Skip to main content

Tag: congress

Why we are no longer advocating for Congress to increase transportation funding

Since our inception in 2008, Transportation for America has always primarily advocated for reforming the federal transportation program. But raising the gas tax or otherwise raising new funding overall has also been a core plank of our platform since 2013. With the release of our brand new policy platform and principles coming this Monday, Transportation for America is no longer asking Congress to provide an increase in money for federal transportation program. Why?

Picture of Bellevue, WA light rail construction

For as long as I’ve been working in transportation and probably longer, the debate surrounding the federal transportation program has been a one-note affair: a never-ending fight over who gets money and how much money they get. Those who get money want more flexibility to spend it however they want. Those who get a little money want a bigger piece of the pie. And then both political parties come together in a “bipartisan” way to grow the pie and keep everyone happy.

This two-dimensional debate always leaves out an urgently needed conversation about the purpose of this federal transportation program. What are we doing? Why are we spending $50 billion a year? What is it supposed to accomplish? Does anyone know anymore?

Nearly seven decades ago we set out with a clear purpose: connect our cities and rural areas and states with high-speed interstates and highways for cars and trucks and make travel all about speed. These brand new highways made things like cross-country and inter-state travel easier than we ever imagined possible. We connected places that weren’t well-connected before and reaped the economic benefits (while also dividing and obliterating some communities along the way).

We’ve never really updated those broad goals from 1956 in a meaningful way. We’ve moved from the exponential returns of building brand new connections where they didn’t exist to the diminishing, marginal returns of spending billions to add a new lane of road here and there, which promptly fills up with new traffic.

Why in the world would we just pour more money into a program that is “devoid of any broad, ambitious vision for the future, and [in which] more spending has only led to more roads, more traffic, more pollution, more inequality, and a lack of transportation options,” as I wrote in the Washington Post during Infrastructure Week?

What the program should be about is accountability to the American taxpayer—making a few clear, concrete, measurable promises and then delivering on them. The program should focus on what we’re getting for the funds we’re spending—not simply whether or not money gets spent and how much there was.

Does anyone doubt Congress’s ability to successfully spend money? We all have supreme confidence in their ability to spend hundreds of billions of dollars. Our question is whether that money can be spent in a way that accomplishes something tangible and measurable for the American people.

Taxpayers deserve to know what they’re getting for their spending. Today, they don’t, and nothing about the debate so far in 2019 with Congress has indicated that will change. So we’ve scrapped “provide real funding” from our core principles. T4America has concluded that more money devoted to this same flawed system will just do more damage.

Coming next week: our new principles

With the conversation about money put behind us, on Monday we’re releasing three new principles for what we expect this upcoming surface transportation bill to accomplish. We believe that whether Congress decides to spend more money or less, these three things should be paramount.

Every time federal transportation reauthorization comes up, we hear endless cries about the poor state of our crumbling infrastructure. How many bridges are structurally deficient, how poor our roads are, the long backlogs of neglected maintenance, the (severely inflated) costs of congestion, perhaps even a few voices about the alarming increase in people struck and killed while walking…the list of woes goes on and on.

And then, predictably, states, interest groups, members of Congress and others call for more money for the federal transportation program as the only logical solution, with no clear promises made for how this money will solve any of the problems outlined above or precisely what will be better or different after five years of spending yet billions more.

So let’s stop limping along and spending billions with an unclear purpose and marginal returns. We need a clear set of explicit goals for the federal program. We’ll be back here on Monday as we unveil our principles.

See T4America’s new principles and outcomes for federal transportation policy >>

 

Shutdown averted; another crisis created

people waiting for a train

The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) is refusing to obey the rules and Congress has so far been powerless to stop them. At stake are billions in federal funding for new and expanded transit systems that USDOT doesn’t want to award. But a policy change that attempts to reign in USDOT and make it obey the law could just be making matters worse.

Congress today has done its part to avert a government shutdown by passing a continuing resolution (CR) that will fund the federal government through November 21. The president has until Monday night to sign it. While a CR is generally just a continuation of existing policy, this one tweaks a key, but very wonky, policy for the Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program—the main source of federal funding for building new and expanding existing transit systems.

The CIG program has been under attack by the Trump administration, which is ideologically opposed to funding transit, since day one. Because Congress has continued to fund the program, USDOT has instead sought to sabotage the grant-making process by delaying grants, shutting down lines of communication, and making the whole process more opaque and confusing to everyone involved: Congress, project sponsors, and the public.

Now here’s where it gets wonky. In fiscal years (FY) 2018 & 2019, Congress tried to hold USDOT accountable by adding new language to their appropriations bills that required the agency to actually award (i.e. “obligate”) at least 85 percent of the funds for that fiscal year by the end of the following calendar year (so 85 percent of FY18 dollars would need to be spent by December 31, 2019 and FY19 dollars spent by the end of 2020).

The CR that Congress just passed changes that language to say that USDOT must “allocate,” rather than “obligate,” at least 85 percent of those funds. Allocation is not the same thing as obligation and results in zero dollars actually going to project sponsors.

The original “obligation” language was designed to force USDOT to advance projects through the CIG pipeline and actually award funding by signing grant agreements. The change comes from a concern that USDOT will simply ignore the law—let that statement sink in—which would result in Congress clawing back the CIG funding through a lengthy legal process.

In essence, USDOT doesn’t want the money even though Congress gave it to them anyway and ordered them to spend it because they know local communities are counting on it for their transit projects. But USDOT is ignoring the law and spending as little of the funding as they can get away with. To date, USDOT has only spent about a third of what Congress has authorized over the past three years. It’s understandable that Congress would seek another solution to get grants out the door—we agree more is needed—but focusing on “allocating” funds could create a new problem while failing to solve the original one.

Creating a new problem

Changing the requirement for “obligation” to “allocation” through the CR ignores the new realities on the ground. It used to be that an “allocation” meant something. USDOT would allocate funds to projects that were almost finalized and ready for construction to signal that a grant was to follow shortly. Under previous administrations, allocations would inform how much money Congress would provide in the budget for the CIG program and signal an imminent grant. But this administration has broken from precedent. “Allocations” from this USDOT are a big old nothingburger.

As we have previously described, an “allocation” is simply an internal accounting in the ledgers at USDOT. It doesn’t mean funding has been awarded nor does it guarantee that funding will ever arrive. In at least nine cases, communities have been waiting for months without funding despite receiving an allocation. One of those projects—the Purple Line subway extension in Los Angeles—has received two separate allocations without receiving a dime of federal money.

A table of nine nine unfunded transit projects with allocations and the date of the allocations

Congress’s new rules in the CR would unfortunately do nothing to ensure these communities receive funds and would give undue credit to USDOT for “allocating” these funds, regardless of whether that allocation eventually results in a formal grant.

Instead of simply swapping “obligate” for “allocate,” we’ve proposed that Congress requires a strict timeline for DOT between making an allocation and an obligation, along with requirements for the DOT to regularly communicate with Congress and project sponsors about the status of all projects that are seeking CIG funding. While Congress can’t do USDOT’s work for them, it can exercise aggressive oversight that would make it much harder for the agency to just sit on its hands. USDOT’s actions (or lack thereof) to date have more than justified such an approach.

Congress’s heart is in the right place; they’re trying to make USDOT obey the law and administer the CIG program as intended. The fact that Congress is even in this position speaks to the sordid state of affairs at USDOT. But their proposed remedy to this problem—changing policy in the CR to focus on tracking internal accounting (“allocations”) instead of executed grants—could just end up making things a whole lot worse.

The good, the bad, and the ugly in the Senate’s long-term transportation bill

Vehicles moving slowly on a congested highway in Seattle. The highway crosses a narrow river.

Last month, the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works passed a long-term transportation policy bill. Unfortunately, billions of new dollars for the existing system overshadow its notable new programs, like a climate title and Complete Streets requirements. 

Vehicles moving slowly on a congested highway in Seattle. The highway crosses a narrow river.

Highway traffic in Seattle. Photo by Oran Viriyincy on Flickr.

The transportation authorization bill, known as America’s Transportation Infrastructure Act (ATIA), includes a few new, notable, programs related to Transportation for America (T4America) initiatives. But overall, it fails to meaningfully address the maintenance backlog, ensure safety, or create a system built around providing access to jobs and services. 

The new climate and safety programs, while welcome additions, will be undercut by substantial funding increases for high-speed roadways in the base formulas without any additional constraints to improve safety, measure or reduce vehicle miles traveled, and prioritize access to jobs and opportunities. 

The good: A pilot program for transportation accessibility data and Complete Streets requirements

We’ve long advocated for measuring the success of our transportation system based on whether it, and any new investment, improves connections to jobs and important destination by all modes of travel. After all, this should be the goal of transportation. 

That’s why we’re happy that the ATIA includes a provision based on the bipartisan COMMUTE Act. The “Accessibility Data Pilot Program” would establish a pilot program to provide states, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and rural MPOs with the data and training to improve transportation planning by measuring the level of access by multiple transportation modes to important destinations (such as  jobs, health and child care, education, affordable housing, food sources, and connections to transit, bicycling, and ADA compliant sidewalks). This is a small but necessary first step toward reorienting the federal transportation program toward connecting people to jobs and services.

The bill also includes significant new formula and discretionary safety programs and language encouraging states and planning organizations to adopt Complete Streets designs and plans, tactics that are proven to improve safety for all road users. Specifically, the ATIA requires that 2.5 percent of state and MPO planning funds must be used for adopting Complete Streets standards or policies or developing Complete Streets prioritization plans, active transportation plans, transit access plans, transit-oriented development plans, or regional intercity rail plans.

However, historically programs like these are funded at low levels while 10-20 times as much is made available for status quo transportation, and this makes it impossible for these programs to make a mark on the system.  We see the same thing happening here. 

The bad: No requirement to maintain roads 

“We must fix our crumbling infrastructure” is a Washington, DC cliche. But it wouldn’t be a cliche if we actually did it. The ATIA will not be the bill that requires state DOTs to take repair seriously. 

The bill does not include any requirements that the core formulas or new programs must be spent on maintenance instead of expansion. Its only maintenance program—the Competitive Bridge Investment Program—represents a small amount of the overall funding and does nothing to change the way the rest of the formula funds are used. In fact, one of the eligible uses of this maintenance program is to address increasing traffic; this means expanding and widening roads. Further, there is nothing in this program that rewards states for putting more of their other formula funds to maintenance. DOTs get the same amount of money even if they use the rest of their funds for expansion.

Granted, the bill makes funding from some of the new programs eligible for maintenance and limits funding to projects that do not create new single occupancy vehicle capacity. But the maintenance impact of these funds will be limited as they are also available for a variety of other investments. 

The only way to actually reduce our backlog of maintenance needs is to require that funds are spent on maintenance, not anything else, until DOTs make real progress in reducing their backlog. Maintenance is too important to let states and MPOs opt-out.  

T4A expects Congress to design the national transportation program to reduce the maintenance backlog by half in the next six years. We are tired of hearing the same calls for fixing our crumbling roads and bridges as justification for ever more funding before every reauthorization and not seeing substantial progress.

The ugly: Congress has—once again—stuck to the status quo

Redesigning our national transportation policy is a powerful opportunity that comes only once every five years. By choosing what grant programs to invest in, Congress can massively influence what transportation projects states, MPOs, and cities build for decades. 

And once again, Congress missed its window. Despite including a climate title for the first time ever—a huge feat for a Republican-led Senate—and a new safety incentive program, the ATIA puts the bulk of its funding into programs that incentivize the building of high-speed roads. This negates the funding for the climate and safety programs  because high-speed roads are dangerous by design and increase transportation emissions. Here’s how. 

Vehicles need a lot of space to reach high speeds. Building communities where vehicles can go fast means building destinations spread far apart from each other—the suburban sprawl that many Americans are intimately familiar with. In these sprawling built environments, using any transportation mode besides a personal car becomes incredibly inconvenient and deadly (our report Dangerous by Design found that almost 50,000 people were killed while walking and biking between 2008 and 2017, and that number is rising). Hence, high-speed roads are both dangerous for pedestrians and encourage driving and increase vehicle miles traveled—which increases greenhouse gas emissions. 

Governments at all levels use vehicle speeds as a poor proxy for measuring how connected people are to destinations, like jobs, schools, and grocery stores. But high vehicle speed doesn’t mean that people actually reached their destination in a reasonable time. Our current federal transportation program prioritizes funding a 90 mile commute at 60 mph rather than a five mile commute in stop-and-go traffic. But which commute would you rather have? 

By continuing to prioritize new high-speed roads, the ATIA doesn’t focus on the outcomes of its investments. It doesn’t prioritize connecting people to jobs and services. 

Finally, the bill perpetuates the false notion that highways are the most important transportation mode. In keeping with recent  history, Congress has advanced a major highway bill before either of the Congressional committees dealing with rail and transit have even begun to act. At $287 billion over five years, this bill assumes more than the lion’s share of available funding for highways.

Why we’re thrilled to support the Build Local, Hire Local Act

A bike commuter wearing a suit, tie, and a helmet flashes a thumbs up to the photographer while biking on a busy road in San Francisco.

Last month, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (NY) and Representative Karen Bass (CA-37) introduced legislation that would create transportation accessibility performance measures and a grant program to reconnect communities divided by highways. 

A bike commuter wearing a suit, tie, and a helmet flashes a thumbs up to the photographer while biking on a busy road in San Francisco.

Last month, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) and Representative. Karen Bass (D-CA), chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, introduced the Build Local, Hire Local Act (S. 2404 and H.R. 4101 ), legislation that would use federal infrastructure funding as a tool to hire people who live near new infrastructure projects for high-quality jobs. 

In the process, the bill creates a new access to jobs and services performance measure, and a technical assistance program, and a construction grant program to improve transportation connections in communities divided by highways. We’ve worked closely with the Senator and Representative in developing this legislation and are thrilled to support the Build Local, Hire Local Act.

The performance measure included in the bill requires states and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) to assess how well the entire transportation system—roads, public transit, bike lanes and sidewalks—connects people to opportunities, putting a particular emphasis on improving accessibility in low-income communities. States and MPOs must report these assessments to Congress, who will make the data publicly available online. Measuring accessibility would lead us to a transportation system that prioritizes efficient travel and a more equitable transportation system. 

These tools allow states and MPOs to better understand where people are traveling and to design transportation networks to maximize the ability of people to travel. It also allows states and MPOs to optimize their transportation networks to utilize all modes of transportation and even to understand how their investments interact with land use policies.

This connectivity and accessibility performance measure is similar to the COMMUTE Act, a bill that would create a pilot program for states and MPOs to use travel data collected by the U.S. Department of Transportation to measure and improve access to jobs and services by all modes. We’ve been advocating for this legislation for awhile, and a version of the COMMUTE Act is included in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s recently passed long-term transportation policy bill. 

The Build Local, Hire Local Act’s technical assistance program and grant program take this performance measure a step further. To improve access to jobs and services by all modes, the bill will help communities—especially those bi-furcated by highways—find and build innovative projects that connect divided neighborhoods. 

This is an important step in the right direction. Too often, highway infrastructure tears apart communities, particularly disadvantaged communities, separating people from jobs, services, and connections to other neighborhoods. This not only exacerbates existing inequalities, it worsens air pollution and public health outcomes, turning neighborhoods from places where people want to be into places people want to get away from—via the highway. This bill seeks to fix that.  

“The goal of our transportation system should be to safely and efficiently connect people to jobs and services,” said our director Beth Osborne. “For too long, we have treated vehicle speed as a sufficient measure for this goal. Yet it fails to capture walking, cycling, and transit trips, and inaccurately measures vehicle trips.

“Transportation for America commends Senator Gillibrand and Representative Bass for this innovative legislation to measure and judge performance by what really matters in transportation: access by all modes of travel.”

Mayors tell the Senate that transit, biking, and walking are climate change solutions

Testimonies from mayors at a recent Senate hearing showed that cities understand that reducing driving and expanding other transportation options is key to reducing greenhouse gas emissions and boosting local economies at the same time. 

Walking in Southeast Portland. Photo by James Carnes.

Last week, the Senate Democrats’ Special Committee on the Climate Crisis held their first hearing, which focused on what cities across the country are doing to combat and adapt to climate change. In their testimonies, mayors from Atlanta, Honolulu, St. Paul, Pittsburgh, and Portland, OR highlighted the need to reduce emissions from transportation and maintain and expand their existing transit systems. 

Transportation is the single largest source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, contributing 29 percent of the United States’ total GHG emissions. While states and cities are setting ambitious climate goals to reduce their emissions and to even achieve net-zero emissions, many are finding that they will not be able to achieve those goals without reducing emissions from the transportation sector. The best way to do that isn’t just switching to electric vehicles, but by also reducing how much people drive, or vehicle miles traveled (VMT). 

During the hearing, it was clear that cities recognize the need to prioritize biking, walking, and transit as a way to both reduce emissions and boost their economies. Portland Mayor Ted Wheeler hit on the connection between climate change and transportation, testifying that “switching to riding public transportation is one of the most effective actions individuals can take to reduce their carbon footprint. In the Portland region, there is 60 percent less carbon emitted for each mile taken on public transit, compared to driving alone.”

Honolulu came to a similar conclusion, with Mayor Kirk Caldwell stating that in order to meet their GHG reduction goals, they need to shift the transportation system towards “more biking, walking, mass transit, renewable fueled vehicles, and other new mobility options.” A  recent report from Smart Growth America and Rhodium Group found the same thing. In order for Hawaii to meet its ambitious climate goal of 100 percent clean energy by 2045, it will need to improve transit and land use to encourage walking and biking.

But the mayors weren’t just talk: they highlighted actions their cities are taking to improve biking, walking, and transit. St. Paul is working on “improving pedestrian and bike infrastructure to make it safer and easier to get around” and that Honolulu is “investing significant political and financial capital into transformational projects with high short-term costs and long-term gains, (e.g., rail, Complete Streets, bike lanes, electric buses).” Mayor Wheeler of Portland spoke extensively on the city’s push to “make walking, biking, and using public transit safer and more attractive to maximize the use of our limited road space and help the entire road system work more efficiently.” 

What should the federal government’s role be?

This hearing was meant to showcase what cities are doing to become more resilient, but it also offered a chance for cities to tell the federal government what they need in order to achieve ambitious climate goals. As expected, much of it came down to funding. 

Mayor Wheeler emphasized the need for a reliable federal partner in funding multi-modal transportation networks, stating that his city “continues to suffer from a severe shortage of transportation funding, even as local voters and state governments have recently increased transportation funding.” He encouraged the continued funding of the FTA’s Capital Investment Grant Program (CIG) and the BUILD program. As we saw during an oversight hearing this week on the FTA’s administration of the CIG program, there is a growing demand for federal funding of transit projects in a timely and transparent manner. 

Atlanta also needs additional funding to build out their transit system. Mayor Keisha Lance Bottoms testified, “Atlanta taxpayers have also voted with their pocketbooks to build out sidewalks and last-mile connectivity to our transit system” in a recent election. The city is now moving forward with a $2.7 billion expansion of their transit system that will give people more transportation options and  increase access to 350,000 jobs. Mayor Melvin Carter of St. Paul asked for the federal government to “help us build for the 21st century, with major investments in pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure.” 

Taxpayers in these cities and others across the country are willing to pay more for better transportation. Unfortunately, the federal government spends the vast majority of its resources on expanding highways—exacerbating the climate crisis—while transit funding gets much less funding and there are many more hoops communities must jump through to access it. 

To wrest some of the funding away from building more highways and provide cities and towns with more flexibility in their spending, Mayor Caldwell explicitly encouraged the senators to support the Complete Streets Act of 2019, which was recently introduced by Senator Ed Markey (D-MA) and Rep. Steve Cohen (D-TN). The legislation would require states to set aside money for Complete Streets projects, create a statewide program to award the money (and provide technical support), and adopt design standards that support safer, complete streets. 

Cities get it 

Cities understand that improving transportation infrastructure can have a wide range of benefits. Creating better and more connected multimodal transit systems not only reduces emissions, but it also enables people to move quickly and safely within cities and promotes vibrant economies. Much of the national discourse on reducing emissions from transportation counts on electric vehicles saving us, but cities know that’s simply not enough. Providing transit, safe bike infrastructure, and walkable areas is just as important and the federal government has an important role in helping our country rise to meet that challenge. Mayor Wheeler summed it up best: “The investments that have helped reduce carbon emissions are also what make people want to live, work, and play.” 

U.S. Senate passes transportation appropriations bill with robust funding for transit, rail programs

press release

Washington, DC—Today, the United States Senate again rejected the Trump administration’s proposal to eliminate or severely cut vital transportation programs that local communities rely on by adopting its FY19 Transportation Housing and Urban Development (THUD) appropriations bill. In perhaps their strongest rebuke of the president’s disdain for transit, the bill language specifically requests that USDOT manage the BUILD program (formerly TIGER) as it did during the Obama administration.

“Today the United States Senate reaffirmed the importance of investing in transportation and in particular public transit. The Senate’s vote signals that funding public transit is and should remain a federal priority, despite the objections of the current administration,” said Kevin F. Thompson, director of Transportation for America. “Millions of Americans are counting on new or improved transit service to provide options for reaching jobs and opportunity, and local governments are counting on federal funds to leverage local taxpayer revenue and bring these projects to fruition.”

President Trump has twice sent recommended budgets to Capitol Hill that have eliminated most or all funding for public transit.

The Senate THUD appropriations bill funds:

  • The BUILD (Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development) Grants program at $1 billion. The bill language specifically directs USDOT to administer this program as it was in 2016 (under Obama’s DOT) in response to changes the agency has tried to impose which would have added greater financial and administrative burdens on local communities. The BUILD program is one of the most popular programs administered by the federal government, providing grants directly to local communities across the country for all manner of transportation systems from biking and walking infrastructure to port projects to transit systems. Communities can continue to rely on BUILD to help make upgrades to their ports (like in Mobile, Alabama) or shared-use trail systems (like in northwest Arkansas).
  • The Capital Investment Grants (CIG) Program at $2.5 billion, a $1.6 billion increase over the administration’s FY19 request but $92 million below FY18. This funding will allow projects like the Indianapolis Purple Bus Rapid transit (BRT) line, the Raleigh-Durham light rail line and the Tempe, Arizona Streetcar to move forward. Each of these communities raised tens or hundreds of millions of local dollars based on the promise of federal matching funds. The Senate, through this bill, keeps that promise.

The Senate strongly endorsed continuing Amtrak’s long-distance service, despite objections of the Trump administration, by virtually prohibiting Amtrak from reducing or eliminating rail service on the Southwest Chief line as Amtrak proposed. The Senate also adopted an amendment supported by Transportation for America that expressly prohibits the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) from changing its federal loan policy that would have raised costs for local taxpayers (see FTA’s “Dear Colleague” letter). The letter sowed confusion about FTA’s standards and we’re pleased the Senate rebuked the agency’s actions. The Senate sent a clear message that FTA should continue carrying out the CIG program as Congress intended.

We applaud the Senate for taking a firm stand in support of these programs and the communities that rely on them; we hope the U.S. House of Representatives will do the same.

On May 23, 2018, the House Appropriations Committee approved their THUD bill. Like the Senate bill, the House bill rejects the president’s proposal to eliminate or severely cut vital transportation programs that local communities rely on. We encourage Speaker Ryan to bring the bill expeditiously to the full House of Representatives for a vote.

First & Main: An Opportunity for Local Elected Officials to Tell Capitol Hill Their Stories and Fight for Main Street

The corner of First & Main is where everything happens. Whether a small town in a rural area, a tribal community, or a mid-sized city, First & Main is the anchor of it all. While it has a different name in every community, First & Main is where you can find the old train depot that built the town, City Hall, or the corner from which to spot the community’s most beautiful historic buildings.

Do the Trump Administration and Congress understand what America’s struggling small and mid-sized communities need to turn their prospects around? Local elected officials are uniquely positioned to tell federal decision-makers what they need to flourish, and scores of them are uniting behind a new blueprint for prosperity in these smaller and midsized communities.

The nonpartisan First & Main initiative is a coalition of local elected officials from small to mid-sized communities all across the country. Initiated by current and former elected officials, the coalition will fight to protect those federal programs proven to work for local communities, improve the programs that should be more effective, and create new programs to provide local communities with additional resources.

The First & Main Blueprint was prepared based on feedback provided by these local leaders. It contains more than 30 proposals that local elected leaders have told us will help their communities rebuild, reinvest, and remain competitive in today’s economy. A key component of the First & Main Blueprint is its proposals for funding community-scale transportation projects: roads and bridges, Complete Streets, public transit, transit-oriented development, and trails.

Are you an elected official from a small to mid-sized community such as a mayor, city council member, tribal leader, or county board member? Do you know or work with someone who holds such an office? Here is how you (or they) can get involved with First & Main:

  • Read the Blueprint to learn more about the specifics of what we are proposing
  • Sign up for our free kickoff webinar scheduled for March 1 at 3 p.m. Eastern. On the webinar, three mayors will share stories about how federal programs and funding are essential for their communities. We’ll talk more about the campaign’s goals, strategies, and next steps.
  • If you are a local elected official, join First & Main (no cost) to share your story and become a part of this critical effort to save key federal programs benefitting America’s local communities.
  • Ask your local elected officials – mayors, city council members, county board members, tribal leaders, and others – or those you work with, to join First & Main.
  • Travel to DC April 22-24 for a First & Main gathering to talk more in depth about these issues, strategize, and then go to Capitol Hill to lobby Congress regarding the importance of the Blueprint’s proposals.

The program will offer local elected officials from small and mid-sized communities the opportunity to share their stories with the Trump Administration and Congress regarding how federal programs and policies can improve their economic opportunity, revitalize their downtowns, and improve their quality of life. Join First & Main to be part of a coalition that will do just that.

Recent Federal Activity Summary – Week of December 8th

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you the latest information and developments around federal policy.

Tax Reform

Congress, in coordination with the White House, has been considering comprehensive tax reform, and the proposed bills could have large effects on transportation and infrastructure. The House passed their tax reform bill, H.R. 1 or the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” on November 16th by a vote of 227 to 205.

The House version of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act repeals private activity bonds and eliminates the ability of employers to deduct the cost of providing transit benefits to employees. These proposals undermine efforts to rebuild our infrastructure and make it difficult to envision how the Administration can achieve its stated goal of creating a new $1 trillion infrastructure package.

On Saturday December 2nd, the Senate passed its version of the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” by a vote of 51 – 49. Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) was the only Republican to join all Democrats in opposing the bill. While deeply flawed, the Senate bill retains private activity bonds (PABs), which are a critical tool for financing investment in a variety of infrastructure projects.

President Trump has set an ambitious goal of signing tax reform legislation into law before Christmas. There are substantial differences between the Senate and House bills that will have to be bridged, including the disparate private activity bonds provision, if tax reform will become law. To do that, the House and Senate both voted this week to go to a Conference Committee to reconcile their differences and leaderships from both Houses have appointed their conferees.

The Senate Conferees are: Senators Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Mike Enzi (R-WY), Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), John Cornyn (R-TX), John Thune (R-SD), Rob Portman (R-OH), Tim Scott (R-SC), Pat Toomey (R-PA), Ron Wyden (D-OR), Bernie Sanders (I-VT), Patty Murray (D-WA), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Tom Carper (D-DE). The House Conferees are: Representatives Kevin Brady (R-TX), Devin Nunes (R-CA), Peter Roskam (R-IL), Diane Black (R-TN), Kristi Noem (R-SD), Rob Bishop (R-UT), Don Young (R-AK), Greg Walden (R-OR), John Shimkus (R-IL), Richard Neal (D-MA), Sander Levin (D-MI), Lloyd Doggett (D-TX), Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) and Kathy Castor (D-FL).

Impact of Tax Reform on Infrastructure

The “Statutory Pay As You Go Act,” of 2010 requires the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to keep an annual debt scorecard and institute across-the-board spending reductions to a select group of mandatory programs to offset an increase in the debt in any calendar year. Congress can avoid these mandatory reductions by either cutting spending elsewhere or passing legislation to wipe the OMB scorecard. Each the House and Senate tax reform plans would add approximately $1.5 trillion to the debt over the next decade. Under the law, OMB would have to make $150 billion in mandatory spending cuts every year for the next 10 years, unless Congress takes additional action as described earlier. It is important to note that additional action to cut spending or wipe the scorecard would require 60 votes in the Senate, whereas the special rules – known as reconciliation – being used to pass tax reform only require 51 votes. $639 million in the highway trust fund used for the equity bonus program is considered mandatory spending and that $639 million would be subject to mandatory reductions.

It’s unclear if Congress will allow the mandatory reductions to take effect, as it would slash funding from a variety of programs including Medicare. Two possible scenarios are that Congress would either institute spending reductions in discretionary programs – such as TIGER, Capital Investment Grants (CIG), and others – or it will wipe the scorecard and allow for an increase in the debt. In the latter instance, it is likely that a future Congress will seek to cut spending to address the increased debt. This means that critical transportation programs are at risk as a result of the tax reform proposals under consideration. One way or the other, T4America is concerned that Congress may pay for these tax cuts by choosing to cut programs that reinvest in our country, including critical transportation programs like TIGER, CIG, and Amtrak.

Government Appropriations

Fiscal Year (FY18) Appropriations

The House and Senate approved legislation on Thursday, December 7th – one day before the deadline – to fund the federal government through December 22nd.

Funding was extended by two weeks in order to give the President and Congressional leaders more time to negotiate a full year appropriations package. The main sticking point is how much to raise the discretionary spending caps established by the Budget Control Act of 2011. Democrats want non-defense discretionary spending to be raised by the same amount as defense spending, while Republicans want to increase defense spending more than non-defense discretionary spending. Finally, other issues may need to be dealt with, including the inclusion of the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and health care insurer payments to stabilize the Affordable Care Act.

House and Senate Appropriators are waiting for an agreement on the budget caps so they can finalize FY18 appropriations. An agreement allows each subcommittee to know how much they have to allocate to programs within their jurisdiction. At this stage, we expect that the spending caps will be raised. It is important to note that an increase in the budget cap will not guarantee full funding for key transportation programs like TIGER, CIG, and Amtrak.

Fiscal Year (FY19) Appropriations

One final thing to remember is that while Congress is finalizing FY18 appropriations, House and Senate Appropriators and the Administration are already starting the FY19 appropriations process. If you have FY19 funding or language requests, it’s important to start talking to your member of Congress and the Appropriations committees

Update on Senate Autonomous Vehicle Legislation

As you know, T4America has been working to improve the autonomous vehicle (AV) legislation that is working its way through Congress. The House passed their AV legislation, the SELF-DRIVE Act, in September. The Senate Commerce Committee has approved its bill, the American Vision for Safer Transportation through Advancement of Revolutionary Technologies Act” or the “AV START Act. We are particularly concerned about language that would preempt the enforcement of local laws as well as how the legislation would address data sharing, among other issues.

Last week, the full Senate began the process of advancing the AV START Act. Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune “hotlined” the Senate bill, a process by which the Chairman notifies Senators that he is seeking unanimous consent, and provides them with a final opportunity to object. Senators seeking further change to a bill will seek to address their concerns by objecting to passing legislation by unanimous consent.

T4America continues to have major concerns with the legislation. At least four Senators are known to have formally objected to passing the bill by unanimous consent: Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS), Richard Blumenthal (D-CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Ed Markey (D-MA). We are working with Senators who share our concerns with regard to preemption and data sharing.

T4America and our partners have urged the Senate Commerce Committee to include data sharing requirements to provide states, municipalities, and law enforcement the real-time data necessary to ensure the safety of AVs in their communities. Such data would potentially cover areas like the number of crashes and disengagements an AV has had, the types of roads AVs have had problems on, and the weather conditions at the time of a crash or disengagement. Unfortunately, the Committee so far has declined to do so.

As a reminder, the Senate AV START Act (S. 1885) does a number of things including:

  • Delineating the federal and state/local roles when it comes to regulating automated vehicles via a preemption clause;
  • Establishing a specific exemption from federal motor vehicle safety standards to test automated vehicles;
  • Raising the number of safety exemptions a manufacturer can get to test vehicles to 80,000 over three years; and
  • Establishing an automated vehicle advisory committee to advise the Secretary of U.S. Department of Transportation on a number of issues related to automated vehicles.

Click here for more about T4America’s concerns with the AV START Act.

Chairman Thune has stated his desire to approve AV legislation quickly. If the Committee is unable to satisfy the Senators, the Committee would have to pursue other ways for approving legislation. This would likely include attaching the legislation to another bill that is advancing through the Senate.

Recent Federal Activity Summary – Senate passed its version of the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act”

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you the latest information and developments around federal policy.

This weekend, the Senate passed its version of the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” by a vote of 51 – 49. Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) was the only Republican to join all Democrats in opposing the bill. While deeply flawed, the Senate bill retains private activity bonds, which are a critical tool for financing investment in a variety of infrastructure projects.

The President has set an ambitious goal of signing tax reform legislation into law before Christmas. While it has been suggested that the House could simply vote to send the Senate bill to the President, indications are that the House would prefer to work out the differences between the two bills. Therefore, the next step is for the House and Senate to reconcile their differences through a Conference Committee. The House is expected to vote to proceed to conference on Monday evening, and formal negotiations are expected to begin immediately (informal negotiations have been ongoing).

The House version of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act repeals private activity bonds and eliminates the ability of employers to deduct the cost of providing transit benefits to employees. These proposals undermine efforts to rebuild our infrastructure and make it difficult to envision how the Administration can achieve its stated goal of creating a new, $1 trillion infrastructure package.

Furthermore, both the House and Senate bills would dramatically increase the federal debt. This will force the Administration and Congress to make difficult choices, or trigger substantial cuts to important programs, including infrastructure. The Administration and Congress have proposed deep cuts to transportation programs in their FY18 budget and appropriations proposals. It is therefore likely that, once a deficit increasing tax bill is law, the Administration and Congress will use the required $150 billion in annual spending cuts to target investments in roadways, transit, and other infrastructure needs. The law requires Congress to pay for a budget-busting bill. Unfortunately, Congress will likely pay for these tax cuts by cutting programs that reinvest in our country, including critical transportation programs.

As the House and Senate head to conference, our top priority is to inform the public and Members of Congress that these bills will create, and green light, a torrent of cuts to transportation and infrastructure programs.

Please contact your Representative and Senator today to make sure they understand all that is at stake. Make sure they are talking to their leadership and letting them know how important it is that they not cut infrastructure programs!

 

Recent Federal Activity Summary – Week of November 17th

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you the latest information and developments around federal policy.

Tax Reform

House: On Thursday November 16th, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 1, the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” also known as the Republican’s tax reform package. The bill passed by a vote of 227-205; 227 Republicans voted for the legislation, and 192 Democrats and 13 Republicans voted against the legislation.

What Does this Bill Mean for Transportation?

The bill proposes changes to commuter tax benefits for parking, van pooling, and riding transit and terminates private activity bonds (PAB’s). Employers will no longer be able to deduct or “write off” the subsidy they provide for fringe benefits, including commuting benefits. The bill maintains the ability for employers to provide either a pre-tax benefit or a subsidy. In the case of a subsidy, while the employer can no longer write off this expense, they will not have to pay payroll taxes on the fringe benefit. There is no change to the benefits associated with providing the pre-tax benefit.

Private activity bonds are tax-exempt bonds used to fund a whole range of infrastructure projects that have a “private” use of at least 10%. PAB’s have been used to finance a wide range of infrastructure projects around the country, including roads, highways, housing, hospitals and airports. Recently, PAB’s have been used to fund a lot of transportation projects that are using private public partnerships for financing, including the Purple line in Maryland and the Rapid Bridge Replacement Project in Pennsylvania.

The House’s elimination of PAB’s will greatly harm the ability for state and local governments and private entities to obtain financing and build infrastructure projects that use financing tools, such as toll roads and transit and rail stations. This step is directly at odds with President Donald Trump’s proposal to expand the use of PAB’s to help fulfill his promise to rebuild America’s infrastructure.

Senate: The Senate Finance Committee approved the Senate version of the tax reform package on Thursday November 16th by a party line vote of 14-12. All Republicans voted in favor and all Democrats were opposed. The Senate bill keeps both the commuter benefits and private activity bonds intact, but does eliminate the $20 a month benefit for people who bike to and from work. The House bill also eliminates the bike benefit. T4America is joint signatory of a letter to members of Congress urging them to preserve the bike benefit because it promotes physical activity, reduces traffic congestion and air pollution and promotes walkable communities.

The Senate is scheduled to consider the Senate Republican tax bill when they get back from Thanksgiving recess. Congressional Republicans and the White House hope to have a tax bill on President Trump’s desk by Christmas. It is still unclear whether the Republicans have the votes to pass the tax bill in the Senate. All the Democrats are opposed to the bill so Republicans can only lose two votes and still pass their bill. Right now, Senator Ron Johnson (WI) says he is opposed to the bill in its current form and other senators like Susan Collins (ME), Lisa Murkowski (AK), Bob Corker (TN) and Jeff Flake (AZ) continue to be undecided on if they will support the bill.

One final possible hiccup for the Republican tax reform bill is a congressional budget provision known as the “Pay As You Go” (paygo) rule”. Paygo requires immediate, across-the-board spending reductions to many mandatory programs like Medicare and Medicaid for any bill that reduces taxes and doesn’t fully offset them with revenue increases elsewhere. The GOP tax cut plan would add $1.5 trillion to the debt over the next decade. Under paygo rules, the government would have to make $150 billion in mandatory spending cuts every year for the next 10 years, unless that provision is waived with 60 votes in the Senate, which would require Democratic support. If the Paygo rule is not waived, not only will mandatory spending programs like Medicare take an automatic 4% spending cut, Congress will have to cut a lot of discretionary spending elsewhere to comply with the Paygo rules. Cuts to defense spending are a non political starter right now, so Congress would likely cut from the non-defense discretionary spending accounts. This fact means that funding for popular programs like TIGER, Capital Investment Grants and Amtrak are at risk to be severely cut back or even eliminated entirely if this tax reform bill passes.

The bottom line is that the Republican tax reform bill, especially the House version, will make it harder for state and local governments to make much needed infrastructure investments by stripping away financing tools that governments and private entities rely on. Additionally, the tax bill will potentially lead to devastating discretionary spending cuts that could eliminate programs like TIGER that we fight to fund every year because they are vital to our communities and economies. These two outcomes break the promises made by both the President and Congress to invest more in our infrastructure, not less.

U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT) Nominations Confirmed

During the week of November 13th, the U.S. Senate confirmed two U.S. DOT nominations. Derek Khan was confirmed to be Undersecretary of Transportation for Policy and Steven Bradbury was confirmed to be General Counsel for U.S. DOT. Mr. Kan’s nomination hearing was held in June and he had bipartisan support, but his nomination was held up by New York and New Jersey Senators concerned over the Trump’s administration’s withdrawal from a non-binding commitment with New York and New Jersey to fund half of the Gateway project. Mr. Kan was confirmed by a vote of 90-7.

Mr. Bradbury was confirmed by vote of 50-47. His nomination was more controversial because of his work at the Office of Legal Counsel in the Department of Justice under President George W. Bush. All Democratic Senators and Republican Senators John McCain (AZ) and Rand Paul (KY) opposed Mr. Bradbury’s nomination.

Nomination of Lynn Westmoreland

Additionally, the Senate Commerce and Transportation Committee on November 8th, reported favorably via voice vote the nomination of former Congressman Lynn Westmoreland to the Amtrak Board of Directors. There is no timeline right now for when the full Senate may consider his nomination.

Westmoreland served in Congress for twelve years, including a six-year stint on the Railroads Subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee. During Westmoreland’s tenure in Congress he voted twice to cut Amtrak’s funding, including a vote for a failed bill in 2009 that would have eliminated all federal funding for the passenger railroad.

At a confirmation hearing in the Senate Commerce Committee on October 31, Westmoreland said he does support Amtrak funding, but that “the Board should look at the long-distance routes” and “should shutter these ‘unprofitable’ routes.” In his response to written questions from Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS), a member of the committee, about his votes to cut funding for Amtrak’s long distance routes, Westmoreland deflected and said his vote for the 2015 FAST Act demonstrates his support for Amtrak because it “reauthorized funding for Amtrak.”

Amtrak will only survive politically if it is a robust national system that serves as many states and communities as possible. Mr. Westmoreland has not adequately justified his prior votes to cut Amtrak funding and considering his Senate Commerce Committee testimony; we remain extremely concerned about Mr. Westmoreland’s commitment to funding long distance train routes. Given the vital importance of long distance Amtrak routes and Mr. Westmoreland’s record in opposition to those routes, we don’t think he is a good fit for the Amtrak board.

Sign-on letter to support transit capital funding

Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Jackie Walorski (R-IN) are leading a sign-on letter calling for funding for the transit Capital Investment Grant program in the FY2018 federal funding bill. These champions are collecting signatures on this important letter, which they will then send the to senior appropriators and leadership. Please let your Representatives know how important transit funding is to your region and encourage them to sign on to this letter. We will keep you updated on the timing of the appropriations process and negotiations.

Transportation for America’s Principles for Infrastructure Investment

RE: T4America’s Principles for Infrastructure Investment

Dear Transportation for America Members:

Transportation for America shares the goal of the Trump Administration and members of Congress on both sides of the aisle for reinvesting in our nation’s infrastructure.  Transportation systems have a profound impact on our lives and communities. All Americans understand that the deteriorating state of our transportation infrastructure limits economic opportunity.  Expediting the critical rebuilding of infrastructure like roads, bridges, transit systems and other investments that improve shared mobility access and strengthen our diverse, multimodal transportation network will guarantee a prosperous future for all Americans.

Today, we are sharing the following principles essential to developing an infrastructure package with the Administration and members of the 115thCongress.  These principles will foster new opportunities by connecting communities, creating jobs and securing long-term economic growth. Our goal is to move the national conversation beyond the breadth and cost of an infrastructure program to include an examination of which projects we are investing in and why. Our principles are simple and sensible:

  1. Increase real funding
  2. Fix the infrastructure we’ve already built
  3. Make sure that any new infrastructure is selected through competitive processes, is locally driven, and has clear and specific benefits.
  4. Measure the performance of investments to ensure accountability.

These principles will not only serve to help guide investment, they will also help federal, state, and local agencies, as well as taxpayers, judge the success of these investments. Through accountability, we can ensure limited dollars are used wisely.

Please feel free to share these principles through your professional and social media networks.  If you have questions, or would like to discuss these principles, please contact Alicia Orosco, our program manager for membership and outreach at alicia.orosco@t4america.org or at (202) 971-3907.

Sincerely,

Kevin F. Thompson
Director, Transportation for America
  1. Provide real funding

We need real federal funding, not just new ways to borrow money or sell off existing assets, to rebuild our transportation systems. Historically, economic development and opportunity have depended on federal investments in transportation that connect communities and allow businesses to bring goods to market. Direct federal investment funded the construction of our highways, bridges, and transit systems, creating economic opportunities. Today, deteriorating transportation infrastructure—the result of years of reduced federal investment—is a roadblock to continued economic growth. Real funding, invested according to the principles outlined here, will rebuild the nation’s transportation infrastructure and restore economic opportunity.

  1. Fix the existing system first

We must immediately fix the transportation system we have and fund needed repairs to aging infrastructure. If we have a house with a leaky roof, it’s only prudent to fix the roof before building a new addition. Our transportation systems are no different.

Congress should dedicate federal transportation formula dollars to maintenance to make sure the system is returned to a state of good repair, is resilient, and works for all users; before funding new projects that bring years of additional maintenance costs. The application of federal performance measures to both the state and metro area programs would help prioritize needs and ensure that the greatest of them are addressed first.

  1. Build smart new projects

At a time when transportation resources are scarce, it is critical that funds go only to the best new projects. Competition, local control, and objective evaluation can ensure that federal funds flow to the projects that deliver the greatest benefit to communities. When communities are given the opportunity to compete for federal funds, they work harder to put forward projects that maximize return on investment, provide creative solutions, and involve a diverse range of stakeholders. Congress should direct new federal transportation dollars through competitive processes, such as the TIGER and transit Capital Investment Grant programs, which are accessible directly to city, county, regional, and state governments. Merely adding new funding into existing and outdated formula funding programs will not deliver the transformative projects that deliver long-term economic growth.

  1. Measure success

Investments in transportation are not an end in and of themselves. They are a means to foster economic development and improve all Americans’ access to jobs and opportunity. Agencies should be held accountable by evaluating how well their investments help achieve their regions’ goals. Newly available data and tools allow agencies to measure—better than ever before—how well transportation networks connect people to jobs and other necessities. The federal government should harness these tools so that state departments of transportation and metropolitan planning organizations can ensure that federally funded investments are effectively connecting people to economic opportunity.

Download these principles as a sharable one-page PDF here. 

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of November 10th

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • Almost 50 members of Congress, led by Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) and Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), sent a letter to U.S. Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao asking her to keep the greenhouse gas emissions rule and not move ahead with plans to repeal it. (Senator Cardin’s Office)
  • The U.S. Senate is expected to vote to approve Derek Kan’s nomination today to be Undersecretary of Transportation for Policy. (Railway Age)
  • Representatives Randy Hultgren (R-IL) and Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD) explain in an op-ed the importance of a tax reform bill keeping private activity bonds. (Northwest Herald)
  • “Self-Driving Taxi Service From Waymo Set To Begin Shortly” in Chandler, Arizona. (CleanTechnica)
  • Forbes Op-Ed: “Waymo Tests Its Self-Driving Cars In My Town. Here Are The Odd Things I’ve Seen.” (Forbes)
  • The American Transportation Research Institute, part of the American Trucking Association put out a report that concludes a “federal fuel tax increase is the ‘only meaningful mechanism’ to pay for President Donald Trump’s proposed infrastructure improvements.” (Talk Business and Politics, ATRI Report)
  • Reed Cornish, a White House Advisor, shed a little more light in an interview with Recode on the Trump’s administration’s infrastructure principles and reveals he encouraged Elon Musk to start building a tunnel between New York City and Washington D.C. (Recode)

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of November 3rd

Stories You May Have Missed

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you pertinent information. This includes news articles to inform your work. Check out a list of stories you may have missed last week.

  • The House GOP tax bill has advocates scrambling because it eliminates important current provisions of the tax code like private activity bonds. (The Hill)
  • “Facing pockets of discontent in their own Republican ranks, tax negotiators in the U.S. House of Representatives will seek this week to brook differences over their far-reaching tax bill and stick to a self-imposed deadline of passage this month.” (Reuters)
  • “Private investors line up to support infrastructure projects without Trump” but say that “a commitment from the federal government is needed to provide long-term financing.” (Washington Examiner)
  • House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Bill Shuster will stay in Congress, even after he gives up the chairmanship next year due to term limit rules. (The Hill)
  • The NY Times covers some examples of the burgeoning highway removal movement. (NY Times)
  • The National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) released a guide at their conference last week to help planners and engineers determine what bike lanes should be protected. (Streetsblog)

U.S. DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION House FY2018 APPROPRIATIONS BILL AMENDMENT SUMMARY

As of September 5th 2017

INTRODUCTION

On Monday July 17th, the House Appropriations Committee marked up and passed the House Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) appropriations bill for fiscal year (FY) 2018. The House THUD bill would appropriate $17.8 billion in discretionary FY 2018 funding to the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT), a $646 million decrease from the FY 2017 funding level. The full text of the House draft bill can be found here.

The THUD bill is part of a package of six appropriations bills that the full House of Representatives will consider together, and we expect that the House will consider this package during the week of September 4th. The House Rules Committee is scheduled on Tuesday September 5th to consider the 89 amendments proposed to the THUD bill and decide what amendments to make “in order” and advance to the full House of Representatives for consideration.

We urge you to call your Representatives and make your voices heard on the below amendments that the House of Representatives may consider in the near future.

TIGER

Current Bill: The House FY 2018 bill eliminates funding for the TIGER program, which was funded at $500 million in FY 2017.

Amendments Proposed:

Maxine Waters (D-CA) Amendment #1: Provides $7.5 billion for the TIGER program.

Maxine Waters (D-CA) Amendment #2: Provides $550 million for the TIGER program, specifically requires the Secretary to award the funds using the 2016 notice of funding opportunity (NOFO) criteria, and requires that the Secretary distributes the grants 225 days after the enactment of the bill.

Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) Amendment: Provides $500 million for the TIGER program.

Rod Blum (R-IA) Amendment: Provides $200 million for the TIGER program and reduces HUD tenant rental assistance by $200 million as an offset.

T4America’s Position: We SUPPORT efforts to fund TIGER because it is a crucial program that gives local governments direct access to federal dollars for innovative projects. TIGER projects are overwhelmingly multimodal and multi-jurisdictional projects – like rail connections to ports, complete streets, passenger rail, and freight improvements – that are often challenging to fund through the underlying formula programs.

However, we OPPOSE paying for a TIGER program by cutting the HUD tenant rental assistance program, which is also a crucial program. There is enough money, as evident by past appropriations bills that fund both, to sufficiently fund these two important programs.

New Starts, Small Starts, Core Capacity (Capital Investment Grant Program)

Current Bill: The House bill allocates $1.75 billion to the Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program, which is $660 million less than the FY 2017 enacted funding level of $2.4 billion. It is also $549 million less than the authorized level for the program in the FAST Act. Of this $1.75 billion, $1.008 billion is set-aside for New Starts projects that have full funding grant agreements (FFGAs), $145.7 million for Core Capacity projects, and $182 million for Small Starts projects.

Of the remaining CIG funding, $400 million would fund “joint Amtrak-public transit projects.” This language indicates that the Subcommittee intends the funding to go to the Gateway project, a rail improvement project in the Northeast Corridor. With all this funding dedicated to Gateway, there would be no remaining funding would be available for any of the CIG projects that anticipate getting an FFGA signed in 2018 or late 2017.

The House bill also includes language directing the USDOT Secretary to “continue to administer the Capital Investment Grant Program in accordance with the procedural and substantive requirements of” the law, including directing the “Secretary to continue to advance eligible projects into project development and engineering in the capital investment grant evaluation.” Basically, when CIG projects become eligible to move along in the pipeline, this language requires the Secretary to advance them. The Committees included this language because the Administration has stated a desire to block funding for any new CIG projects by not advancing or taking in new projects into the program. While this language challenges that approach, under the House bill, the lack of funding available for additional New Starts projects would effectively prevent new projects from moving forward until at least 2019.

Amendments Proposed:

Darren Soto (D-FL) Amendment: Increases the amount of funding for small starts funding by $82 million and decreases funding for intercity passenger rail projects by $82 million as an offset.

Mark Amodei (R-NV) Amendment:  Requires the Secretary of Transportation to continue administering the current Capital Investment Grant (CIG) Program in accordance with current law and requires the USDOT secretary to enter into a grant agreement with any small starts project that has satisfied the current eligibility requirements of the small starts program.

T4America Position: We OPPOSE proposals to offset funding for small starts by taking money from intercity passenger rail funding, which is also important. There is enough money, as evident by past appropriations bills, to sufficiently fund both programs and we should not be cutting funding from one program to fund the other.

We SUPPORT legislative language that increases the likelihood that the CIG program will continue operating as it should and also moves future small starts projects forward by ensuring these projects get grant agreements when they are ready.

Amtrak, CRISI, State of Good Repair, and REG

Current Bill: The House FY 2018 bill provides $1.4 billion for Amtrak. Of this, $1.1 billion is reserved for the National Network, which is consistent with the FAST Act authorized amount, and $328 million for the Northeast Corridor (NEC), which is a decrease from the $515 million authorized amount in the FAST Act.

The Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements (CRISI) grant program is funded under the House bill at $25 million, a decrease from the $230 million authorized under the FAST Act and less than half of the $68 million that the program received in FY 2017. The draft bill does not provide funding for the Restoration and Enhancement Grants (REG) program, which authorized at $20 million under the FAST Act and funded at $5 million in FY 2017..

The House FY 2018 bill also provides $500 million for Federal State Partnership State of Good Repair grants, significantly above the $175 million authorized for FY 2018. In spending this funding, the bill directs USDOT to “first give preference to eligible projects for which the environmental impact statement required under the National Environmental Policy Act and design work is already complete at the time of the grant application review, or to projects that address major critical assets which have conditions that pose a substantial risk now or in the future to the reliability of train service.” This language indicates that funding would be directed to the Gateway’s Portal North Bridge and Hudson River Tunnel projects. Overall, the Gateway project could receive $900 million in grant funding under the bill – about one sixth of the $5.4 billion in discretionary appropriations for non-aviation programs.

Amendments Proposed:
Mo Brooks (R-AL) Amendment #1: Eliminates funding for Amtrak’s National Network only.

Mo Brooks (R-AL) amendment #2: Eliminates both the funding for Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor and Amtrak’s National Network.

Mo Brooks (R-AL) Amendment #3: Eliminates funding for Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor only

Jim Himes (D-CT) Amendment:  Increases funding for Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor account by $30 million and decreases essential air service funding by $30 million as an offset.

Ted Budd (R-NC) Amendment: Eliminates the $900 million allocation for the Amtrak gateway program, increases funding for national New Starts Projects by $400 million and applies savings from the elimination of the TIGER Grant program to deficit reduction.

T4America’s Position: We STRONGLY OPPOSE the elimination of funding for Amtrak, which is crucial to the economy vitality of our nation and communities across our country. The National Network provides mobility options for and acts as an economic catalyst to small and rural communities across the country. For many residents in these communities, the Amtrak connection is their primary way of traveling around the country, especially in areas that are losing Essential Air Service. Similarly, Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor is the primary travel option for millions of people traveling the congested Northeast Corridor every year. Not only does it take cars off our congested roadways, benefiting train and road users alike, but the Northeast Corridor is a huge economic driver for communities located along the Corridor. Cutting funding for Amtrak’s National Network and Northeast Corridor would decrease our nation’s prosperity, harm the economic vitality of communities that Amtrak serves, and greatly lower the amount of personal mobility and freedom that people that use Amtrak currently have. The House of Representatives rightly voted down these amendments two years ago and should do so again.

We also OPPOSE funding for the Northeast Corridor by taking funding from the Essential Air Service program. While Northeast corridor rail funding is important to the urban communities along the corridor and our nation’s economy as a whole, the essential air service program is important to many rural communities that would not have airline service otherwise. Our transportation system should and can meet the needs of both our urban and rural communities and this amendment would needlessly cause a divide between urban and rural communities when we need all of our communities united in a push for greater infrastructure funding overall.

Finally, we OPPOSE amendments that pit one infrastructure priority against another one.

Other Amendments To Watch:

Kevin Brady (R-TX) Amendment: Prohibits federal funding, including a grant or loan agreement, for the development or construction of high-speed rail, with non-interoperable technology, in the State of Texas.

T4America’s Position: We OPPOSE efforts to limit the ability of the federal government to advance high-speed rail in Texas. Texas currently has an exciting privately led effort underway to build high-speed rail between Houston and Dallas. While the private group leading the effort has indicated they don’t have plans to seek financial support from the federal government, we shouldn’t prohibit the federal government from providing financial support if the need arise and there are benefits to providing that financial support. The federal government provides billions of dollars in funding to other modes of transportation, including highway and other transit projects, so the federal government shouldn’t be prohibited from providing funding in this case if it becomes a good idea to do so.

Jamie Herrera-Butler (R-WA) Amendment: Prohibits federal funds from being used to establish or collect tolls on Interstate 5 or Interstate 205 in the state of Washington or Oregon.

T4America’s Position: We OPPOSE efforts to limit the ability of Washington State or Oregon to use tolling as a financing option for infrastructure projects. Congress hasn’t raised the gas tax since 1991 and therefore there is a national funding crisis for transportation. Because Congress has repeatedly been unable to step up to the plate, States increasingly have taking the lead and either raised their gas tax or found other innovative solutions, including tolling, to raise revenue to fund transportation and other infrastructure projects. Congress shouldn’t prohibit states from taking much needed steps, including tolling, to solve a problem that Congress has so far refused to solve.

Al Green (D-TX) Amendment: Restores $250,000 in funding for the Department of Transportation Office of Civil Rights and reduces USDOT salary and expenses by $250,000 as an offset

T4America’s Position: We SUPPORT efforts to maintain funding for the Office of Civil Rights within USDOT. Unfortunately even today, there are still many equity issues in the way we fund transportation projects and the individual projects and modes of transportation that we do ultimately fund. The Office of Civil Rights is crucial in our effort to ensure that we solve the equity challenges and gaps that still exist in our transportation system today.

Congress permanently increases commuter tax benefit for transit riders

After years of effort from T4America, the Association for Commuter Transportation and scores of others, in late 2015, Congress finally raised the pre-tax benefit that can be claimed for commuting via transit, permanently equalizing that fringe tax benefit with the benefit for parking expenses.

This news got a little buried in the wake of the passage of the Fast Act, the new five-year transportation bill, but it’s an important change that will have notable impacts on how people choose to commute.

A provision in the annual spending and tax extender package, passed by Congress and signed into law by President Obama at the end of 2015, permanently establishes tax parity between drivers and transit riders. This means transit, vanpool, and parking will all receive pre-tax commuter benefit deductions of $255 a month in 2016. Though the benefit for transit riders had been temporarily increased to match parking benefits several times over the last few years, for most of the last decade, the value of the transit benefit was around half the value of the parking benefit — effectively putting a thumb on the scale for millions of people making a choice of how they’d like to commute.

These stacked financial incentives surely had an impact on commuting decisions, adding more congestion to roads and hurting low- and middle-income taxpayers in particular — people more likely to depend on transit, but under the former setup, receiving less tax benefits to do so.

As a longstanding and vocal advocate for permanently making these benefit equal and providing benefits to commuters, no matter how they choose to commute, Transportation for America celebrates this moment for commuters and for the positive impacts that it could have in communities across the country through increased transit ridership and cost savings.

Federal update: Path clears on a short-term deal to avoid government shutdown

Though all federal funding expires on Wednesday, September 30, 2015, Congress appears poised to avoid a government shutdown and extend current funding levels through December 11, 2015. The U.S. Senate may pass a continuing resolution (CR) spending bill tomorrow with House passage expected the same day. What will happen between now and this new December 11th spending deadline is less clear in light of Speaker of House John Boehner’s (R-OH) unexpected retirement announced last Friday.

Here’s our members-only look at what you need to know from Congress related to transportation funding & policy.

Short-term outlook

As reported last week, Senate Appropriations Chairman Thad Cochran (R-MS) introduced a CR proposal to provide funding through December 11, while also providing $700 million for wildfires, extending Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Authorization through next March, and restricting funds to Planned Parenthood. The Senate failed to pass Senator Cochran’s proposal on a 47-52 vote with 7 Republicans opposing the bill.

In response, the Senate removed language pertaining to Planned Parenthood as well as the FAA authorization from Senator Cochran’s proposal. The Senate tied his CR proposal to a House-passed bill (H.R. 719, the TSA Office of Inspection Accountability Act of 2015) to speed passage out of Congress. The Senate plans to force consideration in the near-term with a procedural move called a cloture vote this evening. If the cloture vote is successful, the Senate will vote on final passage late Tuesday. Outgoing Speaker Boehner has indicated that he plans to bring up the Senate’s version of the CR for a vote on Wednesday before the fiscal year 2015 expires at midnight.

Long-term outlook

The good news is that in this scenario, the federal government will remain open on Thursday, October 1 — a markedly different outcome than many expected last week. However, Congress has a full docket of pressing matters to deal with between now and the end of the year: including a modified FY16 budget that many hope will ease federal sequestration spending limits and include an omnibus spending package, tax extenders, a federal debt limit increase and extend the positive train control implementation deadline.

The House Republican Caucus will also hold leadership elections to replace outgoing Speaker Boehner and the remainder of the leadership team.  Most believe current House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) will receive the necessary support to become Speaker, but he is expected to receive opposition from Congressman Daniel Weber (R-FL), among others. Many Capitol Hill observers are starting to look beyond the Speaker election to the expected campaigns for majority leader, whip and conference chair, and whether or not members from the House Freedom Caucus will receive any of these posts.

Speaker Boehner has indicated a desire to achieve much prior to his retirement, stating “I don’t want to leave my successor a dirty barn.” One item not yet addressed is House action on a multi-year transportation authorization. The House Transportation & Infrastructure (T&I) Committee is awaiting transportation funding levels from the Ways & Means Committee before T&I introduces and marks up their version of a surface transportation authorization. House action on a multi-year transportation authorization may very well be sidelined through the month of October due to the expected budget process coupled with House Republican leadership elections.

As always, we will update you as more information comes available.

The Senate’s multi-year transportation bill misses the mark on multimodal freight

Below is an in-depth explanation of one of the 10 things you need to know about the Senate’s DRIVE Act.

The Senate’s multi-year transportation bill recognizes that efficient freight movement is important, but the bill prioritizes freight moving on highways over that moving by rail, air, ports and pipelines.

The DRIVE Act (HR 22) is unique from past transportation bills in that it creates a program for freight. The bill includes almost $1 billion for freight in its first year and up to $2.5 billion toward the end of the authorization in 2021. (The bill was more robust when originally introduced in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, providing $2 billion in the first year and rising to $2.5 billion. It was scaled back to a smaller cost when some of the DRIVE Act’s “pay-fors” were deemed too controversial).

The program features a comprehensive and thoughtful national- and state-level planning framework to analyze the condition and performance of the national freight transportation system.  It would require states to identify priority projects for improving freight movement regardless of mode – including rail, seaports, pipelines and airports. Yet the program restricts the majority of funds to highway projects. Only 10 percent of the money it provides to states can go to other modes.

This funding model would fall far short of the costs of multimodal freight projects. California, for example, would be allocated $90 million under this program in 2016, only $9 million of which could be used for non-highway projects. The Port of Los Angeles’s West Basin Railyard project – a rail and port project – costs $137.7 million.

Similarly, Illinois would have less than $4 million available. Chicago’s CREATE program – one of the most significant freight projects in the nation, which would improve rail freight efficiency throughout much of the country – costs over $3 billion.

This restriction seems burdensome, particularly since the new program would be paid for out of the general fund, not by roadway users. Congress has taken funding from across the board and restricted it to highway projects, even if a state says that its priorities for freight are elsewhere.

Also troubling is the fact that the National Freight Program’s funding would be distributed among the states evenly, using a formula that ignores where freight volumes are highest or where goods get stuck in congestion or bottlenecks. It’s the equivalent of investing wildfire prevention dollars in all 50 states even though a majority of fires are in the dry, arid west.

Reducing the country’s freight bottlenecks and helping businesses efficiently move commerce is a worthwhile goal, and one that can only be achieved with a truly multimodal freight program. When the House takes up their transportation bill in the early fall, we hope they rethink the DRIVE Act’s distribution formula and the restrictive funding cap on non-highway projects to ensure this program lives up the goals outlined for the National Freight Program.

US House Passes Transportation-HUD Appropriations on Razor-Thin Margin; 216-210

Late last night, the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass their FY2016 Transportation-HUD with just 6 votes separating the bill from defeat. Just 3 Democrats voted for the bill’s passage — Rep. Ashford (D-NE), Rep. Cuellar (D-TX), and Rep. Graham (D-FL) — and 31 Republicans voted in opposition. The list of Republicans voting in opposition included centrists such as Rep. Dold (R-IL), Rep. King (R-NY), and Rep. Meehan (R-PA) and more conservative representatives such as Rep. Amash (R-MI), Ken McClintock (R-CO), and Rep. Massie (R-KY).  While the news is bad for TIGER, Amtrak and New Starts transit capital programs — which all received heavy cuts — we do not expect this bill in its current state to become law any time soon.

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 last night prior to the bills passage include:

Rep. Denham (R-CA) – An amendment to prohibit funds from 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 from being used 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)

UPDATE: The House is voting to slash transportation programs local communities are counting on

This evening, the House of Representatives is expected to begin debate and vote on their annual transportation funding bill. As it stands, the bill will make painful cuts to several important transportation programs that local communities depend on. With debate beginning Wednesday at 7 p.m. and continuing through the night, it’s crucial that we weigh in as soon as possible. 

Updated 2:15 p.m 6/4/15: The House delayed the final vote on the bill until Tuesday, June 9th. So keep those messages coming! Share the news with your friends and if you have already sent a letter, click through to the form again and you can find your rep’s phone number for making a quick call.

Updated 10:52 a.m 6/4/15: Debate on the bill continued well into the wee hours of Wednesday night into Thursday morning, and the House is expected to vote on the bill by noon (eastern time) on Thursday.

Can you send a message to your representative today in advance of this crucial vote?

The 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.

Specifically, this bill would:

  • Cut $200 million for all new transit construction. This comes at a time when public transportation ridership is booming and cities of all sizes are looking to invest in new bus, rail transit, and bikeshare projects to help them stay economically competitive. This program is what Indianapolis is currently using to kick-start their ambitious bus rapid transit network, and scores of other communities are hoping to do the same.
  • Slash the TIGER competitive grant program by 80 percent from last year’s level down to just $100 million. We’re now six rounds into the popular TIGER program, and it’s clearly inadequate to fulfill the huge demand throughout the country. The program has funded innovative projects in communities of all sizes in all 50 states — and in districts both red and blue.
  • Cut Amtrak’s budget by $250 million just a few weeks after the tragic Amtrak derailment in Philadelphia, and at a time when ridership has never been higher.

This bill moves to the House floor this evening and will be debated well into the night. The final vote is most likely to come sometime tomorrow, so don’t stop calling and sending messages before the end of the day Thursday. (See updates on timing above.) 

So send a message to your representative as soon as you can today. And after you do, if you want to make an even bigger impact, pick up the phone, give them a call and urge them not to cut funding for New and Small Starts, TIGER grants and passenger rail.

Rural Senators focus on heartland transit

--AmtrakHow could a new transportation bill revitalize rural and small-town America? That was the focus of a Senate Democratic Steering Committee briefing on “Issues and Innovations for Small Towns and Rural Communities” in the Capitol Visitors Center last Friday.

Transportation for America co-chair and former Meridian, Mississippi Mayor John Robert Smith shared his perspective as chief executive of a mid-sized city in a rural area. During his tenure, Smith initiated a renovation of Meridian’s historic train station, sparking growth and economic vitality in the downtown corridor that is now the “life of Meridian.” The improvements that he championed resulted in $135 million in capital investments around the station, and property values quadrupled in an area previously devoid of residents. More importantly, a vital aspect of mobility was restored for all residents of the area. Knowing firsthand how vital Amtrak service was to Mississippians, especially many traveling on fixed budgets, he helped lead the fight to restore the train route between Atlanta and New Orleans, and has continued his advocacy for passenger rail travel ever since.

Rural and small-town residents throughout the country are seeking more transportation options and want to ensure that they’re not left behind. Briefing panelists emphasized that transportation reform, far from leaving the heartland in the dust, can actually encourage growth and improve quality of life.

For one thing, improving rural transportation helps seniors. In 2000, 23 percent of older adults in America lived in rural areas, and as they age, they risk being isolated in their homes in the absence of adequate transportation infrastructure. DSC_0064.JPGBroader accessibility is a challenge as well due to long distances some rural Americans must travel to reach employment, groceries and health services. And, intercity mobility remains limited in many parts of the country, cutting people off from friends, family and economic opportunity. During the briefing, Mayor Smith spoke not only about the economic benefits of revitalizing the area around the train station, but also about the transit service that connected low-income residents in Meridian’s HOPE VI housing development, ensuring their access to essential destinations.

Enhancing transportation safety, relieving highway congestion by shifting goods movement to freight rail, investing in public buses and paratransit services and increasing intercity and multi-modal connectivity are some potential solutions for small cities and rural regions. T4 America staff have partnered with National Association of Counties and the National Association of Development Organizations, both of which were represented at the briefing, to help promote these solutions as vital parts of the upcoming transportation bill.

Far from leaving rural America out, a much-needed overhaul to our nation’s transportation policy can in fact provide a needed lifeline and help rural areas and smaller towns succeed as vital, livable places for all.

Rochelle Carpenter of Transportation for America contributed to this report.