Suddenly, transportation funding is the topic de jour.
Last night, the House debated the measure that will set transportation spending levels for the coming fiscal year, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development bill. Among other controversial provisions, the bill would cut the popular TIGER grant program from $600 million today to $100 million. (You can read our full summary of the bill here.)
The TIGER cuts drew opposing statements from 13 Democrats and from the Obama Administration, which has called for an increase of TIGER funds to $1.25 billion. The Administration Monday declared its opposition to the THUD measure, citing in part a TIGER funding cut that “would reduce an already highly competitive grant program and its ability to support innovative projects across the United States.”
Meanwhile, both the House and the Senate are scrambling to find new ways to keep the highway trust fund solvent. With tax increases off the table in an election year as an expected shut-off of funding for new projects looms, both houses appear to be searching for short-term measures to plug the gap between lagging gas tax receipts and current spending levels.
As you may have heard, House Republicans have proposed to find the money by eliminating Saturday postal service and applying the savings (potentially up to $2 billion a year) to help fund the Highway Trust Fund. Interestingly, Postmaster General Patrick Donahoe, who has himself pushed to cut Saturday service, told interviewed by the Washington Post earlier this week that he was delighted by the idea.
However, this plan is not widely supported by either party. More than three-dozen House Republicans have signed a letter stating their opposition to five-day delivery service, and House Democrats do not see this as a viable fix for the funding gap.
In the Senate, Senator Harry Reid (D-NV) and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) have created a bipartisan plan that includes a one-time tax “holiday” for multinational corporations to bring profits home from overseas with a lucrative tax deduction. Such a move would yield a windfall of $20 billion to $30 billion over the next two years, they estimate.
While that would be enough to cover the projected trust-fund shortfall for a year or two, it would not solve the longterm problem. It also has drawn opposition from other key leaders who fear a longterm hit to the treasury if the profit repatriation is not tied to comprehensive corporate tax reform – changes that are far too complex to work through before the looming deadline.
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.
Most taxpayers would agree that the level of government closest to the people should have more control over how transportation dollars get spent in their local communities. Yet local cities, towns and counties control less than 15 percent of all federal transportation dollars.
(You can read more in-depth about Representative Davis’ bill on our blog here or check out the Congress.gov page for H.R. 4726 here.)
Local leaders are the ones who feel the heat when crumbling infrastructure stalls traffic, when workers can’t connect to jobs, streets are unsafe or goods get stuck in congestion. But they lack the access to federal funds that could help them fix those problems and boost their economies, and they have little say in how their state’s federal allocation gets spent.
Thanks to the leadership of a bipartisan group of Representatives and Senators, this terrific proposal would set aside a small portion of each state’s federal allotment to create a grant program especially for local communities. The grants would be awarded on merit by a panel with representatives from state and local jurisdictions, ensuring that funds go to well-conceived projects with the most local support.
This program would make a tremendous impact by requiring that more transportation dollars flow to communities — a great way to make good on Congress’s promise of more local control in MAP-21, the current transportation law.
The grants could fund a wide variety of surface transportation projects — such as bridge repair or improvement, highway projects, freight movement, bike and pedestrian safety and transit, to name a few.
This bill represents one of the best opportunities we’ve had in some time to ensure that more transportation dollars get down to where they’re needed most, to be spent on the very best projects that communities need.
Did you already send your letters? Then help spread the word! Use the links to share on Twitter and Facebook below, OR, cut and paste the message in the box to send a message to your friends via email.
Shouldn’t the level of government closest to the people have more control over how transportation dollars get spent in their local communities? And shouldn’t they have more access to federal transportation funds?
I think so, and I asked my representatives to cosponsor this bipartisan bill that would give local communities more access to federal transportation funds that they can invest in homegrown transportation plans and projects, and more control over how those dollars get spent.
Will you join me and send a letter? It only takes a moment.
Yesterday, Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL) announced a new bill to give local communities across the country greater access to federal transportation funds for innovative projects via a new in-state competitive grant program.
Rep. Davis announces his new bill in Normal’s Uptown Station on May 14, 2014, flanked by Mayor Chris Koos and Transportation for America Illinois field organizer Erin Evenhouse. Photo courtesy of Town of Normal.
At a press conference yesterday inside Uptown Station in Normal, Illinois, alongside the Town of Normal Mayor Chris Koos, Rep. Davis introduced the Innovation in Surface Transportation Act.
The bipartisan bill, to be introduced by Reps. Davis (R-IL) and Dina Titus (D-NV) in the House of Representatives next week, would create a new in-state competitive grant program that would allow local entities (cities, towns, etc.) to have greater access to federal transportation funds they can invest in innovative projects to help boost local economies.
The bill would create a statewide program of competitive grants for local communities, overseen by a diverse selection panel that includes the state DOT and local jurisdictions.
“The Innovation in Surface Transportation Act is a commonsense, bipartisan bill to give local entities a stronger voice when it comes to funding local projects,” said Rep. Davis. “Additionally, this bill recognizes our nation’s fiscal realities by giving preference to projects that strengthen the return on investment, encouraging public-private partnerships and increasing transparency so that every federal dollar spent goes a little bit further.”
Transportation for America applauds Reps. Davis and Titus for their leadership in crafting this bill that would make a dramatic difference by giving towns and cities and counties more access to the transportation funds they desperately seek for important local projects.
“As a former mayor who speaks frequently with local leaders around the country, I can say with confidence that they are more than willing to compete and be held accountable for results, but they need access to resources to meet their communities’ needs,” said Mayor John Robert Smith, chair of Transportation for America and former Mayor of Meridian, Mississippi. “This bill would take a major step toward restoring funding for local needs that was greatly restricted in the 2012 transportation bill, MAP-21. Rep. Davis’s and Rep. Titus’s measure will ensure that those closest to the heart-beat of a community will be making decisions on how transportation dollars should be spent, while promoting innovation and efficiency,” said Mayor Smith.
The location of yesterday’s announcement was no coincidence. Normal’s Uptown Station is a terrific example of what can happen when a local community can competitively access federal transportation funds to make an ambitious plan a reality. (Read our longer profile of Normal’s “can-do” story here.) A competitive federal grant was the final piece in the puzzle for Normal to rebuild their downtown multimodal transportation center and rebuild the infrastructure of their city’s core.
The new Children’s Museum and roundabout in the center of Uptown Normal, Illinois. Photo courtesy of Scott Shigley
Normal Mayor Chris Koos talked about how important it is for local communities like Normal to have the ability to invest in homegrown transportation projects to signal to the private sector that they have a committed partner. “The private sector was clearly not willing to make significant investment in Uptown Normal until it was evident that the public sector was committed to making a big investment of its own,” said Mayor Koos.
The more than $80 million invested by the Town of Normal into Uptown has sparked more than $140 million in private investment. That’s exactly the kind of spark that we hope Rep. Davis’ bill will provide to communities like Normal all across the country.
“An in-state grant program builds on the idea of competitive grants to spur innovation and allow communities of all sizes to build connections that provide better opportunities for local businesses and residents to prosper,” concluded Mayor Koos.
Rep. Rodney Davis (left) and Mayor Chris Koos shake hands at yesterday’s event in Normal, Illinois. Photo courtesy of Town of Normal
Rep. Davis heard this message from local officials like Mayor Koos all over Illinois, and responded by crafting a bill that could help give them exactly what they need to succeed. That’s the kind of leadership we need more of on Capitol Hill.
We will have much more detail on this bill in the days to come, but we want to congratulate Reps. Davis and Titus for leading the way and we hope to help them succeed in their efforts in Congress.
Today President Obama and House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Dave Camp (R-MI) introduced separate proposals that would prevent the looming insolvency of the nation’s key infrastructure trust fund.
President Obama today unveiled a proposal for a four-year, $302 billion transportation bill, with a windfall from business tax reform covering the shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund for that period. Chairman Camp proposed tax reform measures that would include staving off insolvency of the transportation fund for eight years. James Corless, director of Transportation for America, issued this statement in response:
“We are encouraged to see the threat to our nation’s transportation network begin to get the attention it deserves. With the bankruptcy of our transportation trust fund just months away, this can’t come soon enough. Just today, local leaders from across the country came to Capitol Hill to tell Congress what a robust federal investment in their transportation networks would mean for their economic development and long term prosperity. (See our blog post on today’s events here.)
These local leaders are putting their money where their mouth is, going to their voters for tax increases to pay for infrastructure they need. But as they said today, and as I reiterated in remarks to members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, their plans count on a dependable federal partner. Today’s actions by the Administration and key House leaders show the message may finally be getting through.
With the current transportation program expiring at the end of September, we look forward to working with Congress and the Administration on a fully funded program that promotes innovation, rewards initiative and gives local communities the latitude to solve their infrastructure challenges.”
Before a packed room on Capitol Hill, local leaders from three very different communities shared one very specific message with a handful of Congressmen and at least four dozen staffers: If Congress doesn’t act to shore up the nation’s transportation fund before it goes insolvent later this year, their cities and communities would bear the brunt of the pain.
Along with Reps. Richard Hanna (R-NY) and Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), Transportation for America helped to bring local leaders to Washington to talk about what the looming insolvency of the Highway Trust Fund means for their communities. As we’ve noted here, states and local governments stand to lose nearly all access to federal transportation support next year if Congress doesn’t act to shore up the nation’s transportation fund sometime before the end of the summer. (The details of which were explored at length in a presentation by the day’s last panelist, Sarah Puro, Principal Analyst at the Congressional Budget Office.)
In between appearances by Reps. Blumenauer and Hanna, as well as comments from Rep. Jim McDermott of Washington and Rep. Rodney Davis of Illinois, three local officials painted pictures of their ambitious transportation plans, and what the lack of federal investment would mean for them.
Normal, IL, Mayor Chris Koos shared the story of how city leaders revitalized their town’s core — and how federal support was the only way they could make it a reality. (Read that full story here.) He noted that the private sector has since followed through with millions in new investments, but that they were unwilling to invest in Uptown Normal until they knew the public sector was truly committed.
Rep. Rodney Davis, a Republican from the 13th District that includes Normal, came up and offered his support for Normal Mayor Chris Koos and expressed pride in this project in his district — a model for how the federal government could support a smart local vision that also had strong local and state funding and support.
Rep. Rodney Davis (right) greets Mayor Chris Koos of Normal, Illinois after the Mayor shared the story of the revitalization of Uptown Normal — made possible by a federal TIGER grant.
While Mayor Koos was speaking in one hearing room, Transportation for America director James Corless was telling a different group of more than 20 members of Congress the same story from Normal, Illinois.
He was testifying alongside many of the transportation industry groups in an invitation-only congressional roundtable hosted by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure to discuss the next transportation bill. He told the 20-plus members of Congress there, along with transportation lobbyists and advocacy groups, that because local economies are the heart of the American economy, the federal program should support more local initiatives like Normal’s.
“Normal should be “normal,” not the exception,” Corless said.
While Normal is a small college town, Nashville, Tennessee is a much larger, booming metropolis. They’ve been adding jobs and people over the last ten years, and are expected to add a million more in another 20-plus years.
Marc Hill, Chief Policy Officer of the Nashville Area Chamber of Commerce, explained how the business community and the chamber got together years ago and recognized that congestion threatens that economic prosperity.
“Six years ago, the Chamber began focusing on transit as a top priority — second only to improving public education.”
Marc Hill from the Nashville Chamber of Commerce
Why? They’ve certainly been inspired by watching and learning from some of their neighbors’ mistakes. “We don’t want to be another Atlanta. We don’t want to start working on transit 10 years after we’re in gridlock,” he said.
The business community is leading the way for making bus-rapid transit a reality in Nashville — and they hope that The Amp’s first line through the center of town is just the first component of what could be a wide-ranging regional bus-rapid transit system, the first of its kind in the South.
But, “there’s simply no way a local community can pull off something like this without a federal partnership,” he said. If the trust fund goes belly up and the federal contribution is curtailed for next year, Tennessee could be out $900 million and Nashville would lose $40 million.
Down in Florida, Tampa Bay is home to the 15th largest port in the nation and the closest to the Panama Canal in sea-miles. Charlie Hunsicker, director of the Manatee County Parks and Natural Resources Dept and also speaking on behalf of the Manatee Chamber of Commerce, urged the Ways and Means members to consider freight as they mull how to rescue the trust fund from insolvency.
“Ports constitute the most important first mile, or last mile, in world trade,” he said.
Charlie Hunsicker, Director of the Manatee County Parks and Natural Resources Department.
The recurring theme today was clear: No matter how motivated and inspired, the American public and business community cannot do this alone.
Nashville is working on their local funding sources for The Amp, and hoping for the feds to support this region that’s “an economic driver, not just in Tennessee, but for the mid-South,” as Marc Hill put it. “There’s no lack of will locally to invest to be a full partner, a majority partner, but we absolutely can’t do it without that federal support.”
Messages and stories like these will continue to flow into Washington, DC from cities and towns and counties and districts all across the country.
But the ball is in Congress’ court, and especially the Ways and Means Committee that’s responsible for funding a transportation bill. Without a solution to the funding crisis, writing great new transportation policies will be like crafting a beautiful saddle without the horse.
These local leaders are counting on Congress to come through for them.
—
Photos from the event
Sarah Puro of the CBO gives a presentation at the briefing organized by Reps. Blumenauer and Hanna, with Transportation for America. 2/26/14
Rep. Richard Hanna speaking at the briefing organized by his office and Rep. Blumenauer, with Transportation for America. 2/26/14
Rep. Earl Blumenauer speaking at the briefing organized by his office and Rep. Hanna, with Transportation for America. 2/26/14
Rep. Jim McDermott stopped in to say a few words at the briefing organized by Reps. Blumenauer and Hanna, with Transportation for America. 2/26/14
Rep. Rodney Davis (R-IL) at the briefing organized by Reps. Blumenauer and Hanna, with Transportation for America. 2/26/14
Transportation for America’s John Robert Smith — himself a former mayor — kicks off the briefing with a few remarks.
Maine’s application for a TIGER grant to replace the aging Penobscot River bridge has a benefit-cost ratio of 8.7
Updated 1/17/2014 at bottom. Positive news from Congress today! Yes, you heard right. Just months after budget sequestration and a government shutdown put transportation funding at risk, House leaders have agreed to a budget deal that would provide stable or increased funding for key programs that you’ve helped us defend over the last few years.
House leaders deserve recognition for this positive step for transportation funding. And they need to know that they’re on the right track.
It’s not over yet, but this is an important victory for T4America and all of you who think smart investments in transportation are key to economic prosperity.
The House and Senate reached a tentative agreement back in December and this new “omnibus” comprehensive budget bill to keep government functioning was drafted along that outline by House and Senate appropriators.
Most encouraging is that it wasn’t that long ago when serious proposals were floated in Congress for across-the-board transportation cuts of one-third, significant cuts to funding for Amtrak and new transit construction, as well as zeroing out the innovative TIGER grant program.
This budget deal includes $600 million for another round of grants for the TIGER program — a level not seen since 2010 — as well as an increase in the New Starts program that communities need to meet the demand for transit service. Amtrak also received what they need to continue operating their booming services while investing for the future.
Get Involved
Tell your House representative that you welcome this deal, thank them for their work to make it happen, and urge them to pass the measure when it comes to the floor.
That means that commuters throughout the nation can breathe a sigh of relief that their transit route is less likely to be cut, rail cars and buses could be upgraded, and essential new service can begin the process of being added. With cuts to highway programs reversed, they also can know that their bridges and roads are more likely to be repaired and replaced. Riders who depend on Amtrak can breathe easy knowing that most service cuts are likely history.
So what’s next? A vote in the House perhaps as early as tomorrow (Wednesday) and then a subsequent vote in the Senate by this weekend.
After this important deal is approved, we hope Congress will turn its attention toward preventing the oncoming insolvency of our key transportation trust fund. For inspiration, they can look to our alliance’s proposal to raise enough revenues not only to avoid calamity, but to provide our communities the resources and latitude they need to reach their economic potential.
Our nation’s economy is only as strong as our local economies, and those depend on a reliable, safe, well-maintained transportation network.
Updated 1/17/2014 With a 359-67 vote in the House and a 72-26 vote in the Senate, the full $1.1 trillion budget for FY 2014 was approved by Congress and sent to the President for his signature. Here’s our statement on the final vote.
The two chambers of Congress at the moment are looking at very different paths for funding transportation.
The House path — though stopping short of cutting all funding by a third as proposed in the past — slashes passenger rail funding by $400 million, eliminates money for the innovative TIGER grants, and reduces the funding communities depend on for new transit projects.
Meanwhile, a Senate committee has drafted a budget that increases funding for new transit construction, keeps and expands TIGER, provides support for Amtrak and passenger rail improvements, and funds a new grant program to jumpstart progress on repairing critical bridges.
The House transportation budget is unabashedly bad, and the only way to counter it is with a strong Senate alternative.
The Senate proposal embraces the reality that communities everywhere are looking for smart ways to keep people and goods moving, promote prosperity and keep their infrastructure in good shape. The House would thwart them on every front.
The Senate budget acknowledges that Amtrak ridership is breaking records and that Americans deserve a convenient rail option. It acts to do something about the fact that we take 260 million trips each day over deficient bridges that urgently need repairs.
So let’s make sure that the Senate hears this message loud and clear: Face up to reality and pass a transportation budget that funds solutions to our problems, whether it’s fixing bridges or providing more viable ways to get around.
The Sandy relief bill on the cusp of final passage will provide billions for cleanup and more than $12 billion for transportation — including an unprecedented step toward making transportation networks around the northeast and NYC more resilient in the face of climate change, more frequent and unpredictable storms, and rising sea levels.
The MTA A Train bridge to the Rockaways was heavily damaged during Hurricane Sandy. This photo shows early repair work underway as of November 3, 2012. Photo: MTA New York City Transit / Leonard Wiggins
It’s not completely a done deal yet — the House and Senate passed slightly different bills — but the $50.66 billion Sandy relief bill was passed by the House this week more than two weeks after the promised vote by Speaker Boehner to New Jersey Governor Chris Christie (and others) at the end of 2012.
The Senate passed their version of the bill back in 2012. The bills are almost identical in their funding amounts, though there are some small programmatic differences in funding. Also, earlier this month, Congress approved and President Obama signed a measure providing $9.7 billion in additional funding for the federal flood insurance program, bringing the total expected Sandy spending up around $60 billion.
Part of the reason the House did not vote on this comprehensive package was due to pushback from House Republicans against approving such a large emergency spending package, and particularly because the package included funds for “future disaster mitigation,” i.e., acknowledging that climate change exists and is something worth preparing for. As a result, northeastern legislators from both parties were livid at the delay in approving disaster funding for their hard-hit region — actually a longer wait than for Katrina funding in 2005.
So what’s in the two bills for transportation?
The Senate package included over $12 billion for transportation. The bulk of that ($11 billion) is for the damaged transit systems that millions of daily commuters and riders depend on, to be distributed through the new Federal Transit Emergency Relief program (created by MAP-21). Close to $5.4 billion of this funding is directed to mitigation efforts to reduce the risk of damage from future disasters. As noted above, this unprecedented inclusion of mitigation funding represents a major shift in the federal dialogue about the real need to address and prepare for the impacts of climate change.
The Senate bill also included $336 million in mitigation relief to Amtrak and the Northeast Corridor for damages caused by the storm as well as advancing projects critical to improving resiliency in the case of future disasters. (According to our partners at the Tri-State Transportation Campaign, that money also helps NJ Transit, which operates commuter service on the same tracks.) There was also about $920 million to repair Sandy-related damage on our nation’s highways and bridges.
The House-passed package included relief for all of the above, but there are some important differences in the transportation funding distribution. Amtrak’s relief was cut by about 64% down to $118 million. Transit system relief is still close to $11 billion with close to $5.4 available for projects to alleviate future damage (there were some slight language changes and a small boost in funding). Highway disaster relief increased to a little over $2 billion.
Though there was opposition to the package from many House Republicans, the measure was pushed through with the support of the House Republicans from the region as well as House Democrats. Now, the Senate will likely take up and pass the House bill, or potentially attempt to amend it before final passage.
MTA New York City Transit preparations for Hurricane Sandy. Photo: MTA New York City Transit / Leonard Wiggins
As this map and graphic below amply demonstrates, the Senate’s transportation bill not only was developed with bipartisan input and adopted with votes from both parties, but it garnered support from every region of the country and from the reddest of “red” states — Georgia, Alabama, Texas, Oklahoma — and the bluest of blue — California, New York — as well many others that trend purple. Click to enlarge.
This is a noteworthy accomplishment in this Congress, and one that House leaders should take note of before dismissing HR 14 out of hand. (HR 14 is identical to the Senate’s MAP-21, and is before the House right now.)
No one is saying the House shouldn’t debate its own amendments to the Senate bill. Indeed, there are several areas we would like to see strengthened. But with the clock ticking, construction machines idling and Americans looking to get to work, the Senate bill’s bipartisan provisions form a strong base for a House debate.
That was exactly the message contained in this bipartisan letter (pdf) sent to House leadership just this week by Rep. Dold (R-IL) and Rep. Blumenauer (D-OR) and signed by Reps. Biggert (R-IL), Quigley (D-IL), Charles Bass (R-NH) and Larsen (D-WA).
“With funding for transportation and infrastructure projects expiring at the end of the week, it is critical that we act as soon as possible to provide certainty in the transportation and infrastructure sector that employs so many Americans,” said Rep. Robert Dold (R-IL-10). “I firmly believe transportation is a bipartisan priority that extends beyond partisan politics- that is why I am urging the House to consider the bipartisan Senate bill if it cannot bring a viable longer-term bill to the House floor by the March 31 expiration. We must reach a bipartisan consensus now to ensure that local transportation agencies can better plan for the future, and so that these important projects and jobs can continue.”
Would we, like the House members who signed this letter, prefer a longer bill, in an ideal world? Yes, if it had the right policies and an appropriate source of revenue.
However, with the time available, and in an election year where every vote is a litmus test, an attack ad waiting to happen or a political message of some kind, the Senate is offering a sound path forward that everyone should be able to live with now, and build from in the future.
Relatedly, we have completed a long and detailed summary of everything we know about the Senate’s MAP-21 bill, which you can download in its entirety here. (pdf)
The House Appropriations Committee released their draft bill for 2012 spending in the transportation program, and the cuts are severe, with some key programs facing more of a reduction than others.
The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development spending bill, or THUD, as its called, contained similar cuts for transit and road/bridge spending that we saw in Rep. Ryan’s budget earlier this year. Transit and highway spending both get cut proportionally, around 34 percent.
While cuts are proportional in those main two areas, other areas and innovative programs face deeper cuts.The innovative TIGER grants, TIGGER grants and high-speed rail programs are cut entirely.
The New Starts transit program, which essentially funds all new transit system construction, gets cut to $1.55 billion down from $2 billion in FY10. In addition, a policy tweak is made that requires state or local funds to make up more than 50 percent of any new grant agreements. Or put another way, the feds will no longer cover more than half of any New Starts transit project, exacerbating an existing gap between the share the government will pay for transit vs. highway projects. (Highway projects get around 80 percent of their funds from the federal government.)
Existing passenger rail service faces deep cuts of its own. Amtrak’s capital budget (new rolling stock, new lines, equipment, etc.) is cut by $24 million, but the operations budget is where Amtrak takes a big hit, going from $563 million to $227 million. On top of that, an important policy change will prevent Amtrak from using any of their operating funds on state-supported lines — lines where a state has partnered with Amtrak to increase passenger rail service and ridership. To put that change in perspective, in 2010 9 million rides were taken on state-supported routes.
Amtrak State-Supported routes, from the T&I Committee “A New Direction” report (pdf).
Another notable policy change is for the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The bill prohibits HUD from using any funding for anything related to the Sustainable Communities Partnership with DOT and the EPA. Essentially, this bill would require HUD to stop coordinating with the other two agencies and go back to the outdated siloed approach on housing, ignoring the effects on and the impacts of transportation and the environment.
The silver lining is that it’s unlikely that this appropriations bill will make it through the full process to passage anytime soon. Instead, Congress will likely pass a continuing resolution (CR) before September 30 to stop the government from shutting down — which means at least for a while, the 2012 funding levels could be more in line with last year’s levels, preventing some of these cuts. Whether it passes or not, it’s important to note that this is the House appropriators opening position on transportation funding for next year.
Here’s a full list with details on the cuts.
Cuts highway funding from ~$41B to $27B
Cuts transit funding (excluding New Starts) from $8.3B to $5.3B
Cuts New Starts from $1.6B to $1.55B and requires that any new grant agreement include at least at 50% non-federal share; Note, FY10 New Starts funding was $2B, separate cuts were made last year.
Includes funding for Washington’s Metro system – $150M
No funding for TIGER, HSR, or TIGGER (transit energy efficiency grants)
Prohibits any new RRIF (a loan program like TIFIA for rail projects) loans or loan guarantees.
Cuts Amtrak capital funding from $922M to $898M; FY10 funding was $1,002M
Down-to-the-wire negotiations late last night between President Obama, House Speaker John Boehner and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid resulted in a budget deal containing about $38 billion in reductions from current spending levels and the prevention of a government shutdown.
With the Federal Government slated to close at midnight, the House and Senate passed a final one week stop-gap measure to allow the details of the agreement to be ironed out. The continuing resolution itself contains $2 billion in cuts that largely hit the U.S. Department of Transportation and Department of Housing and Urban Development.
By next week, Congress is expected to finalize its fiscal year 2011 budget — which runs through September — at the agreed-upon funding levels. President Obama made brief remarks on the budget compromise at the White House shortly after 11pm last night.
The cuts to transportation and housing passed last night were deemed largely non-controversial because they matched closely with the funding levels requested in President Obama’s fiscal year 2012 budget.
The High Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail program will receive $1 billion, a reduction of $1.5 billion from the previous year, and the New Starts program — a key revenue source for transit projects throughout the country — loses $280 million, though the resulting figure is reportedly sufficient to fund projects that have already received grants from USDOT. Other cuts include:
$6.3 million from the Transportation Planning, Research, and Development account
$2.5 million from the Federal Railroad Administration’s Research and Development; and
The Transit Research and University Research Centers Program budget is reduced to $64.2 million.
Details on the remainder of the fiscal year cuts and how they will affect transportation are not yet available, although Politico has early information on a few items:
One of the toughest fights, casting the White House as the budget cutter against reluctant Republicans, was in highway and transportation spending. But here the administration succeeded in cutting about $630 million in so-called orphan earmarks and $2.5 billion in unexpended contract authority.
We expect to hear more about the final package soon.
UPDATE: A White House blog post confirms that the fiscal year 2011 cuts include $630 million in earmarked transportation projects and $2.5 billion in funding that was slated for transportation projects.
The federal government will keep the lights on next week after the U.S. Senate easily approved the House’s two-week stopgap measure containing $4 billion in spending cuts. The vote was 91-9.
Although some in the press have characterized the development as a victory for Republicans, the $4 billion in reductions is decidedly modest and overlaps with programs already targeted in President Obama’s fiscal year 2012 budget. Only two budget items — $650 million from a one-time Federal Highway Administration program and a handful of legislative earmarks – are transportation related.
However, the measure to fund the government for two weeks received 85 Democratic “no” votes in the House — including Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi — and a chilled reception in the Senate even from those Democrats voting in favor. Unifying the more liberal-leaning Senate Democrats wary of deep cuts with moderates who are more open to them could be difficult. Some members were also alarmed by remarks from Speaker John Boehner that cutting “one slice at a time” could achieve his party’s goals if deep reductions were not passed in one package.
House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman John Mica was a yes vote, as was top committee Democrat Nick Rahall. Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer and Republican counterpart Jim Inhofe also voted yes.
Though spared for the time being, crucial transportation programs like New Starts, high-speed rail and TIGER grants remain on the chopping block. So far, cuts to transportation have not received a lion’s share of the attention, though Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois highlighted his opposition to TIGER grant cuts at two events last month and several House members offered amendments to restore essential funding to public transportation.
This week’s compromise does not preclude a shutdown later this month, given the seemingly wide gulf between the two parties on what level of spending cuts are acceptable. Some Democrats said they fear the short two-week timeline will induce gridlock and result in Republicans re-offering their $61 billion spending reduction plan as an alternative.
FINAL UPDATE, 2/19/11, 9am: The House voted 235-189 in favor of an FY2011 budget containing $60 billion in spending cuts.
No Democrats supported the continuing resolution and three Republicans opposed it. The Hill has more here, and the final roll call vote is here.
ORIGINAL POST: The U.S House of Representatives is currently debating a bill to fund the government through September of this year. As we noted earlier in the week, the budget under consideration contains deep cuts to transportation, including many of travel options Americans use and support.
Some of the most important cuts to transportation contained in the initial language include:
New Starts, the program that funds new transit construction, gets cut by $430 million. There is also a rescission of about $300 million in unspent 2010 (fiscal year) funds.
High-speed rail is cut completely and the CR would rescind essentially all funds from 2010. Other than the money already spent, this entire program is eliminated.
The innovative TIGER program is eliminated completely and the unspent/unobligated FY10 funds are rescinded.
Amtrak appears to be mostly intact, avoiding the cuts that were proposed by the GOP study committee.
These cuts are the wrong direction for a fragile economy and high unemployment rate. And, as a recent report from Smart Growth America noted, spending on public transportation and infrastructure maintenance is one of the best job-creation tools around. Why would Congress put that at risk?
As if those cuts were not bad enough, several members offered amendments that would go even deeper. Some of the amendments include:
Amendment No. 453, which would eliminate all funding for Amtrak. (Sponsor: Rep. Connie Mack, R- Florida)
Amendment No. 45, which would reduce Amtrak funding by $447 million (Sponsor: Rep. Pete Sessions, R-Texas)
Amendment No. 204, which would remove funding for the White House Director of Urban Affairs (Sponsor: Rep. Steve Scalise, R-Louisiana)
A number of amendments would restore critical programs. These include:
Amendment No. 400, which would restore all Recovery Act funding (Sponsor: Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Texas)
Amendment No. 69, which would restore funding to the TIFIA grant program (Sponsor: Rep. Jared Polis, D-Colorado)
Amendment No. 44, which would restore most public transportation funding (Sponsor: Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-New York)
An amendment sponsored by Northern Virginia Democrat Gerry Connolly that would have restored cuts to the Washington DC Metro system was ruled out of order by House Republicans and will not come up for a vote.
Congress is expected to continue debating for several hours, with a final vote time still unclear. Amendments relating to the Department of Transportation have not yet been considered.
UPDATE, 2/17/11, 9:30am: The House took up or postponed action on two amendments of interest late last night:
Amendment No. 511 (Nadler), which would have restored funding to several transportation programs, was ruled as out of order for lack of a revenue source and will not come up for a vote.
Amendment No. 43 (Sessions), which would reduce Amtrak funding by $447 million, was postponed and is expected to receive a vote today.
UPDATE, 11:15am: Amendment No. 43 (Sessions), which sought to reduce Amtrak funding by $447 million, was defeated by a vote of 176-250.
UPDATE, 3pm: The House still has a number of amendments to consider on the Transportation and Housing portions of the budget. Members will continue debating into the evening, with a late vote expected on the full package.
UPDATE, 7pm: Amendment No. 204 (Scalise), which seeks to remove funding for several positions, including the White House Director of Urban Affairs, was approved by a vote of 241-171.
UPDATE, 2/18/11, 10am: The House adjourned past 1am last night without voting on the bill. Debate continues today.
UPDATE, 12:45pm: The House is debating the “Republican Study Committee” amendment, which would add an across-the-board 5.5 percent cut to the entire budget, with exemptions for defense and homeland security. The amendment would also reduce legislative budgets by 11 percent.
Republican Rep. Dan Lungren, a member of the Committee, is opposing the amendment, saying the cuts to Capitol Police and legislative staff are too deep. House Appropriations Chairman Hal Rogers, Republican of Kentucky, also opposes the amendment.
UPDATE, 3:30pm: The amendment seeking an across-the-board spending cut of 5.5 percent was rejected by a vote of 147-281.
On the Friday before the President releases his budget for 2012 (forthcoming sometime this morning), the House Appropriations Committee, led by Chairman Hal Rogers (R-Ky.) released their funding proposal to carry the government through the rest of 2011.
Quick refresher: The government is currently operating under what’s known as a Continuing Resolution (CR) that expires in March. Congress has been under pressure since late in 2010 to pass a full budget, but have been passing Continuing Resolutions due to an inability to agree on and pass a budget. These CRs basically continue funding levels from the 2010 fiscal year until Congress manages to pass a budget for 2011. Or they pass a CR with cuts and lower funding, which is what the House has proposed.
The 2011 budget that passed out of the Appropriations Committee Friday afternoon has some significant cuts for transportation, and some of them mirror the proposal that came from the Republican Study Committee a few weeks ago. There are a lot of cuts to very worthwhile programs across the board, but here are some of the highlights (lowlights?) for transportation:
New Starts, the program that funds new transit construction, gets cut by $430 million. There is also a rescission of about $300 million in unspent 2010 (fiscal year) funds.
High-speed rail is cut completely and the CR would rescind essentially all funds from 2010. Other than the money already spent, this entire program is eliminated.
Amtrak appears to be mostly intact, avoiding the cuts that were proposed by the GOP study committee.
These cuts target exactly the kinds of projects that can create the most jobs and can help get our economy moving. Costs for labor and material are low right now, making it a prime time to spend on infrastructure, and we know that spending on public transportation creates more jobs than other types of transportation spending.
While these cuts are indeed severe and may get some support in the House, this proposal will still have to make it through the Senate.
We’ll be back later today with some information on how you can contact your Representative and urge them to reject these cuts to critical transportation projects.
Earlier this week the House adopted rules for this new session of Congress. It’s a bit of inside baseball that can be hard to decipher, but these rules determine how bills are considered by lawmakers and what bills can and cannot do. Streetsblog Capitol Hill covered this issue on Monday and today, but it’s worth a closer examination.
One of the new rules will definitely have two significant impacts on transportation spending.
First, it would subject transportation spending to the annual appropriations process. Basically this means that instead of having transportation funding be more or less automatically tied to spending determined by the six-year transportation law, appropriators in Congress would decide funding levels each year — likely lower than what the transportation bill “authorized” and potentially leaving money unspent in the highway trust fund each year.
Since 1998 during the last two transportation laws (SAFETEA-LU and TEA-21), appropriators have been required by House rules to fund overall transportation programs at the aggregate levels written into the authorization, like current law SAFETEA-LU. This change will allow congressional appropriators to fund transportation below funding levels authorized in the transportation law or even below gas tax receipts.
While the new rule won’t actually allow diversions of transportation dollars to non-transportation uses as some highway advocacy groups claimed last week, it nevertheless poses some significant issues. It would have an impact on the economy and on local projects that rely on the certainty of guaranteed funding to bid out contracts and build projects. It could create even more uncertainty than we already have with the continued stopgap extensions.
There’s no doubt that the highway trust fund isn’t covering what we need to spend as general funds have been used to shore up the trust fund in the past few years. But cutting transportation spending even further won’t solve the real problems, namely that the money — whether it’s more or less than before — is too often given out to states with no strings attached and no accountability for what that money should accomplish.
We need a better program that spends money wisely to meet the needs we have in 2010, not just a cheaper one.
Second, the new rule would prohibit the Appropriations Committee from funding any program not specifically authorized in law. This means that innovative programs that were created outside the six-year transportation authorization like TIGER or the Bush Administration’s Urban Partnership Program wouldn’t receive funding from the trust fund because they were new programs not included in the transportation authorization. (The UP program was the source of funding for congestion pricing in New York, before that project fell apart locally.)
In the last 8 years, both Republican and Democratic presidents have developed creative programs like these to better address our nation’s transportation needs. If this rule had been in place these two programs would not have been funded and projects like the Norfolk-Southern’s Crescent Corridor and Minneapolis’s I-35 multimodal corridor improvements among others could not have moved forward.
Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-OH) probably learned the hard way earlier this year that safe, accessible streets for bikers, walkers and all users don’t tend to have any party affiliation, and he is to be commended for proving his support for complete streets by signing onto the House complete streets bill last week, becoming its first Republican cosponsor.
On behalf of our thousands of supporters from communities across the country who think that it’s important that our transportation network be safe and usable by everyone, we’d like to thank Rep. LaTourette for signing on to the Complete Streets Act of 2009, making the bill bipartisan in the House. He joins sixty other co-sponsors in supporting good transportation planning practices that ensure that the safety of everyone using the road will be taken into account – whether they are driving, bicycling, walking, or catching the train or bus.
For some strange reason at the federal level, complete streets have been unfortunately maligned as a partisan issue, with Republicans in Congress hesitant to formally support the principles in a bill, resulting in the strange dynamic of Congress being far behind the curve of their state and local counterparts where politicians and leaders of all stripes have supported complete streets from the state level on down to the big city, metro area, county and small town — no matter their party affiliation.
“With 23 states and more than 140 local governments adopting Complete Streets policies, it has become clear that this is not a partisan issue – and that this is a change in transportation priorities that Americans want to see nationwide,” said Barbara McCann, Executive Director of the National Complete Streets Coalition.
Before its road diet, Charlotte’s East Boulevard was a four-lane, undivided road, that carried over 20,000 per day! Now, East Blvd–with its bike lanes, center turn lane, and curb ramps — is a complete street. Photo: Charmeck.org
We’d certainly like to hope that Rep. LaTourette’s signature on the bill — a product of responding to the voice of his local constituents — will open the floodgates for more House Republicans to support a bill and an idea that has broad support across the country in the local areas they represent. We’re sure there are dozens of House Republicans who are supportive of this idea but have been hesitant to be the only member of their party on the bill at such a polarized time in D.C.
When Rep. LaTourette made his comments back in April of this year about biking and walking to Secretary LaHood in a hearing, he was overwhelmed by the outpouring of comments from residents of his district who agreed with the Secretary that it was high time to treat biking and walking as legitimate and equal forms of transportation.
So local advocates from Walk and Roll Cleveland worked with Mr. LaTourette to bring him on board, sharing information with him about the economic benefits of building infrastructure to serve bicyclists and pedestrians and local bicycle shop owners also visited him. It certainly didn’t hurt that the Ohio Department of Transportation has been showing interest in developing a statewide policy, according to the folks at the National Complete Streets Coalition, or that Cleveland’s metropolitan planning organization adopted a policy 7 years ago.
Members of the National Complete Streets Coalition were pleased with the development.
“In signing on to the Complete Streets bill, Rep. LaTourette has started what could become a significant step toward safer more user-friendly streets for everyone, whether they walk, drive or ride,” said AARP Senior VP for Government Relations and Advocacy David Sloane. “Many Ohioans have seen the benefits of Complete Streets policies in their hometowns; AARP looks forward to the rest of the nation sharing that opportunity.”
Are you represented by someone who hasn’t yet signed onto the Complete Streets Act of 2009? Follow the lead of these Ohio advocates and start calling your representative and organizing meetings to help them see that this idea has broad support back home where their votes are.
UPDATED: We posted a similar question-and-answer document covering the specific issue of rescissions. Read that here.
As you may have read on Streetsblog Capitol Hill, where Elana Schor has been closely tracking the inexorable march toward expiration of the old transportation bill (SAFETEA-LU), the Senate passed an emergency one-month extension of the current law last night, just hours before the deadline.
There have been a lot of questions flying around today, so we’re going to try to post some simplified answers to clear up any confusion. Federal transportation policy is not the simplest code to decipher, but we’ll try our best to start with the basics.
The short explanation?
The Senate failed to pass an extension of their own to match the House’s recent 3-month extension before the transportation bill expired last night.
To prevent transportation spending from stopping entirely, Congress added a one-month extension of current transportation law to a last-minute bill (a Continuing Resolution) that keeps the federal government from shutting down in case they don’t pass the required individual spending bills for the next year. The one-month Continuing Resolution did not address the scheduled loss of $8.7 billion in transportation funds that will be taken from states, starting today.
Click through the jump below if you want much more detailed information. (more…)
We’ll have a number of posts today and tomorrow breaking down some of the notable spending levels and reforms proposed in Chairman Oberstar’s outline of the transportation bill. In the meantime, we thought we’d give you a few details that we’ve looked over while scanning the outline of the bill this morning. Note that today’s 11 a.m. press conference — which will included a longer version of the proposal — has been delayed until 2 p.m. due to “House votes.”
According to Oberstar’s summary, the upcoming bill will restructure and transform federal transportation policy away from multiple “prescriptive programs” into a “performance-based framework” “designed to achieve specific national objectives.”
The outline calls for terminating and consolidating more than 75 of the 108 total programs into a few broad large program areas, but it maintains current funding silos between separate modes. Here’s a quick breakdown. (Remember that these numbers are not final, and could be very different when the bill is released next week.)
Highways: $337.4 billion (75%) of $450 billion
Transit: $98.8 billion (22.2%) of $450 billion
Safety Programs: $12.6 billion (2.8%) of $450 billion
Its important to note that the $98.8 billion in proposed transit funds is not necessarily an accurate reflection of how much money public transportation would receive in total. Oberstar’s outline includes $50 billion for a new “Metropolitan Mobility and Access Program,” which will “provide significant funding to help the largest metropolitan regions address congestion,” and a refocused “Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program” (CMAQ). While money for both of these programs are included in the highway allocation, it would be possible under the proposal to spend these funds on public transportation projects to achieve the stated goals of CMAQ and the Metropolitan Mobility programs.
Chairman Oberstar’s outline also calls for $50 billion to develop high-speed rail — in addition to the money in the stimulus package and yearly appropriations bill for this year — an area of transportation that has never received funding in previous transportation legislation.
Oberstar told Congressional Quarterly this morning that he is still planning on releasing full bill text and marking up the bill in his Highways and Transit Subcommittee next week.
Check back later today for more details and analysis.
With the stimulus successfully passed through the Senate, it moves into conference with the House, where the two chambers will try to hammer out the version to be voted on again by each house before heading to the President’s desk if it passes.
Here is our side-by-side comparison on the transportation spending in the two versions. For the non-policy wonks out there, you’ll want to stick to the numbers at the top before it descends into the particulars of the second half of the table.
Check back here later Tuesday or Wednesday morning for our complete list of what we’re asking Congress to do in conference. (For example, keep the House’s $12 billion for transit.)
You’ll need to click through to see the full table if you’re on the main blog page. (more…)
It appears the Senate compromise on the stimulus package keeps transit and highway funding unchanged. Neither the high speed rail funding or competitive grants for any mode were reduced, as was originally thought to be the case. We’re suspending our appeal to make calls for now.
The Senate will move to vote on the overall stimulus package Monday or Tuesday. Then it moves to conference committee with the House to determine the balance between the two bills that will ultimately be voted on by both chambers and sent to the President’s desk.
Streetsblog Network members The Transport Politic and Greater Greater Washington both had good summaries of the Senate compromise. The Transport Politic breaks down the funding compared to the House version, and points out some crucial differences that will be hashed out in conference:
The final version of the compromise stimulus bill, which was formulated by a group of about 20 moderate senators, has been released by Senated Ben Nelson (D-NE). It does not decrease funds currently proposed to be allocated to high-speed rail or transit programs, but it does not meet the higher standards for funding for fixed guideways and New Starts that were provided in the amendment added to the House version of the bill by Representative Jerrold Nadler (D-NY).
Greater Greater Washington reminds us that while transit wasn’t raided and redirected to highway funding, there’s still no assurance that the highway funds will be directed to where they can be the most effective. Repair and maintenance will create more jobs, spend money more quickly, and will not come with the price tag of future billions in maintenance like new highways do.
People on the left and right have plenty of other complaints about this stimulus. And it still gives the lion’s share of money to states under the old formulas which favor highways. There’s no “fix it first” requirement making sure state DOTs repair crumbling bridges before building greenfield freeways. Still, we were able to stop the Senate from making things a lot, lot worse. That’s a start.
Nothing is truly finished yet. Until the Senate passes their version, amendments could still spring up and funding levels could change. If it passes, the House and Senate will conference together next week to determine how to balance out portions of the bill that are not in line with each other.
For example, the House has $12 billion for transit, while the Senate has less than $9 billion. As TP points out, “the bills are different enough that we won’t know what the final bill will look like until the Senate/House conference committee releases its report after it meets.”
Stay tuned here on the blog or on Twitter to follow updates next week as the bill proceeds. Watch Monday for news about urging the conference to keep the House’s higher transit figures.
.jpg)
Earlier this week the House adopted rules for this new session of Congress. It’s a bit of inside baseball that can be hard to decipher, but these rules determine how bills are considered by lawmakers and what bills can and cannot do. 
