Skip to main content

Tag: invest in the rest

Here’s how we will grade the next surface reauthorization bill

Empty scorecard to grade a bill against three principles: safety over speed, fix it first, invest in the rest.

With the IIJA expiring in September, a draft version of the next surface transportation reauthorization will eventually be released. As with previous bills, T4America plans to release a public scorecard on how well Congress’s proposal would steer the federal program toward achieving its stated goals. Here’s what we are looking for.

Transportation for America is ready to grade the next surface transportation reauthorization, and our rubric is incredibly simple.

Empty scorecard to grade a bill against three principles: safety over speed, fix it first, invest in the rest.

The federal government has spent $1.5 trillion over the past 30 years to achieve its stated goals of improving safety, fixing infrastructure, reducing congestion and emissions, and improving public health. The reality is that despite the massive amount of money poured into the system, we don’t have much to show for it. The success of the next transportation bill should not be measured by how much or how little money we put into the program, but by how well it holds the system accountable for achieving our national goals and being responsible to the American taxpayer. 

Similar to our past scorecards, T4America will be grading legislative text on a pass/fail basis against our three core principles. In line with these principles, T4America will be looking for how the text prioritizes 1) safer roads over speed, 2) the maintenance of existing infrastructure, and 3) investing in more transportation options.

Safety over speed

The roads in most developed countries are safer than ours and continue to improve, but Congress continues to prioritize vehicle speed above all else, including safety.  Safety needs to come first. 

What we’ll be looking for: States and MPOs should be required to set concrete targets to improve roadway safety and reduce roadway deaths and to report progress on safety goals. When states fail to meet those safety targets, their flexible funding under the National Highway Performance Program and the Surface Transportation Block Grant Program should be dedicated to projects that are proven to move the needle on safety. Localities also need evidence-based guidance for roadway designs, and the federal government needs to overhaul its own road safety guidance and provide localities the freedom to experiment. Read T4America’s policy recommendations for prioritizing safety over speed in surface transportation reauthorization. 

An emerging consideration: As the autonomous vehicle (AV) market continues to expand, it is vital to ensure that the rapid growth of this industry does not come at the expense of safety. The next law must promote transparency, make AV data public, and require reporting of collisions, malfunctions, and other anomalies. Local oversight also needs to be preserved, and localities should be able to determine how autonomous vehicles are deployed and operated on their streets. Finally, left unchecked, empty AVs could clog our roads while waiting for passengers. USDOT should establish a pricing mechanism that disincentivizes AV operators from allowing their vehicles to operate without passengers, preventing roads from being filled with empty cars.  Read T4America’s other policy recommendations on ensuring AVs meet their potential. 

Fix it first 

Prioritizing roadway expansion and leaving maintenance as an afterthought, with no long-term plan for decades of maintenance costs, is nonsensical. We can’t afford to keep expanding the size and scope of the system without a clear plan to maintain what we’ve already built. Our last Repair Priorities report showed that we’d need $231.4 billion per year just to keep our existing road network in acceptable condition. Every new road, lane-mile, or bridge adds a costly new financial obligation for decades to come, pushing that number even higher.  We need to be accountable to taxpayers and cannot continue to defer maintenance.  Federal funding should prioritize fixing what we have before building anything new.

What we’ll be looking for: Legislative language must center accountability to ensure that maintenance is not on the back burner. If federal funds are given to grantees to increase roadway capacity, recipients should first demonstrate that they can maintain that asset over the course of its entire lifetime. Grants should not be distributed to agencies that cannot maintain the capacity they claim to need. States and MPOs should be required to set clear, measurable targets for improving pavement conditions, and when they fail to meet those targets, USDOT should step in and reorient National Highway Performance Program and Surface Transportation Block Grant funds toward repair. See the rest of T4Americas’s policy recommendations to prioritize existing maintenance needs. 

Fixing roads should also include reconnecting communities and addressing the harms of previous infrastructure decisions. Projects built in the 1950s (and continuing through today) destroyed local economies and undermined the health and connectivity of people living near highways. Language that expands programs like the Reconnecting Communities Program (RCP), a competitive grant that funds the redesign and deconstruction of outdated infrastructure, must be included in the text (we’ll be looking out for the REPAIR Infrastructure Act, which continues the Reconnecting Communities Pilot Program). Opportunities like RCP offered communities the chance to improve access to daily needs such as jobs, schools, food, recreation, and healthcare resources by building complete streets, fixing sidewalks, and investing in access to public transit. Additionally, models need to be updated for accuracy so agencies can accurately assess the impacts of highway alternative projects, and agencies must be transparent with the public about which models they use. Read the rest of our policy recommendations for an idea of what we are looking for in the next surface reauthorization bill to fix our past infrastructure history. 

Invest in the rest

As the U.S. has built out the highway system, there has been too little support for other modes of transportation. Households need choices for how to get around, and we do not have freedom if there is a monopoly on mobility. The next surface reauthorization bill text must ensure we can build out a world-class transit system, a strong passenger rail network, and take charge of the electric vehicle market (EV).

What we’ll be looking for: One of the biggest challenges localities face is securing reliable funding for transit operations. Fare revenue does not cover the full cost of transit operations, and only smaller systems are allowed to use their federal funds on operations. Larger systems do not have that flexibility, and even if they did, that flexibility comes at the expense of money for capital improvements. In the next surface bill, T4America will be looking for policies that provide robust support for federal transit operations (similar to the Stronger Communities Through Better Transit Act). Rural communities also rely on transit, and we will be looking for language that improves mobility services in rural areas by streamlining funding from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), and Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Read T4America’s full policy recommendations on how to build out world-class transit. 

Passenger rail needs to be preserved and expanded on in the next surface bill. Amtrak’s national network of long-distance and state-supported routes provides vital transportation connections for communities. We are looking for policies that restructure roles and responsibilities, so that Amtrak’s board includes representation from individuals with demonstrated interest in the system and regular experience using passenger rail. The legislation should also encourage residential, commercial, and mixed-use development near rail stations to support transit-oriented development. Read T4America’s complete policy recommendations on building world-class passenger rail. 

Federal transportation policy should position the U.S. to build a competitive advantage in electric vehicle manufacturing. An important part of supporting this market is expanding a reliable charging network by increasing the flexibility within the EV fueling program. The surface bill should include reducing unnecessary restrictions on the National Electric Vehicle (NEVI) program and ensuring that EVs pay into the system just like gas and diesel cars do. Read T4America’s other policy recommendations on investing in the EV market. 

Looking ahead

T4America will look closely at any reauthorization proposal and grade it against our three core principles—priorities with broad support from voters across the political spectrum. Bills that fall short of these very attainable goals will be rated accordingly, while proposals that deliver the mark will earn a ringing endorsement. We will publish our scorecards and determine whether the next surface reauthorization law would actually deliver measurable and improved outcomes. 

The federal government can’t neglect transit operations funds any longer

The most costly aspect of transit is funding its operations, and for decades this has fallen mainly on states and localities that are already struggling financially. The federal government has invested heavily in transit capital, but the big next steps are to improve efficiency and reliability by ensuring transit can function.

T4’s policies to invest in transit operations

In our platform for reauthorization, under our principle of Invest in the Rest, we aim to improve our transit efficiency and reliability to ensure better access to jobs, schools, and other imperative community resources. Establishing a dedicated federal stream of funding will support increases in transit service, including greater frequency, longer hours of service, and launching new service. Our proposal includes changes like:

  • Allowing an 80 percent federal cost share for transit agencies in areas of persistent poverty.
  • Redefining mobility improvement project justification based on improvements in access to jobs and essential services, and the congestion relief project justification based on whether projects allow transit users to avoid traffic congestion.

Why is there little investment in federal transit operations?

The United States has a history of building transit systems while neglecting transit operations funding. For the transit systems that remained after post-World War II urban sprawl, there was a large push from city governments to step in financially for transit operations. The federal government adopted the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964. The act authorized a large sum of funding and was the catalyst for the federal government to assist in transit capital projects and initiated the formation of the Federal Transit Administration.

Federal funding for capital projects increased, while transit agencies were in regular need of more operations assistance. Congress attempted to fill this gap by supplementing $4 billion in federal operating funds following the oil crisis in 1973 (also highlighting the importance of transit for addressing oil-dependency). The federal operations funding helped stabilize ridership and with the addition to the robust capital funds, other metropolitan areas were able to construct their own rail systems (MARTA and BART for example).

During the era of “Reaganomics”, there was a movement to limit the federal government’s role in local transportation issues, and specifically with operating funding. Although the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA-21) both substantially supported transit, federal transit operating assistance had been eliminated. The following federal transit bills reflected this imbalance, allocating more funds to highways than transit and neglecting to adequately adjust operations funding for inflation.

Why feds should support transit operations

A transit operations budget typically includes funding for gasoline, overhead, and salaries for transit operators. For larger transit agencies, these funds are limited and are only supported through local and state funds such as sales taxes or ballot measures. A renewed federal investment in transit operations is essential, building on the precedent set in the 1970s, but scaled to meet today’s greater needs.

Robust, fully funded transit operations dramatically improve service, reliability and efficiency. Transit operations are the everyday costs that are incurred by transit agencies and when it is plentiful, service interruptions are less likely to occur. To improve frequency, agencies need enough operators behind the wheel. Competitive pay and better working conditions help attract and retain drivers, making frequent, reliable bus service a reality. Operations also go towards paying for fuel and vehicle maintenance. Proper maintenance and sufficient fuel ensure that transit vehicles remain reliable and capable of delivering consistent service. Establishing a funding stream specifically for transit operations is foundational to provide world-class services for communities.

Establish transit operations funding at the federal level

We cannot keep forcing states and localities to scrounge around for money to fund transit operations. The federal government has the ability and financial capacity to assist. Cost share (also known as a federal-match) is the portion of funds that is paid for by federal funds. By expanding the cost share to 80 percent from 50 percent, the federal government can assist in closing the funding gap and allow states to focus on providing high quality t services.

In the last couple of years, Representative Hank Johnson (GA) has made efforts to highlight the need for federal assistance with transit operations. His Stronger Communities Through Better Transit Act, originally introduced in 2024, would establish a federal program to provide operating‑support grants to public transportation agencies, enabling improved service in underserved communities. “Simply put, people could get to more places in less time using transit. Jobs, schools, and other daily destinations that previously took too long to reach would become more accessible,” Rep. Johnson said in a recent press release. “People would feel less strain on household budgets as their transportation costs shrink. They would have more time to spend with their families as time spent commuting falls.”

Looking ahead

Even modest federal investment in transit operations can be transformative—especially for communities struggling with limited or unreliable service. A $20 billion annual federal program, as envisioned by advocates, could increase transit service by up to 40 percent. This service increase could be monumental by allowing more people to commute to jobs easier, find greater economic opportunities, and navigate their communities in a safe and reliable way. Day-to-day operations are exactly where the federal government is offering the least amount of support. This reauthorization is a chance to fix that: to fund transit the right way and give states and communities the sustained operational support they urgently need.

Unlocking the benefits of transit-oriented development

It’s time to make the most of our limited federal transit money by encouraging and incentivizing more transit-oriented development, and by using the value that transit creates to improve, expand, and support more transit service in more places.

Introduction to Invest in the Rest

Invest in the Rest is the third of T4America’s guiding principles to transform transportation policy. For decades, the United States has invested hundreds of billions of dollars into our highway system while largely neglecting all other forms of transportation. This country says it is about freedom of choice, but the only feasible way to move around in a vast majority of communities is via a personal car. Americans deserve and are in need of more options for transit services. How are we going to provide that?

T4’s proposal: Promote transit-oriented development & value capture

Under this third guiding principle of Invest in the Rest, our first set of policy proposals focuses on building world-class transit in communities of all sizes. We’ll be expanding on the rest of that idea in future posts (and in an online briefing later this summer), but the fourth and final idea under that umbrella is ensuring that we make the most of our limited federal transit money by encouraging and incentivizing more transit-oriented development:

4. Promote transit-oriented development to maximize transit efficiency and provide high-quality service. Prioritize, expedite, and provide a higher match to Capital Investment Grants projects that include value capture to support transit service and rezone or plan mixed-use, mixed-income development at and around stations.

This small, but important idea has two big picture goals:

  1. Maximizing our limited federal transit dollars by steering more money into projects that can better serve more riders, and 
  2. Capturing more of the value that transit creates and investing that money back into transit. 

Transit increases the value of everything close to it, yet in most cases, that new value accrues to property owners, developers, or is generally just lost. We need to change that. We can start by prioritizing funding for the transit projects that maximize the value created by transit, and use some of that value to help pay for transit operations and improvements. And with the limited federal transit funding available, we should reward agencies that incentivize new mixed-use development around their stations that provide more housing and exciting new destinations to existing riders—and bring new riders into the system.

Transit-oriented development (TOD) is an urban planning tactic that focuses on building things—such as more housing and commercial spaces—near transit stations of all kinds. Encouraging more development in locations that are already well-served by quality public transit can help maximize the benefits of those past transit investments. More things near transit can increase transit ridership, enhance access to jobs and essential destinations, promote public health, and boost real estate value. By the same token, costly transit investments can be undercut by land-use or zoning decisions that prevent more housing or walkable, mixed-use development around transit. At its core, this policy proposal is about building the best transit possible for the money we have available.

The federal government funds new or expanded transit service through the transit Capital Investment Grant (CIG) program, which funds expanded heavy/rapid rail, commuter rail, light rail, streetcars, bus rapid transit and other bus services. Just like the highway program, transit gets built with a share of federal money that doesn’t cover the full cost. But, unlike the highway program, where the federal government has always covered around 90 percent of the total cost, the maximum federal share for new transit construction maxes out at 80 percent and in most cases is closer to 50 percent. This means that transit agencies (and local taxpayers) have to shoulder more of the cost.

Breaking down the policy

It’s unlikely that the next reauthorization dramatically increases transit funding. So, how can we get more money into transit in order to invest in the rest? One way would be to find new avenues for capturing more of the value created by new transit to help pay for building or operating transit. Value capture is a form of public financing that recovers some or all of the value that public infrastructure generates for private entities. For example, building transit stations can increase adjacent land values that create new, unearned profit for private landowners. Studies have shown that transit projects increase nearby property values by 30 to 40 percent. That value can be “captured” directly by allowing public agencies to tax a share of that value that accrues from the public investment to private landowners, and redirect those funds into transit.

One particular type of value capture strategy is joint development. This strategy for TOD allows a transit agency to coordinate with developers to improve the transit system while simultaneously developing real estate in ways that share costs and establish mutual benefits. This creates revenue streams for transit that can be used to cover operating costs and capital projects.

There are many examples of the benefits on real estate values and job growth of focusing new development around transit. On the Orange Line corridor in Arlington County, Virginia, a new metro line and five stations was built under what was at the time a low-density suburban corridor just outside the nation’s capital. Before construction began, Arlington adopted a General Land Use Plan to concentrate dense, mixed-use development around the new stations and along the corridor. Now, the two-square-mile corridor has been a huge driver of economic growth and new housing in the county. There have been a multitude of amazing results for encouraging ridership, including 50 percent of residents taking transit to work and 73 percent of residents walking to the metro stations. They have also maximized the value of their land and the hefty cost of this major transit investment: 26 percent of the county’s residents and 37 percent of the county’s jobs are on just 8 percent of the county’s land area represented by this corridor.

Finally, during a housing crisis with a severe shortage of homes, the federal transit program should reward the localities that are removing outdated zoning or land-use restrictions around transit to help the private market meet the demand for more housing. These onerous regulations often get in the way of building new things around transit that can bring in new riders. Many cities in the United States almost exclusively restrict new development to allow only single-family homes—even in walkable areas served by frequent and high-quality transit. This undercuts the value of transit, which works best when it connects as many people and destinations as possible. It also short-circuits the market, which is clamoring to meet the booming demand for more homes and destinations in walkable places served by transit. In addition to single-family homes, we need to update ancient zoning maps and relax these regulations to allow more mixed-use development or units that allow for residential and commercial space for multiple households.

Transit is at its best and most efficient when it serves as many people as possible and connects them to as many destinations as possible. TOD at its essence is all about building high-quality transit where people and places already are, or by putting more people and things close to the transit you’ve already built. The federal transit program should be encouraging both.

Looking ahead

“Show me the incentives, and I’ll show you the outcomes.” If we want transit to truly connect people to opportunity, we need to reward projects that deliver more than just movement—we need to invest in access, equity, and impact. Transit-oriented development (TOD) is one of the smartest ways to stretch limited dollars, increase ridership, and build stronger, more connected communities. Americans deserve a world-class transit system that’s funded with the same seriousness as highways—and designed to serve people, not just vehicles. By aligning funding with outcomes that matter—like access to jobs, homes, schools, healthcare, and opportunity—we can build a transportation system that works for everyone.

Long Distance Rail Study fails to address the needs of passengers

The Long-Distance Rail Study, released by the Federal Railroad Administration in the twilight hours of the Biden Administration on January 20, 2025, prioritizes lengthy projects that have little chance to succeed instead of shorter-term projects that can deliver service to Americans. It is imperative that Amtrak focus on routes that run daily and not only serve major employment centers but the small urban towns that lie between.

Cardinal Train passing by L’Enfant Station on 2/23/25 (Photo By Author)

In January 2025, just before the change of Presidential Administration, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) released the Amtrak Long-Distance Service Study as a report to Congress. The study, which was due in November 2023, was mandated by Congress as part of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), with the goal of evaluating the restoration of several long-distance passenger rail routes to be operated by the National Passenger Railroad Corporation (Amtrak).

The United States has lost many long-distance passenger rail routes in the decades following the founding of Amtrak in 1971. (Long-distance routes are routes that travel over 750 miles). The study found that many of the remaining 15 long-distance routes serve as a vital link for many rural communities that lack other transportation options, such as interstate highways or airports. Investing in more routes within the Amtrak network will offer increased access to communities across the country by a method other than driving or flying.

1940 map of passenger rail routes in the United States (Source)

Comparison map of Amtrak routes in 1971 vs 2021 (Source)

While it is admirable to recommend 15 more long-distance routes (some of which are the restoration of previous services, while others are brand new service proposals), many of these projects are not able to be completed in a short period of time. Many of the recommendations require complex negotiations with the freight rail companies that own the tracks, constructing new or refurbished accessible stations and boarding platforms, and brand new corridor alignments in order to meet the needs of these proposed services. It is important to think in terms of four-, six-, and eight-year increments for project timelines, as that is the time frame in which Congress and the Presidency operate. And it is often extremely difficult to convince elected leaders to support a project that they may not even see while they are in office.

Quick win opportunities: The Cardinal and the Sunset Limited

Figure 4-1 of the report

Of the 15 remaining long-distance routes, 13 have departures seven days a week. However, two of the proposed 15 trains have a lower frequency, only departing three times a week instead: the Cardinal and the Sunset Limited. Unlike many of the other new route proposals, upgrading the Cardinal and Sunset Limited to daily service is a feasible project that could be implemented in a shorter timeframe and deliver impactful results.

Houston, TX, the fourth most populous city in the United States and on the Sunset Limited route, is the largest city in the country without daily passenger rail service. The Cardinal exclusively connects Charleston, WV; Cincinnati, OH; and Indianapolis, IN, while the Sunset Limited exclusively connects Houston, TX; El Paso, TX; and Tucson, AZ. Cultivating daily service on these two routes would allow for reliable connectivity for many rural communities and small towns to economic and education opportunities and to health/social services.

North Coast Hiawatha Proposed Route (Source)

The North Coast Hiawatha, prominently listed as the “Seattle-Chicago” route, was a long-distance route that was discontinued in 1979. It was similar to the current Empire Builder route that travels between Chicago and Seattle or Portland (splitting service in Spokane), operating three times a week between Chicago and Seattle. However, unlike the Empire Builder, the North Coast Hiawatha took a more southern route through North Dakota and Montana, connecting cities such as Bismark, Billings, Bozeman, Helena, and Missoula. All of these cities currently lack passenger rail, which the Big Sky Passenger Rail Authority is advocating to change. Restoring the North Coast Hiawatha and upgrading it to daily service would allow for reliable connectivity and would increase access to everyday destinations.

Another branch of an existing service that was considered but not incorporated in the study was branching the Crescent, which runs from New York to New Orleans, at Meridian to have a branch to Fort Worth. This line has even received federal grants and currently has a supportive freight host (CPKC) for much of the route.

Tangible opportunities for tomorrow’s wins

With passenger rail funding at a crossroads in the United States, it is important that the FRA and Amtrak utilize existing rail assets in relation to population, economic, and health centers and prioritize starting passenger rail operations quickly. Projects such as the daily Cardinal and Sunset Limited, restoration and enhancement of the North Coast Hiawatha, and splitting the Crescent at Meridian to go to Dallas are shorter-term projects that would construct a brighter future for passenger rail. These projects would create new connections for riders, and allow greater mobility around the United States for a more reasonable cost and within a more reasonable timeframe.

Los Angeles’s “No Car” Olympic Games are important beyond 2028

The opening of LAX/Metro Transit Center Station on the Los Angeles Metro is a major milestone in the city’s history and is vital for the 2028 Summer Olympics, but there are far more reasons to invest in alternative transportation options beyond major sporting events.

A Los Angeles Metro Rail C Line Train at LAX/Metro Transit Center during the testing phase (Source: LACMTA)

The grand opening of a long awaited station

(Source: LACMTA)

This year, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) plans to open the LAX/Metro Transit Center Station on the Los Angeles Metro Rail C and K Lines to serve Los Angeles International Airport (LAX). Despite having the second highest population of any city in the United States behind New York, Los Angeles did not provide rail transit service to LAX (the 8th busiest airport in the world) until 2025. While there is still work to be done on the LAX Automated People Mover (expected to open in 2026) to connect the transit center to the terminals at LAX without the need for a shuttle bus, the opening of LAX/Metro Transit Center is still a major milestone. LA has proven that it is committed to investing in the rest of its transportation system by heavily expanding the LA Metro Rail system and improving frequency and reliability on the LA Metro Bus network.

The LAX/Metro Transit Center Station is part of a larger set of projects known as the Twenty Eight by ‘28 plan in order to ensure Los Angeles and its transportation network are ready for the upcoming Olympic Games in the summer of 2028. Other upcoming notable projects part of the plan include the three phases of the D Line Extension along Wilshire Boulevard to the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), an extension of the A Line to Pomona, bike lane and pedestrian path improvements along the Los Angeles River, and more. Many of these projects are important initiatives to incentivize other methods of transportation beyond driving and will greatly benefit the local residents beyond the Olympics and the influx of people it will bring.

Competing Priorities for “Car-Free Games”

Los Angeles is a city well known for its car culture and particularly for its traffic. However, Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass has stated that the 2028 Olympics will be a “no-car games. This is a tall order for LA, and such an investment will require cooperation from the federal, state, and local levels. However, this mission statement by Mayor Bass aims to avoid congestion by making transit and active transportation the primary focus of the city for the Olympics.

These Olympic Games are a prime time to build transit better in LA, and show the world that a car-free Olympics is possible, even in a city famous for its traffic. In addition, these policy decisions to prioritize alternative transportation for the Olympics will have broad implications beyond the games themselves, as the transit improvements such as the A and D Line Extensions will permeate far beyond the Olympics in 2028, and greatly enhance how Angelenos move throughout the region.

However, it is important that Mayor Bass and the LA Metro follow through with their vision for a car-free games. The need to focus on traffic alleviation and unsafe freeway interchange has prompted LA Metro to shift their focus to freeway expansions, including Express Lanes in I-105, increasing capacity at the interchange of State Routes 57 and 60, and expanding capacity for I-5. These projects run counter to the notion of a car-free games and should be re-examined in favor of other, smaller multimodal improvements which emit less carbon and cause less congestion.

Beyond the Olympics

By focusing on other methods of transportation such as cycling, walking, and many modes of public transit from buses to light rail and heavy rail, LA is creating options for moving around the city beyond driving that will last far beyond the 2028 Olympics. Oftentimes, after the Olympics, many of the facilities built and used for the events end up being underutilized and expensive to maintain (also known as a white elephant facility). By primarily investing in mobility options and reusing existing facilities, LA is creating a lasting mobility legacy beyond the Olympic Games.

A local coalition started by Move LA (the only countywide organization dedicated to public transportation funding that passed transformative initiatives like Measures R and M), FASTLinkDTLA, Agency Artifact, LA Commons, LA Neighborhood Initiative, and the California Community Foundation have come together to create the “Festival Trail” as a legacy project. This 28-mile-long zero-emissions, non-vehicular corridor connects the major venues currently proposed for the 2028 Games in the greater LA region. The Festival Trail is a linkage to current and planned Caltrans, LA Metro, and LA city projects with new public spaces celebrating each community and unlocking up to 20,000 units of new affordable housing in the most under-resourced communities of south LA and downtown.

Ideally, it should not take a major sporting event such as the Olympics to see the benefits of public transit, cycling, and other alternative transportation improvements. Building more public transit, both bus and rail, and investing in cycling and pedestrian pathways should be principles that cities across the United States implement regardless. But these mega-events do provide a deadline to move these projects along at a much faster pace. If a city so famous for its car culture such as Los Angeles can understand the value of alternative transportation, any city can.

Voters across America show support for more transportation options

Throughout the United States, various measures for funding transportation improvements were approved, advancing efforts to invest in the rest at the local level.

An electric Central Ohio bus arrives at a stop with a nearby bikeshare station
Columbus, Ohio voters supported funding for improved bus service in the recent election. (Central Ohio Transit Authority)

In addition to the presidential, Senate, and House races that occurred during this tumultuous election cycle, American voters recently decided on a variety of transportation and housing measures for their communities. (See our recent post on success for transit in Nashville here.) No matter the outcome of the federal elections, these measures represent a desire to invest in the rest of our transportation system and secure more travel options. Here are four major highlights from the many measures that were voted for around the country.

Columbus, Ohio

Issue 47 raises the sales tax for the Central Ohio Transportation Authority (COTA) from 0.5% to 1% in order to fund LinkUs. The plan calls for 45% more bus service, the creation of five bus rapid transit (BRT) lines to create faster and more efficient bus service. This includes dedicated lanes, priority at signals, and 14 new bus routes. The plan would also provide eight new COTA//Plus zones, which provide subsidized rideshare in neighborhoods of Columbus without bus service.

Money from the new sales tax will also be used for pedestrian infrastructure to support walkable neighborhoods near the new transit lines. LinkUs will create opportunity and access for Columbus, which is expected to grow to over three million residents by 2050.

Durham, North Carolina

The Durham Streets and Sidewalk Measure authorizes the city to issue $115 million in bonds for street and sidewalk projects. This money will be used in a variety of projects, such as adding 12.4 miles of sidewalk, repaving an estimated 100 miles of streetscape, and continuing an ongoing project to pave the remaining 10.5 miles of unpaved streets in Durham. The success of this measure shows that voters in cities like Durham understand that fixing it first is vital to support a well-functioning transportation network.

A yellow line metro train arrives at an underground station
WMATA Yellow Line at L’Enfant Plaza Station. (Photo by author: Maxwell Reinisch, Transportation for America)

Fairfax County and Arlington County, Virginia

Both the Fairfax County and Arlington County transportation bond measures provide millions of dollars of bonds for public transit. Fairfax County provided $180 million in bonds for the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) to assist with capital costs of acquiring land for transportation facilities, new train cars, and more. Arlington County also provided $72 million in bonds, including $44.3 million in funds for WMATA capital improvements, $22 million for improving local streets, and $1.5 million for sidewalk and curb maintenance, and $1.3 million for street lighting and miscellaneous transportation projects.

WMATA has made great strides in recovering ridership since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, and these funds will allow WMATA to keep providing frequent, reliable service throughout DC and its surrounding counties.

Denver, Colorado and surrounding counties

Measure 7A allows the Denver Regional Transportation District (RTD) to collect and reinvest revenue from sales tax above the originally approved levels in 1999. Removing the limits from decades prior allows the RTD to continue to improve service for the Denver Metropolitan Area for the three million residents in Boulder, Broomfield, Denver, and Jefferson Counties as well as portions of Adams, Arapahoe, Douglas, and Weld Counties, which rely on RTD’s bus, light rail, and regional rail lines.

Why it matters

Municipalities around the country voted to invest in the rest in this last election, including funding for a more balanced transportation system that designs streets for safety over the speed of private automobiles.

While not every transit or transportation investment measure was passed, the majority were approved by voters. And where transportation measures failed, like in Charleston County’s Special Sales and Use Tax ballot measure, voters rejected funding for projects that would have gone to a highway expansion and negatively impacted the local environment.

It is important to acknowledge the progress that forward thinking communities in the country have made towards making our transportation system more equitable and sustainable for everyone. When determining how to support our nation’s transportation system, we hope that the incoming administration takes note of these trends.

Four ways our federal leaders can invest in the rest

Photograph of a street facing the U.S. Capitol with bike lanes down the middle and pedestrians utilizing a crosswalk

While we might have the most extensive highway infrastructure in the world, the U.S. is delivering pitifully poor results compared to our peers when it comes to cost, efficiency, emissions, and safety. What can Congress and USDOT do to invest in the rest?

Under federal transportation policy, funding for highways greatly outpaces transit. Worse, it is hard to overstate how little of total funding has been allocated to building sidewalks and bike routes. For Americans who are unable to drive or lack regular access to a car, the lack of alternative options has very real consequences. In addition, when we fail to invest in opportunities to walk, bike, and take public transit, communities lose out on the wide-scale benefits these options provide. Multimodal transportation investments that make transit and walking more practical options for people promote ecologically and fiscally sustainable options for economic development.

Our system today costs us much more than we think, with poor outcomes for all users, including public health and climate outcomes, which have a disproportionate impact on Black and low-income communities historically marginalized from transportation decision-making. We continue to invest in road capacity expansions as our go-to strategy to alleviate congestion or drive economic growth, despite proof that this strategy does not work. As a result, cities remain locked in a Sisyphean strategy that continues to leave us stuck in traffic, even after COVID-19, with more remote work options than ever.

A bar chart compares transit funding with highway funding in federal investments from 1991 to 2021. In every bill except the 2021 ARP that only funded transit ($31B), highway spending dwarfs transit spending, with the largest discrepancy appearing in the IIJA ($432B for highways and $109B for transit). Cumulative spending since 1991 is also significantly higher for highways than transit, with cumulative spending by 2021 reaching $1413B for highways and $359B for transit.
Across recent major bills, federal investment in highway programs has vastly outpaced investments in transit.

Instead of continuing oversized investments in the bloated federal highway program that fail to deliver results, the next transportation reauthorization bill needs to invest in the rest to build a world-class, multimodal transportation system. Here are some steps Congress and USDOT can take to get started.

1. Fix the data

We need quality data to make quality decisions. Transportation generates plenty of opportunities to collect data, from vehicular speed and throughput to how many miles of bike lane are being built. However, ensuring data quality matters much more than raw quantity of measures alone. While we have plenty of data-oriented solutions and measures to advance and plan specific transportation projects, the data underlying our system is full of holes.

Right now, it’s difficult for policymakers and advocates to determine how we are spending our money and to identify the actual effects of spending trends. Critical performance measure data tracked by the Federal Highway Administration can take years to update or be presented incomplete, missing data entirely. But even quality data is insufficient when we interpret it through the same old flawed processes that take us to the same old conclusions that lead us to the same bad outcomes.

We need better information to make better decisions at the federal, state, and local levels. Practitioners should have access to tools that effectively model and account for induced demand, land use changes, greenhouse gasses, and access to jobs and services in ways that can inform investment decisions away from strategies that have not worked in the past. Current and planned transportation investments should be reported on a more standardized basis in order for state advocates to understand where their funds are actually going.

2. Better utilize federal programs

The transformative investment levels required to provide a world class transportation system won’t be met with small, individual discretionary grant programs alone. The real workhorses of the federal transportation program—the Surface Transportation Block Grant and National Highway Performance Program—often provide a significant portion of federal funds for states to invest how they see fit, which almost always means building more roads. Spending on new road capacity is delivering diminishing returns and should be rededicated to opportunities to take public transit or walk, bike, and roll.

Under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA), there are many programs available to create more transportation options. However, finding and applying for these funds can be a strain on communities. Congress should consider consolidating the number of programs and expanding the size of smaller programs that provide funding access for local communities to address local safety, access, and resilience priorities. In implementing these federal programs, USDOT should streamline grant applications for smaller localities and jurisdictions while continuing to provide specialized assistance and relevant application information for lower resourced communities.

3. Fund transit operations, and use funding to boost frequency

When properly supported, transit provides immense value to communities and users from all walks of life. Unfortunately, transit has received significantly less support over the years compared to highway projects.

In order to unlock the transformative economic, climate, and equity benefits that transit can bring to a region, transit service needs to be frequent and provide access to jobs and services. We can do this by helping to fund transit operations and structuring federal grant programs to provide a pathway for transit agencies to reliably increase service and frequency to get people where they need to go.

Pairing the above with walkable, denser development around transit and a method to raise revenues that captures the value transit brings to a region could help advance investments in building out our transit systems, making them even more valuable resources.

4. Build out the passenger rail network

The IIJA is proving to be a launchpad for a passenger rail revival in the United States. There’s no doubt we’ve come a long way. However, as projects develop, there’s still much more work to be done and it takes a long time to bring a train up to top speed. If we want to build off our successes, reauthorization should ensure that we don’t stop building our rail network commitments now. Continuing our investments in national connectivity, and service is the best path forward to a strong national rail system. Learn more about how federal leaders can help advance passenger rail here.

The stakes

Congress and USDOT can play a major role in supporting a multimodal, world-class transportation system. Providing a floor for consistent investment in transit and active transportation infrastructure will be vital in ensuring that every American can reach their destinations safely, conveniently, and efficiently.

It’s Invest in the Rest Week

Click below to access more content related to our third principle for infrastructure investment, Invest in the Rest. Find all three of our principles here.

  • Four ways our federal leaders can invest in the rest

    While we might have the most extensive highway infrastructure in the world, our system is delivering pitifully poor results compared to our peers when it comes to cost, efficiency, emissions, and safety. What can Congress and USDOT do to invest in the rest?

  • Week Without Driving showcases the need to invest in the rest

    Last week, Transportation for America joined organizations and advocates nationwide in the Week Without Driving challenge. During this week, all Americans, including transportation practitioners and policymakers, are encouraged to travel without a car, allowing them to experience local barriers to walking, biking, and taking public transit firsthand.

  • Time to tip the scales in favor of more transportation options

    For decades, federal highway funding and funding for all other types of transportation (public transit, opportunities to walk and bike) have been severely unbalanced. In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, pedestrian deaths, and traffic, the Department of Transportation must invest in more transportation alternatives.

Week Without Driving showcases the need to invest in the rest

A cyclist passes a bus stop in San Diego, CA as an American flag waves high above his head.

Last week, Transportation for America joined organizations and advocates nationwide in the Week Without Driving challenge. During this week, all Americans, including transportation practitioners and policymakers, are encouraged to travel without a car, allowing them to experience local barriers to walking, biking, and taking public transit firsthand.

For decades, our policies and investments have prioritized creating transportation infrastructure that is primarily oriented around the movement of people in cars. This focus has come at the expense of all other ways to travel, and everyday people pay the price.

This is why many advocates and organizations, including Transportation for America, chose to participate in the national Week Without Driving, which challenges people to spend a full week getting around to work, the grocery store, and all other activities, without using a car.

For individuals in transit-friendly and walkable neighborhoods, the Week Without Driving challenge was hardly a challenge at all. Many went about their daily routines or had fun exploring the other travel options in their area. But for the majority of Americans, who live in neighborhoods designed for cars at the expense of the safety and mobility options of everyone else, it’s not as easy as putting down the car keys and choosing another way to get around. Not being able to drive has consequences for travel time, as well as the comfort and safety of a trip. And this is not an accident—it’s a product of years of funding and policy decisions that focused on vehicle speed, rather than the far more important measure of how well our system is getting people where they need to go.

For a third of Americans, traveling without a car isn’t a choice, it’s an everyday reality. Yet many people who regularly drive are unaware of the need for more options. For some, it is an insurmountable challenge to get from Point A to Point B without a vehicle. Hostile walking and biking infrastructure, and unreliable transit frequency and coverage are only a few of the barriers cited by participants in going car free. Poorly maintained conditions of sidewalks and incomplete networks of paths also prevent pedestrians from safely crossing busy roadways and major arterial roads.

The impact isn’t felt equally

Every traveler has had the experience of not being able to drive at some point, for a variety of reasons (including when your car has to be taken in for repairs). However, the burden is felt most by people who are unable to drive regularly, if at all, including young adults, elderly folks aging in place, people with disabilities, and those who cannot afford the exorbitant costs of having a car. Barriers to access for a car are also particularly exacerbated in rural areas and low-income communities.

Everyday travel would look vastly different if the amount of funding we dedicate to expanding roadways and highways was instead used to build out the other transportation options that have been neglected for far too long. Not only would this increase the mobility options available for communities, it would also generate environmental, health, and public safety benefits writ large. We hope this year’s Week Without Driving helped decision-makers envision the transportation network Americans need.

At T4A, we believe it’s time to invest in a complete and comprehensive transportation network that empowers people to get wherever they need to go conveniently and efficiently, regardless of the mode of transportation they choose. That’s why one of our three guiding principles for the next federal investment in transportation infrastructure is Invest in the Rest. Learn more about this principle and why it matters here.

It’s Invest in the Rest Week

Click below to access more content related to our third principle for infrastructure investment, Invest in the Rest. Find all three of our principles here.

  • Four ways our federal leaders can invest in the rest

    While we might have the most extensive highway infrastructure in the world, our system is delivering pitifully poor results compared to our peers when it comes to cost, efficiency, emissions, and safety. What can Congress and USDOT do to invest in the rest?

  • Week Without Driving showcases the need to invest in the rest

    Last week, Transportation for America joined organizations and advocates nationwide in the Week Without Driving challenge. During this week, all Americans, including transportation practitioners and policymakers, are encouraged to travel without a car, allowing them to experience local barriers to walking, biking, and taking public transit firsthand.

  • Time to tip the scales in favor of more transportation options

    For decades, federal highway funding and funding for all other types of transportation (public transit, opportunities to walk and bike) have been severely unbalanced. In order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, pedestrian deaths, and traffic, the Department of Transportation must invest in more transportation alternatives.

Three principles to guide federal transportation spending

T4A's three principles for transportation funding are Safety over Speed, Fix It First, and Invest in the Rest

It’s time for transportation investments that achieve results for all Americans. For future investments in U.S. infrastructure, Congress should follow three key principles: prioritize safety over speed, fix it first, and invest in the rest.

T4A's three principles for transportation funding are Safety over Speed, Fix It First, and Invest in the Rest
We’ve released our three principles for future federal investments in our nation’s infrastructure. Learn more about them at t4america.org/platform.

Federal transportation policy has very serious problems to solve. Our roads, bridges, transit, sidewalks, bikeways, and rail systems are in disrepair; congestion has increased; pedestrian fatalities and emissions are the highest in decades, and rising; and too many people lack safe, affordable, and convenient access to jobs and essential services.

For too long, Congress has thrown more funding at the problem, hoping that spending more dollars on the same thing will lead to different results. However, all this money has only continued to make our problems worse. As Congress makes decisions about limited taxpayer funds, it’s time that they invest smarter, prioritizing our dollars to create a transportation system that works for the average American.

With the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act expiring in 2026, the next surface transportation reauthorization, a significant federal investment in our nation’s infrastructure, will be top of mind for the next Congress. Based on the results of the last reauthorization (and the one before that, and the one before that), it is clear that we need a fundamental change in approach. That’s why we’re calling on Congress to update the decades-old federal transportation program to design for safety over speed, prioritize maintenance, and invest in the full transportation system, including opportunities to walk, bike, and take public transit.

Invest in the rest

For more than half a century, we’ve invested hundreds of billions of dollars into building a sophisticated highway system that attempts to connect everyone to everything everywhere—by car. We’ve completed a highway system that was once the envy of the world, but now that same system is failing to meet today’s needs. Imagine what we could achieve if we applied the same level of funding and energy into investing in more options to get people where they need to go.

Past road projects destroyed walkable communities or eliminated walking as an option. Investments in highways have drastically outpaced transit investments, with roughly 80 percent of federal transportation money going to highways since the 1980s while only 20 percent has gone to public transportation. As a result, most Americans have to travel by car to get where they need to go—whether or not they want to or can afford to—which leads to more traffic, more lanes, and more harmful climate emissions.

It’s time for Congress to invest in the rest of our transportation system, which has been neglected for far too long, and bring the freedom of choice back to everyday Americans trying to get where they need to go as conveniently, safely, and affordably as possible.

It’s Invest in the Rest Week! In our next three posts, we’ll be diving into this principle and why it should be a top priority in federal transportation spending. Check out the first post here for more on this new T4A principle.

Safety over speed

Ask any member of Congress, and they’ll tell you that they believe our roads should be safe for all travelers. Yet federal investments in transportation have made our roads deadlier. In 2022, the number of people hit and killed while walking reached a 40-year high.

This is because our transportation models and policies prioritize the speed of vehicles over the safety of all road users. High-speed car travel makes sense in some environments, like on interstates or limited access highways. However, when fast-moving cars encounter people walking and biking on our local roadways, crashes, injuries, and deaths become far more likely. When it comes to roads like these, we have to choose between vehicle speed and the safety of all road users—we can’t have both.

Fix it first

There is an $830 billion backlog for repairing existing U.S. highways alone. The entire federal program spends about $50 billion per year, so even if we devoted 100 percent of all federal money to maintenance for ten straight years, we’d still be unable to fully address this backlog. This does not even account for the costs of maintaining and preserving the additional roads and bridges that we continue to build.

Our congressional leaders are well aware of this deficit. In fact, when they are determining how many taxpayer dollars to devote to our nation’s infrastructure, the need for maintenance is always top-of-mind. However, when states go to spend those dollars, they almost always prioritize costly highway expansion projects over needed repairs. And despite the clear public desire to see maintenance needs addressed, there is no federal requirement that they spend these funds any other way.

We can’t continue to build more roads and bridges if we can’t take care of the ones that already exist. Our federal funding needs to be focused on achieving a state of good repair.

For decades, Congress has poured money into the same flawed system. We’ve seen the results of that strategy. It’s time to make smarter investments in our transportation system. Starting now, we will continue to engage our congressional leaders to advance these three principles—and in the year ahead, we’ll be calling on you for help.