EPW Archives - Transportation For America

Five things to know about the INVEST Act, and how it compares to Senate bill

With the INVEST Act clearing a crucial vote in committee last week, it moves to the full House for a final vote. We’ve covered the bill from nearly every angle, but here are five important things to remember as the bill moves forward, including how it radically outperforms the Senate’s status quo proposal on reauthorization.

The scale of change in the INVEST Act is a sign that leaders in Congress are taking reforms seriously, but they need to know that you care about this too. Will you send a message to your representative and urge them to support modern transportation policy? Take action here >>

1) What’s next for the INVEST Act?

Late last Thursday, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved the INVEST Act after two days of considering amendments and marking up the bill. Over the weekend, the House Democrats announced their $1.5 trillion Moving Forward Act for infrastructure and stimulus investments, which incorporates this $500 billion multi-year INVEST Act. (The Moving Forward Act is the legislative version of the broad infrastructure framework they released earlier this year.)

This means that the INVEST Act will be considered as part of that larger bill, rather than with a separate vote like all other reauthorization proposals. Without a proposal for paying for the INVEST Act or the rest of the $1.5 trillion package, House Democrats are using the Moving Forward Act to signal their broad, overarching priorities for stimulus and infrastructure investments. Regardless of the outcome on this whole big package, the INVEST Act represents the starting point for one-half of Congress on reauthorization. And that’s why we are calling on everyone who cares about overhauling the nation’s transportation policy to weigh in with your representative: Make sure your rep knows that the INVEST Act is Congress’ best chance to finally move the needle.

TAKE ACTION

2) The state of repair is strong!

In our initial scorecard, the original bill got neither a ✔ or an ✖ on our core issue of prioritizing repair and maintenance thanks to some significant loopholes. Thankfully, the bill got those needed changes due to the bipartisan leadership of Reps. Garcia (D-IL) and Gallagher (R-WI). They proposed important fixes via an amendment that passed by a voice vote—not a single member of the committee opposed it, giving our INVEST scorecard a solid checkmark for repair.

SENATE: In incredibly stark contrast, the Senate took a look at the country’s backlog of repair needs and the tendency for states to ignore those needs while building and widening new roads, and decided to opt for the status quo, dumping more money into a program that has allowed expansion in place of repair for decades. (The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee passed the America’s Transportation Infrastructure Act last July.) The INVEST Act represents a fundamentally different approach to repair.

3) Safety is front and center

The INVEST Act incorporates a focus on safety throughout all federal programs, overhauling a broken system that allows states to increase pedestrian deaths without penalty, dedicating more funding to protect the most vulnerable, and making changes to how we set speed limits to prioritize safety, and prioritizing access rather than speed. There is still room to improve this area, but we do especially thank Rep. Steve Cohen for introducing the Complete Streets Act of 2019 which sparked many of these changes.

SENATE: The Senate included new safety programs and language encouraging agencies to adopt Complete Streets designs and plans, but those programs would be undercut by failing to include the INVEST Act’s kind of overarching requirements to prioritize safety throughout. The Senate bill considers safety to be an option that agencies can and should pursue, but the last 20 years have proven that making Complete Streets designs or safety “optional” will result in an increase in deaths for people walking or biking.

4) Looking beyond cars to measure how well everyone can get where they need to go

We wrote at length about how the House sets existing policy on its ear by finally starting to organize all spending around improving access for everyone, by all modes:

The INVEST Act creates a new performance measure that requires project sponsors to improve access to jobs and services by all modes. While seemingly minor, this marks a huge shift in how transportation funding would be allocated—especially because project sponsors will be penalized if they fail to use federal funding to improve access. …Under the INVEST Act, states and MPOs must consider whether people traveling (not just driving) can reach jobs, schools, groceries, medical care and other necessities. And they will be penalized if they fail to use federal funding to improve that access.

SENATE: The Senate created a new pilot program to bring this kind of approach to a very small slice of all funding. Based on the COMMUTE Act, it would help a select group of states and metros measure whether or not their investments are connecting people to jobs and services. But as with the safety provisions (as noted above), the benefits would be limited by the fact that the other $358 billion in the Senate’s proposal would be spent using standards that often make access worse for many people with every dollar spent.

5) Bipartisanship is good, but it’s also failed to produce a new vision for transportation

House Republicans complained they were left out of the process on the INVEST Act. Even though the repair amendment was approved with a bipartisan voice vote, all of the House Republicans on the committee voted against the bill in the final committee vote. And as noted above, it’s being incorporated into a larger package which will almost certainly see a party-line, partisan vote for and against.

SENATE: Many on the Senate side have been bragging that their proposal was bipartisan, but that’s more of a reflection of the fact that both Senate Democrats and Republicans lack vision. Infrastructure has always been hailed as the place where Congress comes together, but that’s merely because the debate about policy usually begins and ends with the price tag. In the bipartisan transportation bills of the last decade, there was no (potentially controversial) new vision offered, and bipartisan majorities rallied to pass bills that gave everyone a little more money while undermining each party’s priorities equally and failing to replace a broken system. This is why the loudest cries for “bipartisanship” often come from the most entrenched interests, like state DOTs.

The Senate’s bill doubles down on the status quo and does little to nothing to support innovation, get more value for the dollar, fix existing infrastructure, improve safety, ensure access to economic opportunity for all people, address climate or today’s public health crisis. The INVEST Act is not perfect, but it is a different kind of bill that’s challenging many of these old, ingrained rules.

Wrapping up

A final agreement on reauthorization is unlikely to happen this year before the FAST Act expires this September. The silver lining is that T4America and other advocates out there have time to convince good government, equity, climate, and public health champions in the Senate that their status quo bill undermines all of these important goals. There’s not much to be proud of in the Senate bill, even if it was bipartisan. If you’re looking for more, you can find more of our issue-based analysis with these links below:

The Senate’s first transportation reauthorization bill gets an F

EDIT, March 2021: If you represent an organization or are an elected official, please sign our letter urging the Senate to pass a long-term law completely unlike this one—a bill that orients the program transportation program around what counts: getting to where you need to go.

Authorizing federal spending on surface transportation is complicated, with different Congressional committees writing separate portions of the bill. That’s why we’ll score every reauthorization bill by how well it achieves our three simple principles for transportation investment. The America’s Transportation Infrastructure Act fails on all counts.

With the current authorization for federal transportation spending—the FAST Act—set to expire in 2020, it’s time for Congress to set transportation policy for the next five to six years. Once passed, this legislation will set federal funding levels for transportation for another five to six years.

We’re tired of the same old transportation bills that pump money into building highways at the expense of our crumbling roads and bridges, people’s access to essential jobs and services, and human life. That’s why we’ll score every reauthorization bill on how well they achieve our three simple principles.

By our scorecard, the first reauthorization bill—America’s Transportation Infrastructure Act, which the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Committee approved in July—gets a big fat F. Here’s why.

Maintenance

This bill fails to take steps toward cutting our country’s maintenance backlog in half because it contains zero new, binding requirements to ensure that states use federal funds to actually bring their roads and bridges into good condition. The bill provides an additional $32 billion annually—on top of the $40 billion they already receive— for existing road building policy. History has shown that without any requirement to invest in maintenance, many states simply won’t. While the inclusion of a new bridge maintenance program is a welcome step, it’s a relative pittance at just 2 percent of overall funding.

Speed

We are in the midst of a massive safety crisis for people walking, with an alarming 35 percent increase in people struck and killed by drivers while walking from 2008-2017. And nearly 40,000 people die each year in traffic crashes.

This bill includes significant new formula and discretionary safety programs and language encouraging states and planning organizations to adopt complete streets designs and plans. However, we’re concerned that these programs will be undercut by substantial funding increases for high speed roadways in the base formulas without any additional constraints to improve safety. Complete streets designs shouldn’t be optional, as this bill considers them. History has shown us that “optional” will result in many states failing to take action to save lives.

Access

We were happy to see that the bill included a pilot program based on the COMMUTE Act to help a select group of states and metros measure whether or not their investments are connecting people to jobs and services. But a pilot program isn’t enough. Access to jobs and services has to be the core of any transportation authorization. We need to reward the boldness of this pilot proposal by measuring whether all $358 billion in this bill is connecting people to jobs and services.

Multiple states, including Virginia and Hawaii, have already started prioritizing their spending on projects that improve access. It’s possible—and necessary—to prioritize federal spending this way. We can’t afford another five or six years of wasted investment from using vehicle speed as our outdated measure of success.

Click on any image below to learn more about our brand new principles or download a sharable card

Member Policy Memo: Senate EPW Authorization Bill

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee introduced America’s Transportation Infrastructure Act on Monday, July 29 and passed it out of the committee on Tuesday, July 30. This is the first step in passing a long term transportation bill to replace the FAST Act of 2015, which expires in September 2020. T4A’s policy team developed an in-depth analysis of the 487-page bill exclusively for members.

Read the memo here > >

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of October 20th

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.

“Trump officials assure Republicans an infrastructure plan is coming.” (The Hill)
The Senate Environmental and Public Works (EPW) Committee delayed a scheduled vote last Wednesday on Paul Trombino’s nomination to be the administrator of the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA). The vote has been rescheduled for this Wednesday. (Senate EPW Committee)
Intel and Mobileye have developed a system to determine fault in self-driving-car crashes.” (San Francisco Gate)
A new report from the Brookings Institute calculates that over $80 billion has been invested in autonomous vehicle technology. (Brookings Institute)
City Lab says there is a better way to pick infrastructure projects than the current process. (City Lab)
Nashville last week unveiled a bold $5.2 billion proposal to dramatically expand light rail and bus service in Nashville. The city will hold a vote on a ballot referendum to help fund proposal via new taxes in the spring of 2018. (The Tennessean)

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of October 13th

Stories You May Have Missed

“Rural America looks to Trump to help with crumbling infrastructure.” (Washington Examiner)
Democrats gathered last week to discuss ideas for President Trump’s promised infrastructure package and criticized the White House for the continued lack of a concrete proposal. (The Hill)
The Senate Environmental and Public Works (EPW) Committee will vote on Paul Trombino’s nomination to be the administrator of the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) on Wednesday. The nomination is expected to pass easily. (Senate EPW Committee)
The Chairman of the Senate Transportation and Housing and Urban Development (THUD) Appropriations Subcommittee, Susan Collins (Republican-Maine), announced she will stay in the Senate rather than run for Governor of Maine. (Politico)
The Verge reports that “self-driving cars are coming, and US cities are totally unprepared for the radical changes that will accompany them.” (The Verge)
Brookings Institute Commentary: President Trump is undermining the chances of an infrastructure plan passing. (Real Clear Politics)
Streetsblog covers a protest over a bike lane in Minneapolis that rose to a whole new level. (Streetsblog)

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of September 29th

Stories You May Have Missed

President Trump expressed skepticism over the idea of using public-private partnerships to fund infrastructure, saying those deals “don’t work”. (Bloomberg)
President’s Trump apparent change of heart on public-private infrastructure could threaten the administration’s $1 trillion infrastructure package proposal. (Transport Topics)
The Senate Environmental and Public Works (EPW) Committee is holding a hearing on Thursday on Paul Trombino, President Trump’s nominee to be Administrator of the Federal Highways Administration. Mr. Trombino is the former director of Iowa DOT. (Senate EPW)
Senate Democrats push for $500 billion in infrastructure investment (Washington Post)
The National Association of Rail Passengers (NARP) released a study on the positive economic benefits of Amtrak’s national network. (NARP)
Portland’s transit agency Tri-Met is “pitching a $1.7 billion bond measure to help pay for a new light-rail line as well as a slate of other regional transportation projects”. (Oregon-Live)

Senate Passes Cloture; 5 Things We’re Watching

***Please note, at 10:00am T4A received McConnell’s substitute amendment, which means that a number of these items may have changed. We’ll keep you updated as it proceeds.**

Last night, the US Senate passed a procedural vote called cloture. Like a starting pistol in a race, this means that they can now start debating, amending and eventually pass a federal surface transportation bill out of the Senate. While many things can, and will, happen over the next few days, there are a number of topics that Transportation for America is watching.

Want to know how your Senator voted on cloture? Click HERE.

1.Payfors – DC parlance for real and imaginary ways to pay for this bill.

At this time, there appears to be a wide-ranging list of payfors that run as small as $172 million up to $16 billion. Some of these include items like such as rescinding unused TARP funds or extending fees for TSA. There do not seem to be many that keep the traditional tie between users of the system and payments into the system.

The mass transit account appears to be running out of funding well before the highway trust fund. Initial T4A analysis seems to indicate that the legislation pulls in all 10 years of the proposed funding to pay for 3 years of the highway trust fund and 1.5 years of the mass transit account.

APTA transit funding table in current Senate transportation legislation

The legislation also appears to sell 101 million barrels out of the 693.7 million barrels of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) between 2018 and 2025 to bring in $9B over 10 years. Critics of this funding scheme assert that we are selling the oil when prices are at record lows, making it a foolish idea. Sen. Murkowski (R-AK) is reportedly one of those critics.

Originally, this legislation withheld Social Security payments from recipients that are subjects of a felony arrest warrant and for whom the state has given notice that they intend to pursue the warrant, raising $2.3 billion over 10 years. T4A has heard that Senate negotiators have removed this provision due to the advocacy of a number of social equity and civil rights groups.

2. Transit
T4A and the larger transportation community have several concerns about this title, the main ones are:

US Banking Democrats chart on modal share under currently proposed Senate legislation

First, the DRIVE Act fails to provide public transportation with 20% of the new revenue dedicated to growth, which is a historical guarantee dating back to President Reagan’s agreement in 1982. Public transportation receives only 6% of the revenue derived from the future funding growth (see Senate Banking Democrats chart). U.S. DOT estimates that the Mass Transit Account ends the third year of the bill (FY 2018) with a negative balance of $180 million. Senator Boxer is reportedly negotiating a fix with Senate Republicans that will increase that percentage.

Second, projects with private funds get to “skip the line” for federal money, providing a major incentive for privatized service. The existence of a new expedited process could entice cities to pursue transit privatization on a large scale by using P3s to operate transit service. The labor community has expressed strong opposition and may oppose the entire bill if this provision isn’t removed.

Third, this legislation forces the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to wait 6 months before increasing oversight of at-risk projects. Sec. 21015 requires the FTA to wait for a project to fail 2 consecutive quarterly reviews before providing more oversight to a project that is going over budget or falling behind schedule.

3. The Freight program

This legislation includes all modes of freight, including pipelines for the first time. It also requires the establishment of a new multi-modal freight network within 1 year of enactment, the establishment of which appears to be similar to the creation of the existing freight network (as well as a re designation of the existing highway freight network). It does, however, define economic competitiveness by the amount of traffic moved and not economic outcomes and will fund projects that reduce congestion, improve reliability, boost productivity, improve safety or state of good repair, use advanced technology or protect the environment on the national highway freight network.

You’ll recall that T4A sent out an action alert to keep the TIGER program multimodal and not let the US Senate Commerce Committee use it for freight-exclusive purposes. We’re happy to report that effort was successful, though the TIGER program is still not authorized or funded in the transportation bill.

4. Passenger Rail
This legislation authorizes passenger rail funding for the first time ever in a federal surface transportation reauthorization. The legislation calls for $1.44B in 2016 and growing to $1.9B in 2019. It maintains a national system and provides for clear cost accounting among the 4 business lines of Amtrak of the corridor, state-supported and long-distance trains. Provides for up to 6 new passenger rail routes on a competitive basis and for the first time makes operational costs eligible for grants.

5. AMP – Assistance for Major Projects
This is a new project for highway or transit projects that cost at least $350M or 25% percent of state highway apportionment (10% in a rural state). Applications should be reviewed based on consistency with federal goals, improvement to the performance of the system, is consistent with the statewide plan, can’t be completed without federal help and will achieve one or more of the following:

generate national economic benefits outweigh cost,
reduce congestion,
improve the reliability of movement of people and freight, or
improve safety

Grants under AMP must be at least $50M, with a rural guarantee of 20%. Eligible applicants for AMP include states, local governments (or group of locals), tribal governments, transit agencies, port authorities, public authorities with transportation function and federal land management agencies. It is not yet clear if this language is specific enough to include MPOs.

Amendments to be offered: T4A staff is monitoring a number of potential amendments. One of which (offered by Senators Wicker (R-MS) and Booker (D-NJ)) would increase the ability of communities to fund projects through the Surface Transportation Program. We strongly urge you to call your Senator and tell them to co-sponsor that amendment.

ICYMI: T4A and SGA Host Federal Policy Webinar; Materials Inside

Yesterday, Smart Growth America and Transportation for America hosted a webinar to review congressional action on the federal surface transportation authorization. If you were able to attend, you will recall that we mentioned how the US Senate is poised to consider the authorization before the full Senate next Tuesday. That continues to be the current timeframe for Senate consideration.

Access the webinar powerpoint here.

As a T4A member, you can access the webinar anytime through this page.

Two action items stemming from that conversation include:

It is highly likely that T4A will be issuing a number of action alerts next week. While we don’t have legislative language on a number of potential amendments, we anticipate movement on issues of local control, freight, TAP, transit funding and TIGER. Member support would be greatly appreciated.
The National Complete Streets Coalition is requesting support to tell FHWA to make more inclusive streets that are designed to be more livable. You can register your comments here: bit.ly/NHSdesign (this weblink is case-sensitive).

Three changes could dramatically improve the Senate’s draft transportation bill

Ahead of the looming July 31 deadline to pass a new bill (or extend the current law), the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee in late June introduced and marked up a full six-year transportation bill. While we think it’s a good starting point, there are some promising amendments that could improve the bill dramatically as it goes forward in the Senate.

Mayors and other local elected leaders are the ones who face the music from citizens when bridges need repair, when mounting congestion makes commutes unpredictable, and when families can’t safely walk their kids to school — yet those same leaders are too often left out of the discussions over what gets built and where.

Giving local communities of all sizes the resources they need to realize their ambitious plans to stay economically competitive should be a primary goal of this bill, and several Senators have prepared several amendments to help change that.

Several of these were discussed or offered and withdrawn during the markup, and will hopefully be debated on the floor of the Senate.

First, Senators Wicker (R-MS) and Booker (D-NJ) are offering their Innovation in Surface Transportation Act as an amendment, to create a competitive grant program in each state to give local communities more access to federal funds — but only for the smartest, most innovative projects judged on their merits. A second amendment from Senators Booker and Wicker would increase the amount of flexible transportation dollars directly provided to local communities by ten percent of the program’s share.

Lastly, an amendment from Senator Cardin (D-MD) would increase funding for the program that cities, towns and regions use to invest in projects to make biking and walking safer — restoring the Transportation Alternatives Program to its previous funding level before being slashed in the last reauthorization in 2012.

Can you urge your Senators to support these amendments that will help give local communities like yours more access to and control over transportation dollars?

With a new competitive grant program for local projects in each state, more communities could find success like Normal, IL, found with its Uptown Station. Normal used a grant from the competitive national TIGER program to complete the funding picture for a multimodal station and central plaza that brought new life and economic activity to its town’s core. But the TIGER program is one of the only ways local communities can directly access federal funds, and it’s wildly oversubscribed.

Though the bill has cleared committee, it will still have to be considered in the full Senate, so we need all Senators to hear your support for these amendments. Don’t delay — send a message to your Senators and urge them to support these key amendments to improve this bill.

Logged-in members can read our full summary of the EPW bill below.

[member_content] Feature graphic - epw drive act June 24, 2015 — The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) released its six-year MAP-21 reauthorization proposal on June 22, 2015. The DRIVE Act is a start, but needs much more work to reform — and reinvigorate — the federal transportation program in ways that will boost today’s economy and ensure future prosperity. This memo provides an overview of the key provisions included in the proposal, as well as funding levels for key programs.

Read the full members-only memo here.[/member_content]

Senate Committee rolls forward with speedy markup of six-year transportation bill

In a committee markup where the phrase “doing the Lord’s work” was invoked by numerous members on both sides of the aisle, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee sped through a markup of their draft six-year transportation bill in less than an hour this morning, approving it by a unanimous vote with no amendments, save for a manager’s package of amendments agreed to in advance.

One thing was abundantly clear from the beginning of this morning’s committee markup of the DRIVE Act: the EPW Committee members are eager to get their portion of the bill completed and moved forward as soon as possible.

Led by Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-OK) and Ranking Member Barbara Boxer (D-CA), the committee opened with remarks of praise from Senators. From our vantage point most committee members sounded delighted to support the six-year bill with slightly increased funding levels over MAP-21.

“There’s no reason we can’t do this now if it’s a priority. We need to prove it’s a priority by passing this full six-year bill,” said Senator David Vitter (R-LA).

Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) was one of the first to bring up the elephant in the room. “The next challenge is to figure out how to pay for it,” he said. While that issue is out of EPW’s hands (Senate Finance and House Ways and Means will address the funding question), they did briefly discuss some possibilities. “One of the ideas I’ve heard consistently is to find a way to fix our roads and bridges and transit systems in a more cost-effective way,” Sen. Carper added.

The head of the Senate Finance Committee is Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT). During his remarks in the markup, EPW Member Jeff Sessions (R-AL) said, “I saw Senator Hatch in the hallway on the way over, and I said, you gonna find our money? And he said ‘yes.'”

It was certainly encouraging that there was no vocal opposition to any of the positive improvements this bill makes over its predecessor: providing all Transportation Alternatives program (TAP) funding to local governments, considering the needs of all users when designing and constructing road projects, changing the cost thresholds to enable more local governments have access to low-cost federal loans, providing support to smart transit-oriented development, or allowing cities to use the innovative NACTO street design manual even if their state does not allow it, along with a few others.

Though some members, just like us at T4America, are still hoping to improve the bill further, especially in providing better access and a greater share of funds for local governments of all size.

A handful of members referenced amendments or provisions they hoped to incorporate into the bill, but none were formally offered or voted on. Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) spoke briefly about the Innovation in Surface Transportation Act, sponsored by himself and Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), which would create a small grant program in each state to give local communities of all size greater access to federal transportation funds to complete merit-based projects.

“It’s been something that local officials have been very excited about, very hopeful about, and I’m sure there will be some disappointment that it’s not in the manager’s mark,” Wicker said. “It’s a worthy suggestion and a worthy project not to increase one penny of the spending in this bill, but to set aside a small portion of this bill” for this program to award dollars to local communities based on a competitive process to judge them on the merits.

That manager’s mark (a single group of amendments) makes a few small improvements. A small program of demonstration grants to “accelerate the deployment and adoption of transportation research” was amended to ensure local communities and metropolitan planning organizations were eligible for them — not just states.

Another change in the manager’s amendment will ensure that 100 percent of the $850 million TAP funding that helps make walking and biking safer will be be distributed to and spent in local communities. A provision in the draft bill allowing states to “flex” 50 percent of that funding to other needs was struck — guaranteeing that all $850 million will be spent on local priority projects to improve biking and walking. And a small change was made to take safety into account when designing any projects on the National Highway System.

Senator Boxer was delighted at the unanimity from the Committee.

“I’m just so happy after hearing comments from everyone. Yes there will be struggles about how to pay, but Eisenhower said it well: we can’t be a secure nation unless we have an infrastructure that works.”

The Committee approved the bill by a unanimous vote, but the Senate Banking, Commerce and Finance Committees still have to draft and vote on their portions of the bill. With the July 31 expiration of MAP-21 (and the insolvency of the transportation trust fund) looming, it’ll be an uphill battle to get a full bill passed by the Senate before the deadline, but we will be watching closely.

Members can read our full summary of the EPW bill below.

Read the full members-only memo here.[/member_content]

Senate’s new transportation bill is a good start, but more should be done for local communities

At long last, there’s finally some progress to report on a new long-term federal transportation bill. Today, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee released their draft six-year transportation bill. While we think it’s a good starting point, there are some promising proposals to improve it dramatically during a planned markup tomorrow.

Updated 6/24 3:00 p.m.: The EPW committee marked up and approved this bill unanimously on June 24th without considering amendments (other than a package of amendments in a manager’s mark.) The amendments mentioned below were discussed or offered and withdrawn, and will hopefully be debated on the floor of the Senate. So keep any letters of support coming — the action below is still ongoing! (-Ed.)

That needs to change, and several Senators have readied several amendments to do exactly that.

First, Senators Wicker (R-MS) and Booker (D-NJ) are offering their Innovation in Surface Transportation Act as an amendment, to create a competitive grant program in each state to give local communities more access to federal funds — but only for the smartest, most innovative projects judged on their merits. A second amendment from Senators Booker and Wicker would increase the amount of flexible transportation dollars directly provided to local communities by ten percent of the program’s share.

Giving local communities of all sizes the resources they need to realize their ambitious plans to stay economically competitive should be a primary goal of this bill.

Can you urge your Senators to support amendments that will help give local communities like yours more access to and control over transportation dollars?

The EPW Committee is marking up their bill on Wednesday, so don’t delay — send a message to your Senators and urge them to support these key amendments to improve this bill.

Members can read our full summary of the EPW bill below.

Read the full members-only memo here.[/member_content]

Statement on the release of the Senate’s long-term transportation reauthorization proposal

Senate EPW bill represents progress toward passage of a long-term bill and a good starting point for debate and improvements.

James Corless, director of Transportation for America, issued this statement in response to today’s release of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s Developing a Reliable and Innovative Vision for the Economy (DRIVE) Act to reauthorize the federal transportation program:

“First, I want to thank Senator Inhofe (R-OK) and Senator Boxer (D-CA) for their work in getting a long-term transportation bill moving forward in Congress ahead of the July 31st expiration of the current program. Local communities desperately need the stable, dependable funding provided by a multi-year bill.

The DRIVE Act takes several important steps to address gaps and build on policies adopted in MAP-21. For one, it increases the share of funding directly provided to local communities through the Surface Transportation Program and the Transportation Alternatives Program. It takes steps to help communities become more resilient in the face of natural disasters and a changing climate. It opens up low-interest financing to support smart economic development along public transit lines, and lowers the cost thresholds to help local communities qualify for low-cost federal TIFIA loans. And it would ensure all modes of transportation are accounted for in the design of highway projects.

While this bill provides a positive starting point, there are other areas where Congress can and should do better.

The next surface transportation authorization should improve transparency and accountability, and focus on how we pick transportation projects and measure the success of those investments. The new freight program and the major projects competitive grant provision should be broadened to allow multimodal projects to be eligible. And more emphasis must be placed on investments that promote access to jobs and economic opportunity for working Americans, particularly those that are struggling the most to make ends meet.

The bill should also do more to provide communities of all sizes with greater access to the resources they need to support economic prosperity and competitiveness. The Innovation In Surface Transportation Act, introduced by Senators Wicker (R-MS) and Booker (D-NJ) earlier this year, would be a great place to start. That bill, to be considered as an amendment during committee markup, would create a competitive transportation grant program in each state, allowing communities to compete for a larger share of federal funding on the merits — incentivizing innovation and rewarding smart decision-making and efficiency.

We recognize that this legislation is just the first step in a longer process. The DRIVE Act serves as a positive beginning for further work as it progresses through the Senate and is joined by the work of the other Committees. We appreciate the efforts of Senators Inhofe and Boxer to advance a long-term transportation bill that begins addressing the need to strengthen local economies through smart investments in infrastructure. We applaud them for their work to advance a long-term transportation program, and we are committed to working with them toward that goal.”

Members can read our full summary of the EPW bill below.

Read the full members-only memo here.[/member_content]

House takes first step in process to keep the nation’s transportation fund solvent

For the first time since 2012, the House of Representatives held a hearing focused on funding the nation’s transportation system. Today’s hearing focused on the elephant in the room: how to adequately fund a transportation bill that’s longer than just a few months. While it’s a relief to see the funding issue finally getting airtime in the House, keeping the nation’s transportation fund solvent is only half of the problem — we also need to update the broken federal program that isn’t meeting our country’s needs.

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee tasked with finding the money to pay for a transportation bill, took the most obvious funding solution off the table — raising the federal gasoline excise tax — right at the start of the hearing as the gallery was still getting comfortable in their seats, deflating some members of the committee who were eager to at least discuss this option.

“We are not raising gas taxes‚ plain and simple,” he said, while adding later that the House “does need to find a real solution, a permanent solution. We are all ears.” Chairman Ryan suggested that repatriation of overseas profits (a one-time, non-transportation user fee fix) or giving states more authority could be possible solutions, but a gas tax increase is off the table.

Before the hearing, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) held a press conference featuring a coalition of groups who support his bill to raise new revenue in the House by phasing in a 15-cent increase in the gas tax. Civil engineers, general contractors, roadbuilders, public transportation operators and T4America director James Corless spoke at the press conference to support Rep. Blumenauer’s case that Congress’ inaction is negatively impacting our nation’s economy and action is long overdue.

James corless blumenauer
T4America director James Corless speaking at this morning’s press conference

Rep. Blumenauer carried his momentum from the morning press conference into the hearing an hour later.

“We’re not keeping up our end of the bargain for the 50 percent of capital spending on big projects that comes from the federal government. We haven’t made any meaningful adjustment since 1993 to the gas tax, relying on short-term fixes, gimmicks – and no matter how you slice it, adding to the deficit,” Rep. Blumenauer said in his prepared remarks.

Rep. Lloyd Doggett (R-TX) concurred. “What is missing from our transportation policy is money – revenue. We cannot build these highways with fairy dust,” Rep. Doggett (R-TX) said.

Rep. Renacci (R-OH), who has put forward a separate plan to index the gas tax to inflation and set up a mechanism to provide long-term transportation funding, noted that “short-term fixes cost money in delay and uncertainty.” He shared a story about meeting with constituents, including some tea party members, on transportation issues. He said that they told him, “‘Quit going to the general fund and taking dollars…what you’re doing is passing it onto our children and grandchildren. What I’d be willing to do is pay a user fee as long as I get my roads and bridges fixed.’ We have to come up with a long-term solution, we can’t continue to go down this path,” he said.

As Rep. Bob Dold (R-IL) from the Chicago area noted on the topic of buying new railcars for the CTA and Metra, “Do we buy them one at a time or ten at a time? I can get a far better deal if I buy them ten at a time,” he said. When agencies can’t reliably put together a multi-year budget because they have no idea what to expect from the federal government, projects can begin to cost more than they should.

Following on the heels of today’s Ways & Means hearing, the Senate Finance Committee is holding a hearing of its own tomorrow on transportation funding.

We can hope that the newfound willingness to discuss the challenging revenue question will lead members of Congress to build consensus around a funding proposal suitable for the nation’s need. However, simply raising new funding to pour into a broken system isn’t going to get us where we need to go either — we need to fix the broken system and update it with the kinds of policies that ensure every dollar invested by taxpayers provides the greatest benefits for the economy and our communities. It’s not enough to simply raise money and spend it on the same processes that created the crisis we find ourselves in today. America can do better, and it’s important that the decisionmakers understand this fact.

On that policy question, eyes are quickly turning to the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, which is responsible for the highway title — the largest portion of the bill. They are planning to release and mark up their successor to MAP-21, a six-year bill, next Wednesday, June 24th.

We are counting on the Senate EPW Committee to release a bill that can maintain our current system, complete the transportation network, incentivize the strategic investments that can provide access to opportunity for all Americans and best improve connections within the cities and towns that drive our economy.

Continuing and improving a nascent process to measure the performance of our transportation investments would allow us to better ensure that our limited resources bring the best return. And a forward-looking plan to direct more of that money down to where it’s needed most would be a great companion to any plan to shore up the nation’s transportation funding.

We’re now looking to the Senate to make progress on finding a long-term funding solution, but also to make the policy changes we so urgently need to ensure those dollars are well spent.

With GOP victories, SAFETEA-LU team in line to chair Senate committees

With last night’s election, both the Senate and House will see leadership changes in key transportation committees. With the nation’s transportation funding source running near empty and the current law, MAP-21, expiring in the spring, these new committee leaders will have an opportunity to make an impact in the very near term.

First, the Senate, where the Environment and Public Works Committee writes the largest portion of the transportation bill, the “highway title”. Chair Barbara Boxer (D-CA) is expected to yield the gavel to Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK). Though the two worked closely together on MAP-21, Inhofe has indicated that he plans to conduct EPW business differently than his predecessor, and it’s unclear at this point exactly how he would stray from the current course.

The next biggest piece of the Senate bill, the “transit title”, is written in the Banking Committee, where Richard Shelby (R-AL) is in line to become chair. The Inhofe-Shelby pairing also led negotiations on SAFETEA-LU – MAP-21’s predecessor – in 2005.

In the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Ranking Member Nick Rahall (D-WV) — amazingly a member of this committee his entire time in Congress — lost re-election to his 20th term, which eliminates the top Democrat on the committee. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) is next in line for the top Democratic seat on the Committee, and is a familiar and vocal proponent of a strong federal role in transportation.

That covers the policy side of the equation. On the funding side, Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) is projected to take over the Finance Committee, swapping roles with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR). On the funding side in the House, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) is expected to take over the Chair of the Ways & Means Committee for retiring Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI).

In the short-term, the biggest battles will come over annual appropriations, setting the spending levels for discretionary programs such as TIGER and Amtrak. The first order of business for Congress when it returns next week is extending the continuing resolution – a temporary funding measure – that expires in December long enough to allow appropriators to hammer out spending levels for the full fiscal year. That will now likely occur under the GOP-controlled Congress early in the next calendar year.

The 800-pound gorilla of questions marks though, is how Congress will fund the nation’s transportation system next year and beyond. Gas tax receipts are dropping, cars are getting more fuel-efficient and driving is leveling off – and most baby boomers haven’t even stopped commuting yet. Although a faction of Republicans has called for the feds to abandon their traditional role and devolve the lion’s share of responsibility and oversight to the states, that idea so far has not gained traction with the full caucus. Though yet another short-term fix was agreed to a few months ago to keep the program going into next year, that funding will be tapped out by Spring 2015, and the trust fund will be near insolvency yet again.

Raising the gas tax may be a non-starter in a GOP Congress, though that remains to be seen. Other revenue ideas have struggled to gain a foothold, including the House GOP proposal during the last reauthorization to boost revenue with fees from expanding oil and gas drilling into formerly protected areas. On the Democrat side, DeFazio has introduced legislation to replace the federal gas tax with a fee at the refinery level that would be indexed to inflation, potentially yielding a more stable funding source.

In all, Tuesday’s election results should make for a fascinating 2015.

Senate committee passes six-year transportation bill this morning

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) passed their portion of the transportation reauthorization bill out of committee this morning after a short one-hour session. The amended six-year $243 billion bill does little to improve on the draft version released earlier this week, but several key amendments could strengthen the bill as it moves to the floor of the Senate.

Updated: 5/28 with full summary below. -Ed. The bill that was approved by the committee today is mostly unchanged from what was released earlier this week, with a few exceptions detailed below. There were a handful of amendments agreed upon in advance that were accepted as a group with no discussion.

As we pointed out in our statement Tuesday, the EPW bill takes positive steps to repair and replace federal-aid bridges not on the National Highway System, extend innovative financing to support local economic development along transit lines and increase the share of the Transportation Alternatives Program under local control, among a few other highlights. But this bill as passed today still has room to grow in providing communities access to resources they need to support our economy and improve opportunities for Americans to prosper.

The most prominent change was offered by Sen. Inhofe (R-OK) which cuts 25 percent ($250 million) from the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) program in order to fund the federal research program that was booted out of the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) in the bill introduced by the EPW Committee and subject it to the annual appropriations process.

After the bill and amendments were approved by a quick voice vote early this morning, members of the committee stayed to offer remarks and discuss possible amendments that deserve debate and will hopefully be included in the bill in the days and weeks to come as it moves through the Senate process.

One proposed bipartisan amendment discussed by Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) would give local communities across the country greater access to federal transportation funds for innovative projects via a new in-state competitive grant program. (Note: This would be the Senate companion of the bill announced in an event yesterday by House Reps. Davis and Titus.)

An amendment from Senator Whitehouse (D-RI) would improve local and regional access to the Projects of National and Regional Significance by lowering the minimum total project cost (currently $350 million) so that the program focuses on project outcomes rather than unnecessarily driving up the cost of projects.

An amendment from Senators Gillibrand (D-NY) and Merkley (D-OR) would make local governments eligible for the new American Transportation Awards program, which is an $125 million annual general appropriations discretionary grant program that focuses on advancing innovative solutions to achieving our national transportation goals. (Currently only states, MPOs and tribes are eligible.)

Today was just step one, as jurisdiction over transportation in the Senate is split between four committees. EPW, Commerce, Banking and Finance — which is responsible for the biggest question mark of all: how to fund a bill that needs billions in new revenues merely to stay at current funding levels.

Read our full summary. (PDF)

T4America statement in reaction to the Senate bill to reauthorize the federal transportation program

WASHINGTON, D.C. – James Corless, director of Transportation for America, issued this statement in response to the release of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee bill to reauthorize the federal transportation program:

“First, I want to thank Senator Boxer (D-CA) and Senator Vitter (R-LA) for recognizing that our communities desperately need the stable, dependable funding that a multi-year bill would provide.

The draft bill takes several important steps to address gaps or to build on some policies introduced in MAP-21. Specifically, we are pleased that it would provide aid to repair and replace locally owned bridges under the National Highway Performance Program, which were excluded in MAP-21. It also allows financing to support communities in creating economic development along transit lines. And it would increase the share of the small, but popular, Transportation Alternatives Program that is under local control, while creating a modest program to recognize innovative practices.

However, our alliance of local elected, business and civic leaders believes the proposed legislation stops well short of providing communities the access to resources they need to support economic success. Rather than make improvements on the margins, the federal program needs to recognize the importance of our cities, towns and suburbs and move control and accountability closer to the people who pay into the system. Allowing communities to compete for a larger share of the funding would incentivize innovation and reward smart decision-making and efficiency.

We recognize this legislation is a work in progress and that the Committee has taken steps to recognize some of the issues we have laid out. The draft bill should serve as a solid platform for further advancement as it progresses through the legislative process. Again, we appreciate the efforts of Senator Boxer and Senator Vitter to advance a long-term and stable transportation bill that builds on MAP-21, and we are committed to working with them toward that goal.”

SOTU followup: Does transportation offer a glimmer of bipartisan hope?

As we noted in our statement after the State of the Union address Tuesday night, it was good to hear the President again cite the need to steer new revenue toward “rebuilding our roads, upgrading our ports, unclogging our commutes”. He didn’t say much beyond that, of course, but given other developments in the background, we have reason to be somewhat encouraged.

140125121707-obama-sotu-2013-story-top

Though his transportation remarks were limited, what he did propose was a bit more concrete than past references to diverting billions saved from winding down various wars. This time, he called for making changes to corporate taxes – moves with at least some support in both parties – that could yield a temporary infusion for infrastructure investment.

It would be a welcome near-term boost, but as his transportation secretary has repeatedly pointed out, we need a long-term fix for the ongoing shortfall in our beleaguered transportation trust fund. The U.S. DOT will run out of money to reimburse states before the end of the fiscal year, with deep cuts likely in following years. Simply put, rising construction costs and falling gas tax revenues from an increasingly efficient vehicle fleet have us on course for a “transportation fiscal cliff”.

As the President surely knows, this bodes ill for much of the strategy he outlined for easing the burden for work-a-day Americans. It won’t do much good, for example, to train a low-wage worker for a job in the suburbs if he or she can’t get to it. Efforts to revive manufacturing will falter if producers can’t move their goods through bottlenecks on overburdened and deteriorating urban highways.

As the expiration of MAP-21 nears this fall, we are hoping the Administration will put forward a transportation bill that lines up with Obama’s economic strategy. But when it comes to raising the revenue to boost the trust fund to levels sufficient to repair and modernize our infrastructure, the President cannot go it alone.

The good news is he may not have to. In recent days, the chairs of two key infrastructure committees, Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA) and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) – representing both chambers and both parties – have sounded the call to save our transportation fund from insolvency and make smart investments for America’s future.

Chairman Barbara Boxer, Senate Environment and Public Works Committee

Chairman Bill Shuster, House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee

“This problem must be addressed in this Congress,” said Senator Boxer, who chairs the Environment and Public Works committee. “A strong transportation system is vital to ensuring our nation’s economic competitiveness, and this requires maintaining federal investments in our infrastructure.”

Rep. Shuster, chair of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, also has been bold and articulate on the need for a “strong federal role” in creating the infrastructure to sustain our economy and quality of life, and the need for local leaders to speak up for it. In opening a hearing this month on “Building the Foundation for Surface Transportation Reauthorization”, he said: “We can’t afford to be stuck in the past or we’ll be left behind. We should encourage our federal partners to think outside the box on how to address our transportation challenges [and] promote innovation.”

We couldn’t agree more, and we can’t imagine that his Democratic counterparts would disagree. We recognize that finding agreement on the revenue source will be a steep climb. We have suggested several possible sources. Perhaps tax reform offers another vehicle to find new revenue for transportation needs.

Meanwhile, “We need your help in educating members of Congress,” Chairman Shuster told the U.S. Conference of Mayors this month. Those members need to hear from elected, business and civic leaders from around the country that there is support – and a demand – for congressional action to provide the infrastructure funding our economy relies on. That’s our mission at T4America: to rally those voices across the country and bring them to their members of Congress. If you can help – either by speaking yourself or by reaching out to a community leader – please let us know!

Amendments offered to improve the already solid Senate yearly transportation funding bill

Already standing in sharp contrast to the House’s approach to funding transportation for the next fiscal year, leaders in the Senate are working to further improve the smart Senate transportation funding bill through a handful of amendments to the bill as it reaches the floor.

With the approval by the full Senate Appropriations committee, the Senate’s yearly transportation (and housing) funding bill is now being considered on the full Senate floor.

Which means amendments…lots of amendments.

Senator Schumer (along with Sens. Gillibrand, Menendez, and Cardin) proposed an amendment (No. 1763) that would allow rail and transit bridges to also be eligible for the $500 million in the Bridges in Critical Corridors program. Our most critical corridors aren’t always just highways, and this allows states and local communities to apply for flexible funding that can meet their greatest local need, whether that a bridge carries trains or cars.

There was another predictable attempt by Senator Rand Paul to take away the tiny slices of money that local mayors and communities often use to invest in popular trails and protected bikeways like Indianapolis’ downtown Cultural Trail or Washington, D.C.’s Capital Crescent trail that commuters depend on daily and spend those relative pennies on bridge repair. (Streetsblog covered this troubling amendment yesterday.)

We should do a better job of repairing our aging bridges. As noted before, the Senate bill contains a new $500 million grant program to do exactly that. But which bridges? Senator Rob Portman from Ohio succeeded in having an amendment included that would ensure that the money can only to to repair bridges that are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete. That’s a done deal.

Lastly on bridges, Senator Cardin and Senator Gillibrand also proposed an amendment (No. 1760) requiring FHWA to report on highway and bridge conditions in each state as well as the amount of funding states are spending on highway and bridge repair — something that states once had to do before MAP-21 eliminated the dedicated bridge repair program. This would restore a requirement for states to closely track the conditions of their bridges and most importantly, how much they spend to repair these bridges compared to spending on new construction, helping taxpayers and citizens hold state leaders accountable for making progress.

There are some other amendments detailed below, which we’ll report on in the coming days.

It’s not too late to write or call your Senator and urge them to pass the Senate transportation funding bill when it comes before the full Senate. There were crucial swing votes on the committee that will be imperative to preserve when the full vote happens.

—

Other notable amendments we’re tracking:

Flake 1764 (and Flake 1796) – Prohibits use of funds to subsidize cost of food service and first class service on Amtrak
Flake 1765 (and Flake 1772) – Requires Amtrak to submit a report on losses in food service and first class service by route and line
Flake 1766 – Eliminates the $15M in funding provided for the public transit emergency relief program
Flake 1767 (w/ McCain) – Requires Secretary of Transportation to submit a report on programs carried out under chapter 2 of title 23 – which includes the Federal lands program and Transportation Alternatives
Inhofe 1771 – Requires that at lease 20% of the funding in the “Bridges in Critical Corridors” program be used in rural areas
Vitter 1775 – Requires the Secretary of Transportation to establish and publish selection criteria for TIGER including any required documentation. It also requires notification of awards within 3 days
Vitter 1776 – Allows any project awarded funds under the “Bridges in Critical Corridors” program to proceed with a categorical exclusion from NEPA requirements
Murphy 1783 (w/ Rockefeller and Blumenthal) – Requires that in any postings for Buy America waiver USDOT ‘assess the impact on domestic employment’ of the proposed waiver
Coons 1788 – Increases funding for Amtrak from 1.452 billion to $1.565 billion
Cochran 1794 (w/ Wicker) – Creates weight exemption for trucks on portions of Route 78 designated as an interstate after the effective date of the bill (this provision is similar to Wisconsin bill truck weight bill recently approved by the House)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Transportation for America Response to Senate EPW Reauthorization Bill

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

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

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