Skip to main content

Tag: House

Recent Congressional Activity Summary-Week of October 23rd

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you the latest information and developments around federal policy. This dedication includes in-depth summaries of what is going on in Congress and the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT). Check out what you may have missed this past week in Congress and at U.S. DOT.

Senate Approves FY18 Budget

On October 19th, after a series of amendments the Senate approved H. Con. Res. 71, a concurrent resolution establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2018 and setting budgetary levels for fiscal years 2019 through 2027. The proposed budget significantly reduces non-defense discretionary spending, which would likely require cuts to transit Capital Investment Grants, TIGER, and passenger rail programs. The Senate-passed budget must now be reconciled with the budget approved by the House on October 5th. Both chambers must pass identical budgets to utilize reconciliation (a process by which legislation only needs 51 votes in the Senate) to approve tax reform. T4America will provide updates as the House and Senate work to approve a final FY18 budget. It is important to note, however, that additional budget legislation will be necessary to raise the sequester caps set in the Budget Control Act, allowing Congress to complete its FY18 appropriations work.

Senate Environment and Public Works Reschedules Vote on FHWA Nominee

The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee postponed an October 18th meeting during which it was planning to vote on Paul Trombino’s nomination to be FHWA Administrator. T4America has been informed that postponing the meeting was unrelated to Mr. Trombino’s nomination. This meeting has been rescheduled for this Wednesday, October 25th and we expect his nomination to be approved.

House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Holds Infrastructure Hearing

On October 11th, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s Subcommittee on Highways and Transit held a hearing entitled: “Building a 21st Century Infrastructure for America: Highway and Transit Stakeholders’ Perspectives”. You can watch the full hearing here. In a wide-ranging hearing, the panel of witnesses discussed a variety of issues important to the transportation community. Witnesses and Members agreed on the importance of a long-term solution to the solvency of the highway trust fund. Republicans on the Committee were focused on alternatives to funding the trust fund beside the gas tax. Democrats on the Committee expressed frustration that there have been several hearings about the importance of a long term solution to the trust fund but the Committee has not marked up, or held hearings on, legislation that would raise more funding for the highway trust fund.

Mr. Peter Rogoff, Chief Executive Officer, Sound Transit made a forceful case for transit investment and noted how the President’s budget and House appropriations package actually cuts transit funding, especially the Capital Investment Grant program, and would harm communities like Seattle that have raised billions in local funds for transit investments with the understanding that the Federal government would match the local commitment.

This hearing is part of an effort to prepare Congress to develop an infrastructure package. T4America will provide additional updates as the Administration and Congress work on this issue.

Recent Federal Activity Summary – Week of October 9th

As a valued member, Transportation for America is dedicated to providing you the latest information and developments around federal policy. This dedication includes in-depth summaries of what is going on in Congress and the U.S. Department of Transportation (U.S. DOT). Check out what you may have missed these past two weeks in Congress and at U.S. DOT.

President and Congressional Leaders Release Tax Reform Proposal

On September 27th, the Trump Administration, the House Committee on Ways and Means, and the Senate Committee on Finance released what they call the “Unified Framework for Fixing Our Broken Tax Code”. The full framework is available here, and a one-page overview is available here. The proposal would eliminate many tax benefits, including the commuter transit benefit. In 2016, federal law was changed to establish permanent parity between the transit benefit and parking benefit, raising the cap on transit and vanpool benefits to $255.

Tax reform efforts are focused on eliminating many provisions of the tax code, including transportation fringe benefits that cover parking, transit, and vanpools. T4America is concerned that, under the recently released framework, the commuter benefit is at risk of disappearing for good. Eliminating this benefit will end a critical incentive to take transit to and from work, taking money from transit systems already struggling to maintain a state of good repair. T4America will keep you updated as Congress moves forward with this process.

House and Senate Advance FY18 Budgets

The Process: The President submits the President’s Budget Request (PBR) to Congress in the spring. Soon thereafter, the House and Senate Budget Committee’s develop budgets that may or may not be informed by the PBR. Before Congress can consider the 12 appropriations bills that fund the entire federal government, it must first approve a budget. The Congressional budget sets the funding allocations for each of the 12 appropriations bills, allowing the appropriations committees to begin work on the bills. For FY18, the Congressional leadership has chosen to add “reconciliation instructions” to the budget. This is a special process, under which a bill can pass with without a filibuster, using only a majority vote in the Senate (as opposed to the traditional 60 votes). The FY18 budget will include instructions to approve comprehensive tax reform using this process. Passage of an FY18 budget allows Congress to complete its FY18 appropriations work.

The House: On October 5th, the House approved H. Con. Res. 71 — “Establishing the congressional budget for the United States Government for fiscal year 2018 and setting forth the appropriate budgetary levels for fiscal years 2019 through 2027” by a vote of 219-206. H.Con.Res.71 cuts transportation funding, including cuts to Amtrak’s long distance routes, transit, TIGER, New and Small Starts, bike and pedestrian funding, and many other priorities.

The Senate: On September 29th, Senate Budget Committee Chairman Enzi (R-WY) released his FY18 budget. The proposed budget reduces non-defense discretionary spending by $632 billion. This would have a significant negative impact on our transportation programs. The Committee marked up and approved the budget on October 4th and 5th. The full Senate will now consider the budget in the coming weeks.

T4America will provide additional analysis of the House and Senate budgets in the coming weeks.

Senate Environment and Public Works hearing on FHWA nominee

On October 5th, the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee held a Hearing on the Nomination of Paul Trombino III to be Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration. Mr. Trombino is the President of McClure Engineering and the former Director of the Iowa Department of Transportation.

Mr. Trombino has a history of public comments suggesting an openness to new ways of thinking about our nation’s highway system. T4America submitted suggested questions to the Committee to help prepare for the hearing. Chairman Barasso (R-WY), Ranking Member Carper (D-DE), and Members of the Committee focused their questions on the proposed infrastructure bill, project review and approval process, resilience, and Public Private Partnerships. Mr. Trombino stated he is not aware of the status of the proposed infrastructure package but that he will become aware and brief Congress should he be confirmed. On other issues, Mr. Trombino pledged to work to address Senators concerns.

Absent any additional and disqualifying information, T4America expects the EPW Committee to favorably report Mr. Trombino’s nomination to the full Senate.

Senate Commerce Committee Approves Autonomous Vehicle Legislation

On Friday, September 8, the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee approved held a markup to amend and vote on S. 1885, The American Vision for Safer Transportation through Advancement of Revolutionary Technologies (AV START) Act. The bill was approved by the Committee and will now be referred to the full Senate for further consideration. Despite some minor improvements, T4America remains concerned that this bill will preempt the ability of local governments to enforce their local traffic safety laws, potentially putting the public at risk. In addition, the bill does not provide the data-sharing framework necessary to ensure that local governments and law enforcement can adequately prepare for these vehicles.

Here’s the link to the statement T4America put out after the markup: https://t4america.org/2017/10/04/t4america-statement-senate-commerce-av-start-markup/.

What Happened at the Markup

There were 28 amendments offered during the Committee markup, a number of which were considered and approved en bloc, the result of an overnight deal. The full list of all approved amendments is available here: https://www.commerce.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/pressreleases?ID=BA5E2D29-2BF3-4FC7-A79D-58B9E186412C. T4America is analyzing the approved amendments and updated bill text and will continue to provide additional details.

For additional information, please see our previous policy update.

U.S. DOT Releases Proposal to Harmonize Environmental Reviews

At the end of September, US DOT released a supplemental notice of proposed rulemaking (SNPRM) that will harmonize to a much greater extent the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review for projects that need review from multiple U.S. DOT agencies. If you would like to submit comments to U.S. DOT about this regulation, comments are due to U.S. DOT on or before November 28th.

Under this SNPRM, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) will be added to the Federal Highways Administration (FHWA) and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) existing rules and regulations for NEPA reviews under part 771 and part 774 of title 23 of the Code of Federal regulations. The SNPRM proposes to make some changes to part 771 and 774 to account for some of the unique characteristics of rail projects.

This proposed change will ensure that a project undergoing NEPA review through multiple U.S. DOT agencies has one set of rules and regulations to follow. Currently, FRA’s NEPA review regulations are different than FHWA’s or FTA’s. Additionally, the proposed rule change ensures that a record of decision related to NEPA from one U.S. DOT agency is accepted by another U.S. DOT agency. Finally, U.S. DOT is proposing to require that the lead U.S. DOT agency designated to conduct the NEPA review must explicitly include in their NEPA coordination plan “participating agencies that are responsible for providing input within their agency’s special expertise or jurisdiction” and reach an agreement between the two agencies on the timeline for that secondary agency to provide their input. This requirement will ensure that necessary agencies have a chance to give their input with respect to the NEPA review but that there is a concrete timeline for that review to take place.

The practical effect is that as a result of this rulemaking, there should be a “single NEPA document that can be used for all Federal permits and reviews for a project to the maximum extent practicable and consistent with Federal law.” That should speed up environmental reviews without harming the intent of NEPA, leading to faster timelines for the construction infrastructure projects without causing environmental harm.

 

 

Statement from Transportation for America on House Passage of THUD Appropriations

press release

On Thursday, September 14, the House of Representatives passed H.R. 3354, the “Make America Secure and Prosperous Appropriations Act, 2018”, which contains the fiscal year 2018 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) appropriations. Beth Osborne, interim T4America director, issued the following response:

“We are disappointed and concerned that the House decided to move ahead with a bill that cuts federal appropriations for vital transportation programs, including the TIGER and transit Capital Investment Grant (CIG) Programs. Local governments and voters are investing their own dollars on innovative transportation, housing, and neighborhood revitalization projects but they need help from these vital federal programs to make these things happen. This spending bill pulls the rug out from under those communities.

“The House-passed THUD spending bill zeroes out funding for TIGER, a crucial program that gives local governments direct access to federal dollars for innovative projects. TIGER projects are overwhelmingly multimodal and multijurisdictional projects — like rail connections to ports, complete streets, passenger rail, and freight improvements — that are often challenging to fund through the underlying formula programs. In 2016, U.S. DOT received 585 applications totaling over $9.3 billion, reflecting an overwhelming demand across the country for the TIGER program. Through the first seven rounds of grant awards, each TIGER dollar brought in 3.5 non-federal dollars. Given the $500 million appropriated last year by Congress, that’s over $1.5 billion in other critical infrastructure spending that would likely be lost under this bill.

“This bill also appropriates no money for new transit investments through the Small Starts and New Starts programs. These programs provide federal matching funds for communities and regions that are taking the initiative and committing hefty sums of their own local dollars to build or expand transit systems. Without additional federal funding for transit construction, its likely that few, if any, new transit projects will be built.

“This appropriations bill ignores why communities need federal community development and transportation programs. It’s not just that they need money or innovative tools — which, for the record, they do. They also need a reliable partner who can support their work, not austerity measures that punish them for taking action. If the federal government quits being that reliable partner — which this appropriations bill absolutely implies — it will cause lasting damage to American communities and break the President and Congress’s promise to rebuild our nation’s infrastructure. These programs invest in communities across the country, improving mobility, security, and economic opportunity. Now is not the time to slash these investments.

“We urge the Senate to reject the disinvestment this bill represents and instead pass a bill that reinvests and rebuilds America for the future.”

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of September 8th

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 of Representatives on Friday cleared a short-term measure to avoid a government shutdown and raise the debt limit through December 8th, ratifying a deal President Trump struck with Democrats. (The Hill)
  • Earlier in the week, President Trump reached a deal with Senator Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi to provide Hurricane Harvey relief and raise the debt ceiling and extend government funding until December 8th. (Politico)
  • The House of Representatives began consideration of a package of 8 appropriations bills this week, including the Transportation and Housing and Urban Development (THUD) appropriations bill. (See T4America’s blog post and amendment tracker here)
  • The House of Representatives rejected a proposed amendment to the THUD appropriations bill that would have defunded Amtrak. (The Hill)
  • Because of Hurricane Irma, the House delayed final passage of the appropriations package until the week of September 11th. (Politico)
  • House Republicans still lack the votes to pass their draft House budget, putting at risk their efforts to pass tax reform. (The Hill)

House abdicates methodical policymaking for new regulations on automated vehicles

Congress has taken the first major legislative step to encourage & govern the roll-out of automated vehicles, passing the SELF DRIVE Act of 2017 by a voice vote today. Unfortunately, the House only consulted a narrow range of stakeholders like automakers and technology companies to produce this flawed legislation.

GoogleCar-selfdriving

House policymakers were eager to move quickly after facing heavy pressure from private sector groups like automakers, mobility providers (such as Uber or Lyft), and tech industry groups that are working on self-driving technology.

“This bill was produced quickly and voted upon in committee within hours of replacing the entire bill text with an amendment,” said T4America interim director Beth Osborne. “As a result, the unanimous subcommittee and committee votes are less about bipartisan agreement and more the product of a lack of interest in thoughtfully producing sound policy on a critical issue with the potential to reshape our towns, suburbs, and cities dramatically.”

“Without bringing mayors, city or state transportation officials, law enforcement, and others to the table, the House hastily legislated on an issue about which they’re poorly informed, with impacts that will be felt for decades primarily by people and groups who were never invited into the room,” Osborne said.

Cities aren’t opposed to producing legislation to govern how automated vehicles (AVs) operate on our streets — far from it.

But many are concerned by this rush to legislate without their input. They’re convinced of the long-term benefits that self-driving technologies could offer, but want a legislative framework that allows them to experiment, innovate and bring these new technologies to the market in their cities in flexible ways that help them meet other goals.

While no one wants to see a patchwork of regulations that stifle innovation, one of our primary concerns — and that of many of the cities — is that this legislation will preempt local authorities from managing their own streets and fail to give local leaders the confidence that manufacturers and operators will be aware of and follow local laws and regulations.

As written, depending on how certain terms are interpreted, any state and local laws could be at risk if they are found to be an “unreasonable restriction.” This vague language will almost certainly lead to costly legal battles to determine what that term even means when the rubber meets the road.

AVs absolutely need to be tested in real-world situations. But they also need to be tested in manner that ensures public safety and builds public confidence in the technology. Allowing huge levels of safety exemptions per manufacturer each year, increasing from the current level of 2,500, to 25,000 in the first year, up to 100,000 in just three years, is too much too fast. Especially considering that this technology is still very much in its infancy and these vehicles are likely to be clustered in urban centers and not evenly distributed.

What if three manufacturers all want to test the bulk of their vehicles in one or two cities? Shouldn’t federal safety watchdogs like the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have some role to play in assessing their safety along the way and deciding whether or not exemptions should increase based on actual results from testing?

When it comes to safety, cities (and others) also need access to the data on how these vehicles are performing on their own streets. While the bill does require manufacturers testing AVs to report all crashes to NHTSA, it doesn’t require data-sharing on disengagements, near misses or other vehicle movement, safety, and performance indicators. There are also no requirements to share any data with cities, states, academics or relevant parties such as safety advocates for independent review and wouldn’t be subject to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) either.

This legislation ensures that no one other than the private companies doing the testing will be able to learn anything from the massive amounts of data produced by the tests. In order to create more hospitable conditions for all modes of travel, especially AVs, cities and states need these data to inform and optimize their planning, policymaking and operations to prepare for the coming wave of automation.

It’s important that Congress take this issue more seriously and bring all the stakeholders together to produce thoughtful legislation that balances the needs of private industry with the public’s desire for safety, transparency, and improved mobility.

The next step will be a Senate version of the bill and we’re eager to work with them and bring cities to the table to produce something stronger than the House’s first attempt.

House making final decisions on cuts to TIGER, transit construction & rail this week

With the current federal transportation budget expiring at the end of this month, this week the House is considering a handful of amendments and taking a final vote on the 2018 fiscal year budget. Up for debate are amendments that could improve — or further damage — the House’s already problematic transportation budget for 2018.

With the September 30th deadline rapidly approaching, appropriations committees in both the House and Senate have been debating and setting funding levels for transportation programs for next year, including the discretionary programs that the Trump administration has targeted for cuts (i.e., those not funded by the Highway Trust Fund.)

While the Senate largely rejected the Trump administration’s request for cuts to programs like TIGER, new transit construction, and passenger rail programs (read our detailed breakdown of the current House/Senate bills here), the House’s version of the 2018 budget eliminated TIGER funding and reduced the transit capital program down near levels that would only fund transit projects that already have signed funding agreements in hand.

This week the House is scheduled to consider their final House Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) appropriations bill, and there are crucial amendments that could improve the bill by restoring funding for some of these programs — or make the damage far worse.

We’re asking T4America supporters to take action and send a message to their representatives this week urging them to protect and preserve the TIGER competitive grant program, funding for new transit construction, and passenger rail programs that keep towns and cities of all sizes connected to one another. It’s important that the House pass a bill with robust funding for these programs to set their starting point for negotiations with the Senate on the final product.

 

TAKE ACTION

 

Read about the amendments that we’ll be watching closely in the tracker below. Feel free to include information on these amendments as you send emails or make phone calls to your reps, and follow along on Twitter @t4america for updates as the debate begins this week. (Some of these amendments may be rejected by the House Rules Committee before they reach the floor — they are expected to only allow a few amendments for full floor consideration.)

Logged-in T4America members can read our detailed summary of the House THUD appropriations bill and vote below.

[member_content]Members can read T4America’s full members-only memo here.[/member_content]

NumberSponsorDescriptionOutcome
7Maxine Waters (D-CA)Provides $7.5 billion for the TIGER program. Ruled out of order
8Maxine Waters (D-CA)Provides $550 million for the TIGER program, includes the current TIGER project eligibility criteria, specifically requires the Secretary to award the funds using the 2016 NOFO criteria, and requires that the Secretary distributes the grants 225 days after the enactment of the bill. Ruled out of order
13Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) Provides $500 million for the TIGER program. Ruled out of order
66Rod Blum (R-IA)Provides $200 million for the TIGER program and reduces HUD tenant rental assistance by $200 million as an offset. Ruled out of order
46Mark Amodei (R-NV)Requires the Secretary of Transportation to continue administering the current transit Capital Investment Grant Program and enter into a grant agreement with any Small Starts project that has satisfied the current eligibility requirements. Ruled out of order
38Darren Soto (D-FL)Increases the amount of funding for Small Starts funding by $48 million and decreases funding for intercity passenger rail projects by the same amount as an offset. Withdrawn
48Mo Brooks (R-AL)Eliminates funding for Amtrak's National Network only.Failed by a vote of 128-293
50Mo Brooks (R-AL)Eliminates both the funding for Amtrak's Northeast corridor and Amtrak's National Network.Ruled out of order
51Mo Brooks (R-AL)Eliminates funding for Amtrak's Northeast Corridor onlyRuled out of order
54Jim Himes (D-CT)Increases funding for Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor account by $30 million and decreases essential air service funding by $30 million as an offset. Ruled out of order
83Ted Budd (R-NC)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.Failed by a vote of 159-260
78Al Green (D-TX)Restores $250,000 in funding for the Department of Transportation Office of Civil Rights and reduces U.S. DOT salary and expenses by $250,000 as an offset.Ruled out of order

TIGER amendments

T4America supports 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 traditional, narrow formula programs. However, T4America opposes paying for a TIGER program by cutting other necessary programs like the HUD tenant rental assistance program. Recent appropriations bills show that there is enough resources to sufficiently fund both of these two important programs.

Transit construction grants

T4America supports legislative language that increases the likelihood that the transit capital 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. T4America opposes proposals to offset funding for Small Starts by taking money from intercity passenger rail.

Passenger rail

T4America opposes eliminating funding for passenger rail, which is crucial to the economy vitality of our nation and communities across our country. The full 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 that congested corridor every year. Not only does it take cars off our congested roadways, benefiting train and road users alike, but 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.

T4America opposes cutting funding from the Essential Air Service program to pay for the Northeast Corridor. While rail funding is important to the urban communities along the corridor and our nation’s economy as a whole, we need both and T4America opposes amendments that pit one infrastructure priority against another.

Stories You May Have Missed – Week of September 1st

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.

  • “President Trump’s infrastructure package will be broken up into three pieces, with the largest chunk of funding dedicated to projects that already have some private or local money secured.” (The Hill)
  • “Trump infrastructure package could be stretched too thin.” (The Hill)
  • “White House wants to help states, cities offload infrastructure.” (Reuters)
  • The House of Representatives will vote on automated vehicle legislation next week. (Reuters)
  • “Governing Examines How Better Bus Service Became ‘“The Hottest Trend In Transit.”’ (Governing, via Streetsblog)
  • A coalition has formed to support Nashville Mayor Megan Barry’s proposed transit referendum in 2018. (Tennessean)

The House takes its first crack at automated vehicle legislation

As self-driving technology advances toward becoming an everyday fixture in our lives, Congress is beginning to consider regulations to govern how they’ll be tested, how they’ll operate and how to ensure they’ll be safe for everyone. But are they taking the right approach?

Uber’s self-driving pilot program in Pittsburgh. Flickr photo by zombieite.

The House Subcommittee on Digital Commerce and Consumer Protection last week produced what they hope becomes the first federal law on automated vehicle testing and regulation, combining 14 bills that were introduced after a hearing in late June into one bill.

Legislators have been under tremendous pressure from the private sector (like automakers, for example), who say that legislation is necessary to increase safety, avoid a patchwork of state regulations and streamline, not stifle, innovation. While cities are generally both supportive and convinced of the long-term benefits that self-driving technologies could offer, many cities are also concerned by this rush to legislate without their input, potentially losing the ability to regulate their own roads, the lack of data provided by the private sector, the short-term threat to safety, and a lack of focus on long-term impacts to equity, the environment, congestion, land-use and a host of other critical issues.

What’s in the bill?

Among other things, the draft bill contained provisions that would:

  • Pre-empt cities and states from regulating the “design, construction, mechanical systems, hardware and software systems, or communications systems” of highly automated vehicles.
  • Allow automakers to self-certify the safety of both the vehicle and its software without an independent reviewer.
  • Increase the number of NHTSA exemptions to test automated vehicles on public roads from 2,500 to 100,000 vehicles per manufacturer.
  • Create an advisory council that would be devoid of any representation from cities, MPOs or states to study and advise on the effects of this technology.
  • Allow manufacturers and operators to keep secret “…situational information related to any testing or deployment event.”

What are our concerns?

While the bill addressed some of the most critical issues, much of the language lacked specificity and failed to consider the needs of local communities or the long-term impacts of this technology.

Members of our Smart Cities Collaborative were concerned. So last week, we partnered with the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO), National League of Cities (NLC), Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and other organizations to oppose the legislation as it was introduced.

We traveled to Capitol Hill to share our concerns directly with members of the committee and offer alternative language and amendments. Here are some of the specific changes we were seeking:

  • Clarify pre-emption language in order to guarantee that local communities will retain control of their streets.
  • Reduce the number of possible exemptions from 100,000 to a figure that cities and states can safely manage on their streets. We suggested 5,000 was a reasonable increase.
  • Require that the advisory council contain representatives from local governments (including states, MPOs and urban and rural communities) to participate in the conversation alongside the private sector.
  • Establish a third-party repository of data that’s accessible to cities, states, academics and safety advocates on the operational and safety performance of any automated vehicle granted a safety exemption for testing.

After a week of meetings and outreach from cities, states and other organizations, the committee released a substitute amendment last week that compromised on or addressed many of these concerns, improving the bill from the original version. This substituted version (H.R. 3388) was unanimously approved by the the Energy and Commerce Committee last Thursday and is headed to the House floor.

While legislators did improve the bill, much more needs to be done to ensure that the testing and deployment of automated vehicles are not just safe, but helps to drive cities and states towards the long-term outcomes they’re striving for.

What’s next?

As this bill continues to evolve in the House and as the Senate develops and releases its own bill (maybe as soon as this week), it will be important to continue pushing for changes to ensure that local governments can manage their roads effectively and provide the data and information to do so, and to guarantee that cities are proactively guiding the national conversation around the deployment of automated vehicles:

  • Ensure that data is shared and publicly available. The legislation increases the number of vehicles that can be tested on our streets, but fails to offer local governments (or anyone) access to data on their operation or performance. This is critical to assess vehicle safety as well as understand the policy and planning decisions necessary for full deployment.
  • Require a seat at the table for the public sector. State and local officials are permitted to be on the advisory councils, but that’s not enough. They need to be guaranteed representation. Congress cannot let the private sector drive this discussion on their own.
  • Stronger definitions and language. Much of the bill’s language is vague, open to multiple interpretations and has loopholes. For example, current language prevents a manufacturer from selling an automated vehicle, but does not address whether the company could use all 25,000-100,000 of their exempted vehicles in a commercially based “testing scenario,” such as how Waymo or Uber have operating in Arizona and Pennsylvania. Given the scale of the exemptions, these loopholes need to be clarified immediately.

We’ll continue tracking this legislation and this issue overall as it progresses, so stay tuned.

Copy this tactic: Community Transit defends program by using unexpected voices

Last week, I visited with T4A’s members and partners in the Puget Sound region. In the time of “skinny budgets” and tenuous federal support for transit, it was encouraging to hear from local elected officials, advocates and transit agencies on how they’re progressing despite federal (and in their case state) uncertainty.

On the federal level, this region will be among the hardest hit if Congress declines to fund the capital improvement program, with more than $2 billion in federal New Starts investments at risk. These projects include:

  • $1.17 billion for the Lynnwood Link Extension
  • up to $720 million for the Federal Way Link Extension
  • $75 million for the Seattle Streetcar Center City Connector
  • $75 million for Tacoma Link Expansion
  • $43 million for Swift II BRT in Everett
  • $61 million for Madison Street Corridor Bus Rapid Transit in Seattle

These numbers don’t include the threats to passenger rail service or to TIGER.

Rather than throw their hands up in frustration, Community Transit, a T4America member, is using this as an opportunity to tell the story about the economic and job benefits of their Swift bus rapid transit line. We are seeing more and more transit agencies talk not just about the direct benefits they provide to their community, but also the upstream jobs that are created…whether the buses they buy are manufactured in Everett, Washington or St. Cloud, Minnesota.

Community Transit’s Swift Green Line Infographic

Copy this tactic: Including suppliers and engaging your entire supply chain gives you the ability to reach other decision-makers that you may not otherwise have access to. It builds your advocate tent and adds unexpected voices to your issue.

For example, when Community Transit gives this powerful piece of information to one of their members of Congress, Rick Larsen, a Democrat…he can advocate to Tom Emmer, the Republican Member of Congress from St. Cloud. Additionally, their bus manufacturer can advocate to Rep. Emmer directly. This is just one way to show leaders how transportation is truly a bipartisan issue.

T4America continues to find stories like these to use in our work and highlight what’s working. If you have similar stories that you’d like to share with us, please send them our way. We want to know!

A large congressional delegation asks USDOT to improve the proposed congestion rule

Updated 7/28 11:50 a.m. Earlier this week, a large group of senators and representatives sent a letter to USDOT Secretary Foxx, requesting that USDOT change a flawed proposed rule for measuring congestion. They asked that USDOT assess the movement of people, rather than vehicles, as a better measure of congestion and also reward the improvements that can come from transit, toll lanes, or encouraging travelers to choose other options like walking or biking.

Congestion Buses 2

As we’ve been discussing here for a few months now, a new draft rule from USDOT will govern how states and metro areas will have to measure and address congestion. That proposal as written would define “success” in incredibly outdated ways, and old measures lead to old “solutions,” like prioritizing fast driving speeds above all other modes of transportation and their associated benefits.

The shortcomings in the proposed rule got the attention of some members of Congress, and earlier this week Senators Tom Carper (D-DE) and Bob Menendez (D-NJ) and Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) were joined by 64 other members from the House and Senate on a letter to Secretary Foxx about the rule. (19 senators and 48 representatives total.)

From the (Senate) letter: (pdf)

“How we measure performance and outcomes directly affects the choice of investments that will be made. If we focus, as this proposed rule does, on keeping traffic moving at high speeds at all times of day on all types of roads and streets, then the result is easy to predict: States and MPOs will prioritize investments to increase average speeds for cars, at the expense of goals to provide safe, reliable, environmentally-sensitive, multimodal transportation options for all users of the transportation system, despite those goals being stated in federal statute. Encouraging faster speeds on roadways undermines the safety of roads for all road users, as well as the economic vitality of our communities.”

We’re encouraged to see this large group of elected leaders on board with the idea that how we measure congestion matters. It certainly matters for the communities — of all sizes — that they represent, and getting it wrong will have real impacts. In the letter, they note that the proposed rule doesn’t quite line up with some of the stated goals of Secretary Foxx, his Ladders of Opportunity program, and the Every Place Counts Challenge intended to help communities and neighborhoods that have been cut off or isolated by poorly-planned highway projects.

Yet, for far too long our transportation investments have focused solely on moving vehicles through a community rather than to a community, and without regard for the impacts to the community. In the process we have created real barriers for millions of Americans to access essential destinations. These barriers are most present for low-income communities and communities of color.

Nail on the head.

Our streets are about far more than just moving people through a community as fast as possible. They’re community assets and the framework for creating value and economic prosperity, and should be treated like more than just a simple pipe moving one thing quickly all day long.

Note: the House letter is here (pdf)

UPDATE: Representative Earl Blumenauer added his personal thoughts to the release of the letter:

Our federal highway system is stuck in the 1950s. By failing to properly evaluate the billions we spend on road maintenance and construction, we’ve created a transportation system that is unsafe, is increasingly harming the environment despite improving technology, and has left a legacy of racial exclusion and segmented communities.  We have to do better. The Department of Transportation has an opportunity to make sure that federal spending can help meet our goals of safety, sustainability, and accessibility. I hope these comments are considered.

And in case you missed it, Senator Tom Carper also wrote a short note about the congestion rule for the T4America newsletter yesterday. (Don’t get our bi-weekly newsletter? Rectify that immediately by signing up right here.)

Our federal transportation system’s ability to move people and goods is key to an efficient and growing economy, which is why it’s critical for the Department of Transportation to focus on the movement of people instead of vehicles in its congestion relief measures. In order to improve the safety of our roads, and build a world-class transportation system that revitalizes our regional economies, we need to invest in innovative congestion relief techniques that facilitate the movement of people without encouraging faster speeds or incentivizing costly highway expansions. 

Have you sent a letter to USDOT yet? There’s still time to generate a letter that we’ll deliver on your behalf before the comment period closes in a few weeks. We’ve already delivered 2,400 letters, but we’re aiming for far more.

Send yours today.

T4A Advisory Board Member testifies before Congress on the power of passenger rail as an economic catalyst

The success of Uptown Normal’s (IL) multimodal station as a catalyst for redevelopment was center stage as Normal Mayor Chris Koos testified before the House Oversight Committee last week.

Normal, Illinois' Uptown Station project represents what can happen when the local leaders behind an ambitious vision are able gain access to the resources needed to bring that vision to life.

The Town of Normal is located on the 284-mile Chicago-to-St. Louis passenger rail corridor, which received federal support to increase service, reliability and speed (up to 110 miles per hour). Additional federal support was paired with state and local resources to build a brand new multimodal station to replace an old, dilapidated Amtrak station in downtown (they call it “Uptown”) Normal, Illinois.

That new multimodal station has been the anchor of a new economic boom in Uptown Normal. (Read T4America’s more detailed profile of Normal’s can-do aspirations and the multimodal station here.)

While years of tireless work by local officials to make the station a reality were fundamental for success, it wouldn’t have happened without support from federal transportation programs.

That support primarily came through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s TIGER grant program. The House Committee on Oversight’s Subcommittee on Transportation and Public Assets, in its role as overseer of the federal government, held a hearing on July 14th titled Lagging Behind: the State of High Speed Rail in the United States to cover the success and failures of the federal high-speed passenger rail program.

Mayor Koos congress hearing oversight

Normal Mayor Chris Koos is seated at the far right of the dais. Photo courtesy of Brad Tucker, CHG & Associates.

Mayor Koos joined the witness bench alongside Federal Railroad Administrator Sarah Feinberg, and others. While there were a range of opinions about the overall success of the federal government’s high-speed rail program, everyone in the room made it clear that our nation’s passenger rail system is an important asset for this country and we should do more to improve and expand the network where appropriate.

The “only Normal mayor in America” was greeted with friendly introductions led by his hometown Representative Rodney Davis (R-IL) and the ranking member of the subcommittee, Tammy Duckworth (D-IL). Rep. Davis has firsthand knowledge of the success of Uptown Normal station and its surrounding development, as his congressional district office is located in the Uptown Normal government building.

Mayor Chris Koos Rep. Rodney Davis

T4America advisory board member Mayor Chris Koos with Representative Rodney Davis (R-IL) at last week’s hearing.

Transportation-oriented development has been integral for Normal as the city “has experienced growth, but a lot of that growth has been centered around the infrastructure,” cited Rep. Davis.

None of this would have been possible without a $22 million TIGER grant received in 2010. The previous station was inadequate and ill-equipped for the ridership demand, leading to the station’s unfortunate moniker of “Amshack” that was bestowed upon it by many residents over the years.

This all changed with the completion of Normal Illinois’ Uptown multimodal station in 2012. All told, the $49.5 million project received $22 million from TIGER, $10.6 million in additional federal funding and more than $13 million in state and local contributions.

The public funding has spurred significant private investment in the Uptown Station area.

“Thus far, public investment of approximately $85 million in federal, state, and local monies in the transportation arena has generated over $150 million in private investment in the Uptown district,” Mayor Koos told the subcommittee last week. An additional $45 million in private investment is planned.

“Uptown Normal is now a vibrant neighborhood with residential, commercial, and entertainment opportunities. Local transit ridership is up 34 percent and transit oriented development continues to abound,” Mayor Koos said.

Normal’s success doesn’t have to be so rare.

Predictable funding for TIGER and passenger rail programs provide great economic benefit for cities large and small. The FAST Act took great strides by including the passenger rail title in the transportation authorization for the first time. Yet, because these programs are entirely discretionary, their funding is in question every year during the annual appropriations fight.

Mayor Koos provided the House Oversight Committee a glimpse into what is possible with a strong federal, state, local and private partnership, and we hope the members of the committee will work across the aisle to provide more communities the opportunity to follow in the transportation footsteps of Normal.

T4A Advisory Board Member testifies before Congress on the power of passenger rail as an economic catalyst

The success of Uptown Normal’s (IL) multimodal station as a catalyst for redevelopment was center stage as Normal Mayor Chris Koos testified before the House Oversight Committee last week.

Normal, Illinois' Uptown Station project represents what can happen when the local leaders behind an ambitious vision are able gain access to the resources needed to bring that vision to life.

The Town of Normal is located on the 284-mile Chicago-to-St. Louis passenger rail corridor, which received federal support to increase service, reliability and speed (up to 110 miles per hour). Additional federal support was paired with state and local resources to build a brand new multimodal station to replace an old, dilapidated Amtrak station in downtown (they call it “Uptown”) Normal, Illinois.

That new multimodal station has been the anchor of a new economic boom in Uptown Normal. (Read T4America’s more detailed profile of Normal’s can-do aspirations and the multimodal station here.)

While years of tireless work by local officials to make the station a reality were fundamental for success, it wouldn’t have happened without support from federal transportation programs.

That support primarily came through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s TIGER grant program. The House Committee on Oversight’s Subcommittee on Transportation and Public Assets, in its role as overseer of the federal government, held a hearing on July 14th titled Lagging Behind: the State of High Speed Rail in the United States to cover the success and failures of the federal high-speed passenger rail program.

Mayor Koos congress hearing oversight

Normal Mayor Chris Koos is seated at the far right of the dais. Photo courtesy of Brad Tucker, CHG & Associates.

Mayor Koos joined the witness bench alongside Federal Railroad Administrator Sarah Feinberg, and others. While there were a range of opinions about the overall success of the federal government’s high-speed rail program, everyone in the room made it clear that our nation’s passenger rail system is an important asset for this country and we should do more to improve and expand the network where appropriate.

The “only Normal mayor in America” was greeted with friendly introductions led by his hometown Representative Rodney Davis (R-IL) and the ranking member of the subcommittee, Tammy Duckworth (D-IL). Rep. Davis has firsthand knowledge of the success of Uptown Normal station and its surrounding development, as his congressional district office is located in the Uptown Normal government building.

Mayor Chris Koos Rep. Rodney Davis

T4America advisory board member Mayor Chris Koos with Representative Rodney Davis (R-IL) at last week’s hearing.

Transportation-oriented development has been integral for Normal as the city “has experienced growth, but a lot of that growth has been centered around the infrastructure,” cited Rep. Davis.

None of this would have been possible without a $22 million TIGER grant received in 2010. The previous station was inadequate and ill-equipped for the ridership demand, leading to the station’s unfortunate moniker of “Amshack” that was bestowed upon it by many residents over the years.

This all changed with the completion of Normal Illinois’ Uptown multimodal station in 2012. All told, the $49.5 million project received $22 million from TIGER, $10.6 million in additional federal funding and more than $13 million in state and local contributions.

The public funding has spurred significant private investment in the Uptown Station area.

“Thus far, public investment of approximately $85 million in federal, state, and local monies in the transportation arena has generated over $150 million in private investment in the Uptown district,” Mayor Koos told the subcommittee last week. An additional $45 million in private investment is planned.

“Uptown Normal is now a vibrant neighborhood with residential, commercial, and entertainment opportunities. Local transit ridership is up 34 percent and transit oriented development continues to abound,” Mayor Koos said.

Normal’s success doesn’t have to be so rare.

Predictable funding for TIGER and passenger rail programs provide great economic benefit for cities large and small. The FAST Act took great strides by including the passenger rail title in the transportation authorization for the first time. Yet, because these programs are entirely discretionary, their funding is in question every year during the annual appropriations fight.

Mayor Koos provided the House Oversight Committee a glimpse into what is possible with a strong federal, state, local and private partnership, and we hope the members of the committee will work across the aisle to provide more communities the opportunity to follow in the transportation footsteps of Normal.

After years of trying to slash funding, the House proposes solid funding for next round of TIGER grants

After several years of consistently trying to cut or outright eliminate the program’s funding entirely, House appropriators last week approved $450 million for competitive TIGER grants within the annual budget bill for all transportation and housing programs.

Perhaps the House got the message delivered back in March?

Over 170 elected officials and local, civic and business leaders from 45 U.S. states today sent a letter to congressional appropriators urging them to provide at least $500 million for another round of TIGER competitive transportation grants as well as the full amount authorized in last year’s FAST Act for new transit construction. As Congress begins to craft the transportation budget for the 2017 fiscal year, the 170-plus local leaders of all stripes, representing an incredible diversity of places, sent a powerful message that opportunities provided by TIGER and FTA’s New Starts program are crucial to their long-term success.

While they fell short of the mark set in this year’s Senate spending bill of $525 million, the House seems to be coming around on TIGER, which is terrific news.

Overall, the House Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) bill would provide $19.2 billion for the discretionary programs that include TIGER grants, New Starts transit construction and Amtrak, which on the whole, represents an increase of $540 million compared to the current year. Though it would provide $75 million less than the Senate’s funding level for TIGER grants, at $450 million, it represents a big change from just three years ago when the proposed House THUD bill contained zero funding for TIGER. And at least once, the House tried to restrict TIGER funding only to highway projects, leaving the huge number of smart multimodal projects that normally apply out in the cold.

The New Starts transit construction program would receive a significant boost at $2.5 billion total, which is $160 million more than what’s called for by the FAST Act and $320 million more than last year.

What’s the TIGER program?

The fiercely competitive TIGER program is one of the few ways that local communities of almost any size can directly receive federal dollars for their priority transportation projects, and represents one of the most fiscally responsible transportation programs administered by USDOT.

Unlike the overwhelming majority of all federal transportation dollars that are awarded via formulas to ensure that all states or metro areas get a share, regardless of how they’re going to spend those dollars, the federal government has found a smart way to use a small amount of money to incentivize the best projects possible through TIGER. Projects vying for funding compete against each other on their merits to ensure that each dollar is spent in the most effective way possible.  It’s a roadmap to a more efficient way to spend transportation dollars that spurs innovation, stretches federal transportation dollars further than in conventional formula programs, and awards funding to projects that provide a high-return on investment.

Why isn’t the funding guaranteed by the FAST Act?

TIGER, in addition to Amtrak funding and the program used for almost all new transit expansion, are not guaranteed funding each year from the highway trust fund. Unlike federal highway and transit formula programs, these programs have to go before appropriators in Congress each year who decide how much to give each program, resulting in this same debate nearly every year. (An attempt to provide dedicated annual funding for TIGER in the FAST Act failed during negotiations over that bill.)

While this House budget is indeed good news, just like the Senate’s version passed several weeks ago, it could face a shaky path forward. President Obama issued a veto threat to the Senate bill due to the potential for “problematic ideological provisions” included in the bill, including a Senate provision to relax hours-of-service rules for truckers that the House also includes similar language on.

Though it’s unlikely that the House and Senate will complete this budget bill before the October 1 deadline, as in past years, the content of the House and Senate transportation funding bills are incredibly important. They form the starting point for the debate and will likely be consolidated at some point early in the upcoming fiscal year.

Read more about a policy provision also included in this House budget, which instructs USDOT to begin measuring how transportation investments will connect all Americans to opportunity and essential daily needs such as jobs, schools, healthcare, food and others.

House transportation spending bill takes unprecedented steps to increase access to opportunity for all Americans

President Obama releases robust final budget; summary included

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

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

Read a more detailed analysis here.

Help make TIGER roar in this year’s budget

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Think FAST – the good, the bad and the ugly in Congress’ new five-year transportation bill

For the first time in a decade, Congress is on the cusp of passing a five-year transportation authorization bill that will carry us into the next decade. Though we await final floor votes and the President’s signature, it will almost certainly be approved in a matter of days. So how does the bill stack up against the pressing needs of our country? Here’s the good, the bad, and the ugly of the FAST Act.

While the final bill has changed only slightly from the separate versions passed by the House and the Senate since July, we’re going to take a slightly different tack than our usual “ten things you need to know,” and break this bill up into the good, the bad, and the ugly.

T4America members can find a link to our full detailed memo with funding tables below,

[member_content]

Read and download the full members-only summary of the five-year FAST Act.

Note: This and all other bill summaries also live under the “legislative content” tab within the members-only portal.[/member_content]

The good

Preserves stable funding for transportation over five years
While this bill falls far short of meeting any financial sustainability test, it is nonetheless remarkable that Congress is about to pass a five-year bill with no cuts to overall funding levels — including funding for public transportation, which was targeted for outright removal by the House in 2012. The FAST Act provides a slight plus-up in funding over MAP-21 levels (estimated at about $10 billion over the life of the bill) by authorizing $230 billion for highways, $60 billion for public transportation, $10 billion for passenger rail and $5 billion for highway safety programs. While this bill will put a five-year hold on devolutionists calling for ending the federal program outright and dumping all the responsibility on cash-strapped states and metro areas, this “fully funded” bill comes at a steep cost in general fund revenues (that could be used elsewhere, remember) and a number of significant, innovative and locally-driven proposals that were left on the cutting room floor — which we’ll cover further down.

More support for smart transit-oriented development projects
Due in part to the hard work of T4America, Smart Growth America and LOCUS over the last year, transit-oriented development projects will be eligible for the low-interest TIFIA and RRIF federal financing programs. The small pilot program of TOD planning grants was also preserved; grants that help communities make the best use of land around transit lines and stops, efficiently locate jobs and affordable housing near new transit stations, and boost ridership.

Authorization for passenger rail is in the surface authorization for the first time
While the bill does far too little for truly making our system multimodal and making greater investments in more transportation options, it takes a positive step by bringing passenger rail into the larger surface transportation authorization for the first time ever. (This was typically passed as a standalone bill and Congress usually had little impetus for quick action.) Passenger rail will still have to go through the general appropriation process each year (getting started now for FY16, if you’ve been following along) to get their funding, but this positions it well for the long-term hope: including and funding passenger rail with guaranteed funds from a multimodal, 21st century transportation trust fund in the years ahead.

A (slight) increase in funding for metropolitan regions
Though the final product was far short of what we had been pushing for, local governments will receive slightly more money to invest in their priority projects, with an increase in what’s known as suballocated funds by 1 percent per year of the bill, up to 55 percent in 2020. Unfortunately, this bill does nothing to give smaller communities under 200,000 in population any more control over how these funds are spent in their areas — the state will retain authority and can continue to choose to ignore local needs. Overall, funding directed to local communities is an improvement over MAP-21, but the funding and especially the control over those dollars still falls far short of what we need. (More on this below.)

Locals have greater access to low-cost federal loans
To apply for a TIFIA loan today, the total project cost has to be over $50 million, which makes it difficult or impossible for the projects in places that aren’t our biggest metro areas to receive funds. Our colleagues at LOCUS worked with other partners to get the threshold successfully lowered to $10 million, which opens the door to a wider range of project types in communities of all sizes, including complete streets, urban street retrofits, trails and other low-cost projects that are often the highest priority for local communities.

Safer streets for all users
Working alongside our colleagues at the National Complete Streets Coalition, we were successful in winning the requirement that state DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) consider all users of the roadways when designing and building projects. Further, we were able to include a provision in the bill that allows local governments to use the street design manuals of their preference (like the NACTO guide) and preempt their state DOT’s design manual for locally constructed projects. Far too often, local governments are working hard to develop complete, safe streets, but are stymied by their state DOT’s desire to maintain fast speeds and wide lanes at the expense of other people who need to use the street and would benefit from narrower lanes, safe bike lanes or wider sidewalks.

The bad

Very little for innovation
In a world where demographic and technological change is upending the transportation industry, the FAST Act does alarmingly little to advance innovation. Despite a few glimmers of hope such as a new $60 million advanced technology deployment fund, the remainder of the bill is remarkably silent on how and where technological innovation can help improve mobility and accessibility. Even smaller changes to make car-sharing eligible for federal funds failed to get included in the bill, and Congress has even made it tougher for states to advance innovative tolling ideas as means of both managing traffic and raising new revenue.

No new performance measures
MAP-21 took a cautious first step into developing a system of measuring the performance of our transportation investments, but this bill generally refuses to continue that progress. Specifically, Congress missed an opportunity to include a new measure that would improve accessibility and measure how investments affect residents’ access to jobs and opportunity. A new national goal and performance measure was included in the House version by Reps. Waters and Carson (supported by many of their colleagues) that would require USDOT to develop a new performance measure on accessibility for urban disadvantaged populations. The conference stripped this provision.

No increase in accountability or transparency
The House and Senate shot down any and all provisions to improve accountability and transparency for the current way by which public agencies select projects, a process that the public feels is murky, mysterious, and overly political. At a time when Congress needs to take steps to restore taxpayer confidence in the system, we’ve preserved a system that wastes billions annually and fails to improve the experience of the traveling public or improve accessibility and quality of life for all Americans.

Funding for biking and walking preserved, but capped over the life of the bill
While the small but popular Transportation Alternatives Program that helps states and local communities build safe routes for biking or walking wasn’t eliminated, it’s one of the few programs where funding doesn’t grow with the overall increases in bill — it’s capped at $850 million. A new provision was included that will allow large metro areas to “flex” away half of this program to any other project they choose, so some decision-makers at the metro level will be allowed to ignore the demand for (and economic potential of) safer streets and other community-driven mobility projects.

The ugly

A one-size-fits-all freight program
Freight moves across the country on every mode of travel imaginable and our freight issues are inherently multimodal, but Congress didn’t see it that way when they earmarked 90 percent of the funds in a new freight program for highway projects. This new combination of a formula and separate discretionary grant program is the first time Congress has funded a freight program in the transportation bill, but unfortunately other options like ports, railroads, intelligent transportation systems, or better demand management are only eligible for a small share of the freight dollars. The bill creates a discretionary grant program with $800 million this year, rising to $1 billion in 2020, and creates a new formula program with $1.15 billion in the first year rising to $1.5 billion in 2020.

The bill requires states and metro areas to analyze their freight movement and come up with a multimodal plan to improve things (good!) but then only gives them funding to build highway solutions (bad!). This is a backdoor way to provide more unaccountable funding to states for highway projects that may have been on the drawing boards for decades, and does little to promote cost-effective solutions to freight mobility. One additional issue is that this new formula program relies on current highway formulas unrelated to freight movement and completely ignores freight tonnage or value that would ensure we get the biggest bang for the buck from these investments.

Local communities are left out and behind
Despite our best efforts and those of a handful of champions in both the House and the Senate, this bill does not provide significantly more transportation funding or control over that funding to local communities of all sizes. (It does increase suballocated funds by 5 percent over the life of the bill as noted in “the good” above.) It does nothing for smaller metro areas under 200,000 in population, leaving decisions about which projects to build in the hands of the state DOT, which often ignores local wishes and spends locally-earmarked funds on the projects of the state’s choosing. By failing to bring more dollars, control and accountability closer to the local level, the bill fails to restore the trust of the American people in how our transportation decisions are being made.

An astonishing cut to TIFIA loans
Just three years after MAP-21 increased the TIFIA loan program up to $1 billion, the FAST Act slashes it down to $275 million, leaving a far smaller pot for local communities to compete for. Despite some good reforms made to the program overall and at a time when Congress is eager to stimulate more investment with local or private dollars, it’s hard to fathom why the champions of TIFIA in MAP-21 sat by while this financing program was cut by 70 percent.

Using tomorrow’s funding to pay for yesterday’s policies
Rather than raise transportation user fees (or even talk about it) to fill the ever growing chasm between spending and gas tax receipts, Congress scrounged up $70 billion in non-transportation related general funds to pay for this bill. Somewhere between a third and a quarter of this bill’s cost will be covered by all taxpayers, which means places with more taxpayers and more revenue will be paying more. There won’t be a single project with its cost covered by its users over the life of this bill, and every state will be getting back far more money than they contribute in fuel taxes. This is a bad precedent and will make the hole all the harder to dig out of in 2021 when it comes time to reauthorize this program.

Wrapping it all up — the big picture

While states and metropolitan areas will appreciate the certainty of a five-year bill that guarantees funding for their planning and investments, almost a third of the bill’s cost will be paid up front by general tax revenue — not transportation user fees — offset by accounting maneuvers and budget gimmicks. We will all be paying the tab for Congress’ refusal to have an adult discussion about revenue, whether you buy a lot of gas or none at all.

With almost $75 billion in general taxpayer dollars transferred into the highway trust fund to keep it solvent over the last seven years, and more than $75 billion now pledged over the next five years, the notion of a true trust fund for transportation, funded by users of the system, is dead. Only a handful of elected leaders were willing to even broach the topic of raising or indexing the gas tax to cover the cost of their desired spending levels. The majority of our elected representatives, along with most of the traditional transportation industry, were all too willing to pass a bill at almost any cost.

As far as the bill’s policy goes, it uses tomorrow’s dollars to pay for yesterday’s ideas and represents a missed opportunity to do something much better. On the whole, Congress looked at our system for investing in transportation and said, “the approach we’ve been using for the last decade or so seems to be working. Let’s double down on that.”

Do you and your community’s leaders agree? Do you feel like the current system is working for you and your town or city? The answer to that question will tell you how you should feel about this piece of legislation.

House and Senate conference members reach agreement on five-year transportation authorization

Conferees from the House and Senate have reached agreement on a final transportation reauthorization that will tap Federal Reserve surplus funds and other accounting maneuvers to cover the bill’s full cost over five years.

The 1,300-page Fixing America’s Surface Transportation Act (FAST) was filed with the House this afternoon and Speaker Paul Ryan said that he expects to have a final vote this week. In the Senate, Senator John Thune told Bloomberg this afternoon that his chamber would attempt to take the bill up later this week, but it might slip to next week. MAP-21’s current extension ends this Friday, December 4th, so if action is not taken this week, expect to see a very short extension. Amendments or changes are beyond unlikely after the conference agreement, so this bill is the final product that will be voted on by the House and Senate and signed by the President.

We’re still reading through the full text of the bill and will have a more detailed analysis and statement coming in the next few days.

As expected, the bill would revive the U.S. Export-Import bank and use Federal Reserve surplus funds and numerous other budget gimmicks to produce the tens of billions in offsets required to cover the difference between current transportation spending and what the gas tax is projected to bring in each year over the life of the bill. It’s the first multi-year transportation bill since SAFETEA-LU passed in 2005, and according to Senator James Inhofe, the bill contains $227 billion for highways and $61 billion for transit.

[member_content]Members will receive some detailed summaries on the bill, so check your email inboxes for information from us over the next 48 hours.[/member_content]

Senate pivoting to yearly spending bill that increases TIGER but still cuts transit funds

While many Senate members are focused on the conference committee deliberations on a new long-term transportation bill, the Senate committee that doles out transportation money each year released an updated proposal for this fiscal year, and the news is mixed for several important transportation programs.

Update: While the Senate was expected to consider this bill on the floor Thursday, debate over Syrian refugee issues derailed any further consideration of the bill this week.

featured-thudMost transportation spending comes from the trust fund and the levels are already set (for the most part) by the current authorization — like the long-term transportation bill currently being debated. But important discretionary programs that aren’t “authorized” receive their funding each year from House and Senate appropriators.

Yesterday, the Senate Appropriations Committee released a revised proposal for all transportation and housing programs for the next fiscal year, known as the T-HUD spending bill.

The committee had agreed to an earlier version of the bill this summer, which never made it to the floor. The new bill is a substitute for that earlier bill, and includes higher funding levels as a result of the two-year budget deal passed in late October that increases federal spending by $80 billion total over the next two years.

Though when compared to the first version of the committee’s spending bill from this summer, this bill provides about $3.5 billion more funding for this year (FY 2016 started Oct. 1) and increases competitive TIGER grant funding up to $600 million, it still makes cuts to the sole program that communities across the country depend on to help them build new transit service to meet the booming demand.

Logged in T4America members can see a detailed chart comparing the Senate bill to the House version and 2015 funding levels.

[member_content]

Senate THUD 2016 comparison chart

*The Senate introduced a substitute FY16 THUD appropriation bill on November 18, 2015, which replaced the Appropriation’s Committee original bill that was agreed to by the Committee on June 25, 2015. The earlier version had lower funding levels for FTA New Starts & Small Starts and TIGER.

[/member_content]

The TIGER competitive grant program is incredibly popular in part because it’s one of the few ways that local communities can apply for and win funds for their priority projects; helping to get smart, locally-supported projects with a high return on investment off the ground. The TIGER competition ensures the best projects receive funds, and provides a level of accountability and transparency not currently available in many statewide transportation programs. While any funds for this vital program are needed and appreciated, the volume of applications for each annual TIGER round shows that the program is underfunded to fulfill the need.

Good news: the new bill proposes no changes to what kinds of projects can apply for TIGER funding, and increases funding for the program by $100 million this year.

The Senate’s initial bill introduced this summer provided $500 million for TIGER — the same amount as the just-ended fiscal year — and the House version of this bill provided far less at $100 million. It’s encouraging to see the Senate appropriators increase funding for this important program in the newest draft proposal, and that there are no changes to what kinds of projects can apply. This is a hopeful sign that for future House-Senate negotiations on the final transportation spending bill for 2016.

The funding for building new transit service — New Starts, Small Starts and Core Capacity — was increased by more than $300 million from this summer’s Senate THUD bill up to $1.9 billion, just $24 million less than the proposed House levels of $1.92 billion. That sounds like good news, but it’s still represents a $200 million cut from last year for this program.

Amtrak funding was unchanged: $289 million for operating and $1.1B for capital projects, which is slightly more ($39 million) than this year.

The Senate was expected to consider this bill Thursday before departing for Thanksgiving vacation today, but it was sidelined by Syrian refugee and ISIS-related debate.

In any case, it’s unclear if this week’s actions on this lone individual spending bill will have any measurable impact on what observers expect to be another omnibus spending bill for all federal agencies upon the members’ return in early December. We’ll keep you posted.

Day 1 Wrap Up: Congressional Conference Committee Action

This morning the conference committee for the surface transportation authorization bill met for the first time. The first order of business was appointing Representative Bill Shuster (R-PA) – chair of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee – as the conference chair and Senator Jim Inhofe (R-OK) – chair of the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee -as the vice-chair.

Possibly the most revealing item covered during this first official meeting was an early statement from Chairman Shuster (R-PA) that the conference plans to work diligently through the Thanksgiving recess that starts this Thursday, November 19th, to meet a self-imposed deadline of Monday, November 30. The proposed timeline will allow the House and Senate to vote on final passage for the conference agreement before MAP-21 expires on Friday, December 4th (MAP-21 expires this Friday, November 20th, but the House has already passed a bill to extend the authorization to December 4 and the Senate is expected to follow suit today or tomorrow).

There are still a few sticking points that need to be resolved and came up today during each conferee’s opportunity to speak today. Many hold differing positions on the low funding levels for this authorization as well as the non-transportation generated revenue used to pay for the bill. Those in the Northeast took issue with a House provision to remove transit funding dedicated to high-growth states in the northeast and place it in a national competitive bus and bus facilities program. And others, while not objecting to including passenger rail authorization in the surface authorization for the first time ever as expected by this bill, wanted to include greater reform at Amtrak.
We do not expect any further public meetings until the Members of Congress return on November 30, at which time the conference is expected to have finalized this bill. This means that much of the work on the conference report will happen out of view and behind closed doors. If interested, we advise that you contact your member over the Thanksgiving recess and visit them in person if you can about items of importance for you and your community.
Senate Conference Members
Environment & Public Works Committee
Republicans
Jim Inhofe (R-OK)
John Barrasso (R-WY)
Deb Fischer (R-NE) – also a Commerce Committee member
Democrats
Barbara Boxer (D-CA)
Commerce Committee
Republicans
John Thune (R-SD) – also a Finance Committee member
Democrats
Bill Nelson (D-FL) – also a Finance Committee member
Banking Committee
Democrats
Sherrod Brown (D-OH) – also a Finance Committee member
Finance Committee
Republicans
Orrin Hatch (R-UT)
John Cornyn (R-TX)
Democrats
Ron Wyden (D-OR)
Chuck Schumer (D-NY)
Other Conferees
Republicans
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)
Democrats
Dick Durbin (D-IL) – Democratic Whip
House Conference Members 
Transportation & Infrastructure Committee
Republicans
Bill Shuster (R-PA)
Reps. John J. Duncan, Jr. (R-TN)
Sam Graves (R-MO)
Candice Miller (R-MI)
Rick Crawford (R-AR)
Lou Barletta (R-PA)
Blake Farenthold (R-TX)
Bob Gibbs (R-OH)
Jeff Denham (R-CA)
Reid Ribble (R-WI)
Scott Perry (R-PA)
Rob Woodall (R-GA)
John Katko (R-NY)
Brian Babin (R-TX)
Cresent Hardy (R-NV)
Garret Graves (R-LA)
John Mica (R-FL)
Barbara Comstock (R-VA)
 
Democrats 
Peter DeFazio (D-OR)
Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC)
Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)
Corrine Brown (D-FL)
Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX)
Elijah Cummings (D-MD)
Rick Larsen (D-WA)
Michael Capuano (D-MA)
Grace Napolitano (D-CA)
Daniel Lipinski (D-IL)
Steve Cohen (D-TN)
Albio Sires (D-NJ)
Donna Edwards (D-MD)
 
Ways & Means Committee
Republicans
Kevin Brady (R-TX)
Dave Reichert (R-WA)
Democrats
Sander Levin (D-MI)
Energy & Commerce Committee
Republicans
Fred Upton (R-MI)
Markwayne Mullin (R-OK)
Democrats
Frank Palone (D-NJ)
Financial Services Committee
Republicans
Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)
Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)
Democrats
Maxine Waters (D-CA)
Other Committees
Republicans
Mac Thornberry (R-TX)
Mike Rogers (R-AL)
Bob Goodlatte (R-VA)
Tom Marino (R-PA)
Darin LaHood (R-IL)
Glenn Thomson (R-PA)
Will Hurd (R-TX)
Lamar Smith (R-TX)
Democrats
Loretta Sanchez (D-CA)
Zoe Lofgren (D-CA)
Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ)
Gerry Connolly (D-VA)

Where did the additional billions in new revenue come from for the House transportation bill?

In the early morning hours on Thursday during negotiations over the House transportation bill, Rep. Neugebauer presented a fairly surprising amendment that tapped billions from a to-date unmentioned Federal Reserve surplus account to help cover the cost of the bill.

Details are still a little uncertain about exactly how much money will eventually be transferred from this account — House leadership could hang on to some of the money for some other need and choose to only fund three years of their transportation bill — we’ll be keeping a close eye on how that develops. But we do know that the House now has as much as $85 billion in new general fund revenues to cover the gap between what the gas tax brings in and current levels of transportation spending.

From his speech, even Rep. Neugebauer (R-TX) agrees with our assertion that we shouldn’t be filling the trust fund with non-transportation revenue sources (i.e., general taxpayer funds). So what was the reasoning for tapping this Federal Reserve fund in this amendment? One reason was to eliminate one of the Senate’s funding sources that many did not like. Here’s the speech that Rep. Neugebauer gave on the floor in the early morning hours of Thursday when most of us were all fast asleep.

First, I don’t think it’s good policy to fund transportation from other sectors of the economy.

This amendment does seek to address two major issues in the budget offsets sent over from the Senate: the Federal Reserve dividend reduction and the ‘G-fee’ increase. Moving forward with the Federal Reserve dividend reduction without studying it could have a devastating consequence for the supervision of the financial sector and the stability of the Federal Reserve system. The cost that banks, especially community banks, could face as a result of the dividend reduction would be passed on to hard working consumers. At a time when many Americans continue to struggle from the unintended consequences of Dodd-Frank it would dangerous and irresponsible to move forward with the Senate version.

Second, this amendment addresses what I see as a further entrenchment of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. This is particularly timely because just this week we learned that Freddie and Fannie may need to tap the Treasury once again and saddle the taxpayers with the bill. This amendment further protects the taxpayers. Allowing Congress to continue to raise g-fees will make comprehensive housing financial reform impossible.

Our amendment addresses both problems by liquidating and dissolving the Federal Reserve Capital Surplus Account. The Federal Reserve Capital Surplus Account currently has about $29 billion in capital surplus. This Account is made up of the earnings that the Federal Reserve has retained from investing member banks money. Let me say that again. The Surplus Account is made up of the earning that the Federal Reserve has made from investing member banks money. The Federal Reserve continues to hold this account in surplus at a time that our nation has over $18.5 trillion in debt.

This is not a perfect policy but it’s better than the alternative. This preserves the budget neutrality of the transportation bill and counters irresponsible proposals sent over to us by the Senate. Further, it protects consumers from the potential for cost increases while reforming the Surplus Account to meet the needs of the current fiscal crisis. When the Surplus Account was created no one could have imagined the debt and deficits that we are facing. It is appropriate to liquidate this account to meet these days’ realities.

“Moving forward, I hope that this body will ensure that transportation funding comes from transportation users and not completely unrelated sectors of the economy.