPRIIA has jurisidction$442.5M—$23.5M
TIGER$500M$500MNot authorized$475M—$25M
Partnership for Sustainable Communities Grants$0$50M$0$0
Projects of National and Regional Significance (PNRS)Did not exist – created under MAP-21$500M$0$0 (or —$500M from MAP-21)
Hurricane Sandy FTA Emergency Transit Funding$10.9B$10.35B—$545M
Hurricane Sandy Amtrak Emergency Funds$118M$112M—$6M
Hurricane Sandy FHWA Emergency Highway Funds$2B$1.9B—$100M

Senate budget restores some sanity to transportation programs

Just a few weeks after Rep. Paul Ryan released his House budget that proposed cutting or eliminating many important transportation programs, the key Senate committee’s budget for transportation (and housing) for next year contains some good news. Thanks to all of you who sent emails last week to your Senators on the committee!

TIGER, one of the most important programs that communities depend on to fund innovative local transportation projects, was well funded after the House proposal totally eliminated it in their budget.

Whether repairing a pair of deficient bridges that connect two communities in Michigan, extending transit service into an underserved area in Orlando, improving a busy rail crossroads in Texas to move freight faster cross-country, or bringing different modes of transportation together under a brand new roof in Moline, Illinois, the competitive TIGER grant program has been a huge boon to more than 130 communities, funding many innovative projects that often have a hard time getting funding from the state DOT or federal formulas.

New Starts, the small, oversubscribed program that funds almost all new transit construction across the country, was funded at a little more than $2 billion after being also totally eliminated by the House. It’s a prudent move: transit usage is booming across the country while vehicle miles traveled peaked a few years ago and has been slowly declining ever since — especially among people under age 34.

And the small but very influential Partnership for Sustainable Communities was funded again after receiving no funding last year. This program brings together the federal environmental, housing and transportation agencies to make decisions in concert and make small grants to communities that want to engage in better planning to ensure that their communities become or remain great places to live.

This doesn’t mean that the fight is over for this year — this budget will still have to be reconciled with the House, which is no easy feat. And we’ll have a battle at that point once more. It’s been tougher and tougher in the last few years to pass actual budgets for these individual programs. This year will be no different, especially heading into an election this fall.

The full list of notable programs and their funding levels:

  • Highways: $39.1 billion.
  • Transit: The summary doesn’t explicitly give an amount but it’s fairly safe to assume that it’s $8.4 billion, in line with MAP-21 levels, just as the above funding for highways matches MAP-21.
  • TIGER: $500 million
  • New Starts: $2.05 billion. This is the core program that funds construction of new and expanded transit systems.
  • Amtrak: $1.45 billion
  • Passenger Rail Grants: $100 million
  • Partnership for Sustainable Communities: $50 million

Are you confused about the difference between the long-term transportation bill and these yearly budget battles? In short, it’s the difference between “authorizations” and “appropriations.”  The multi-year transportation bill is an authorization, which means the policy is put on paper and the targeted overall funding amounts are determined. We are still working to see that multi-year bill passed with important policy reforms. But in the meantime as we roll along under extension after extension of the old law, it’s still up to appropriators in the House and Senate each year to decide how much money to actually spend on transportation —especially how to divvy up the discretionary money between different programs, like Amtrak, TIGER grants, or high-speed rail, just to name a few.

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.

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

What does the debt ceiling deal mean for transportation?

With just hours to spare before the deadline, the House, Senate and President Obama have agreed (in principle) on an agreement to raise the debt ceiling. While the details of that agreement are circulating in the media, the implications for the ongoing efforts to reauthorize the transportation bill — as well as funding for current programs over the next year or two — are a bit murky.

Here are a few things we know:

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee won’t be able to move their transportation bill this week, which means it won’t get introduced or marked up before the August recess. The delay caused by the debt ceiling debate and the scheduled recess in August will likely move the introduction of the Senate bill and markup into September.

The Senate Finance Committee, currently tasked with finding an additional $12 billion to fund the Senate’s plan for a two-year bill, might be preoccupied with examining the details of the cuts in the debt deal. The Senate would need $12 billion to keep the HTF solvent over the length of its two-year bill.

Perhaps restating the obvious, but at a time when Congress is trying to establish or decide what will or won’t be cut, it could be more difficult to find the $12 billion needed for the Senate’s plan. That said, don’t count out Sen. Baucus just yet and his ability to find this amount of money for the EPW Committee.

Other than the cuts to defense spending, the bulk of the initial cuts will come from discretionary programs (and caps on discretionary spending.) In the past, the Highway Trust Fund has never been treated as discretionary spending by Congress, which could lead to a problem if that is the case in this instance. If there are discretionary cuts to transportation, they will primarily hit the transportation programs that get funded out of general fund revenues. This could include things like high speed rail, TIGER and New Starts, among others.

The upshot is that it’s still too early to determine the specific impacts, but this deal will have definite impacts on transportation over the coming two years and beyond.

Also: Read Streetsblog Capitol Hill on the same topic

Government shutdown averted in last-minute budget deal, with some cuts to transportation

Down-to-the-wire negotiations late last night between President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid resulted in a budget deal containing about $38 billion in reductions from current spending levels and the prevention of a government shutdown.

With the Federal Government slated to close at midnight, the House and Senate passed a final one week stop-gap measure to allow the details of the agreement to be ironed out. The continuing resolution itself contains $2 billion in cuts that largely hit the U.S. Department of Transportation and Department of Housing and Urban Development.

By next week, Congress is expected to finalize its fiscal year 2011 budget — which runs through September — at the agreed-upon funding levels. President Obama made brief remarks on the budget compromise at the White House shortly after 11pm last night.

The cuts to transportation and housing passed last night were deemed largely non-controversial because they matched closely with the funding levels requested in President Obama’s fiscal year 2012 budget.

The High Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail program will receive $1 billion, a reduction of $1.5 billion from the previous year, and the New Starts program — a key revenue source for transit projects throughout the country — loses $280 million, though the resulting figure is reportedly sufficient to fund projects that have already received grants from USDOT. Other cuts include:

  • $6.3 million from the Transportation Planning, Research, and Development account
  • $2.5 million from the Federal Railroad Administration’s Research and Development; and
  • The Transit Research and University Research Centers Program budget is reduced to $64.2 million.

Details on the remainder of the fiscal year cuts and how they will affect transportation are not yet available, although Politico has early information on a few items:

One of the toughest fights, casting the White House as the budget cutter against reluctant Republicans, was in highway and transportation spending. But here the administration succeeded in cutting about $630 million in so-called orphan earmarks and $2.5 billion in unexpended contract authority.

We expect to hear more about the final package soon.

UPDATE: A White House blog post confirms that the fiscal year 2011 cuts include $630 million in earmarked transportation projects and $2.5 billion in funding that was slated for transportation projects.

Photo courtesy of the Washington Post.

Compromise on two-week spending bill temporarily spares crucial transportation programs from deep cuts

The federal government will keep the lights on next week after the U.S. Senate easily approved the House’s two-week stopgap measure containing $4 billion in spending cuts. The vote was 91-9.

Although some in the press have characterized the development as a victory for Republicans, the $4 billion in reductions is decidedly modest and overlaps with programs already targeted in President Obama’s fiscal year 2012 budget. Only two budget items — $650 million from a one-time Federal Highway Administration program and a handful of legislative earmarks – are transportation related.

However, the measure to fund the government for two weeks received 85 Democratic “no” votes in the House — including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi —  and a chilled reception in the Senate even from those Democrats voting in favor. Unifying the more liberal-leaning Senate Democrats wary of deep cuts with moderates who are more open to them could be difficult. Some members were also alarmed by remarks from Speaker John Boehner that cutting “one slice at a time” could achieve his party’s goals if deep reductions were not passed in one package.

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica was a yes vote, as was top committee Democrat Nick Rahall. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer and Republican counterpart Jim Inhofe also voted yes.

Though spared for the time being, crucial transportation programs like New Starts, high-speed rail and TIGER grants remain on the chopping block. So far, cuts to transportation have not received a lion’s share of the attention, though Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois highlighted his opposition to TIGER grant cuts at two events last month and several House members offered amendments to restore essential funding to public transportation.

This week’s compromise does not preclude a shutdown later this month, given the seemingly wide gulf between the two parties on what level of spending cuts are acceptable. Some Democrats said they fear the short two-week timeline will induce gridlock and result in Republicans re-offering their $61 billion spending reduction plan as an alternative.