MAP-21 Archives - Transportation For America

Rep. Bill Shuster’s infrastructure proposal scores 50 percent

On Monday, July 23, the Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Bill Shuster, released his proposal to reform transportation investment. While there are some novel ideas in the proposal, it ultimately scores a 50 percent based on our four guiding principles for infrastructure investment.

Local governments and millions of Americans are counting on the federal government to be a partner in rebuilding our transportation infrastructure. In November 2017, Transportation for America released a set of four simple principles to inform and evaluate any potential plans for federal infrastructure investment. The Chairman’s proposal is a serious one, and should be commended for being the first proposal with real funding in more than a decade, advancing the national conversation about our infrastructure. However, on the policy, it fails to meet our four principles.

How the proposal measures up to our principles

Provide real funding
We need real federal funding, not just new ways to borrow money or sell off public assets to support transportation investments.

The Chairman’s proposal addresses our infrastructure funding deficit through new short term revenue sources and a Highway Trust Fund Commission. While the proposal ultimately eliminates the gas tax, the proposed short-term fixes would include new/steeper taxes on bikes and transit (which we have concerns about). The gas tax would be replaced by a new revenue source (such as a mileage-based fee/road user charge) identified by the Commission. While we believe this proposal generally holds the promise of providing real funding. and we look forward to working together to advance this shared goal.

Fix the existing system first
We must immediately fix the system we have and fund needed repairs to aging infrastructure.

The Chairman’s proposal does not prioritize maintenance over other investment. The proposal creates a vehicle miles traveled tax pilot with a goal to “steadily reduce the state of good repair backlog in surface transportation.” This is a commendable goal, however it cannot be achieved by a funding source. Addressing the state of good repair backlog requires policy makers to set this as a priority and to dedicate available funding for this purpose. This proposal, like the current program, fails to do that.

Build smart new projects
Our current approach, largely driven by formula funding, is necessary to ensure baseline investments, but funding that flows automatically for specified purposes does not encourage innovation or flexible action.

The Chairman’s proposal holds the promise of meeting this principle. Through three proposed programs—national infrastructure investments grants, incentive grants, and projects of national significance—the proposal increases the amount of funding distributed through competition. Competition is an effective way to identify the projects that bring the greatest benefits for the investment.

Measure success
Infrastructure investments are a means to foster economic development and improve access to jobs and opportunity for all Americans.

Unfortunately, the Chairman’s proposal fails to ensure that communities measure the success of their investments or connects what they measure to their investment decisions. Congress started a performance measures framework in MAP-21; however, those measures miss major community priorities (like improving access to work) and fail to connect results to funding and thus lack real accountability.

Our four principles cannot be considered independently of each other. Well crafted programs that are underfunded miss the mark. More money spent ineffectively is certainly not the point. Bringing our infrastructure up to a state of good repair requires both real funding and refocusing the program on maintenance (as opposed to expanding out the highway system).

While Chairman Shuster is the first to propose real funding in quite some time and we thank him for providing real leadership, we can not just spend our way to our goals without other reforms. The proposal therefore scores only a 50 percent, far from a passing grade in the classroom or for something as long-lasting as infrastructure.

We appreciate the chairman’s thoughtfulness and determination and we look forward to working together to ensure that future proposals ultimately spend taxpayer money wisely.

Recent Federal Activity Summary – Week of November 6th

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

Amtrak opponent Rep. Lynn Westmoreland nominated to Amtrak board of directors

On October 6 President Trump nominated former congressman Lynn Westmoreland to the Amtrak Board of Directors.

During Westmoreland’s tenure in Congress he voted twice to cut Amtrak’s funding, including a vote for a failed bill in 2009 that would have eliminated all federal funding for the passenger railroad.

At a confirmation hearing in the Senate Commerce Committee on October 31, Westmoreland said he does support Amtrak funding, but that “the Board should look at the long-distance routes” and “should shutter these ‘unprofitable’ routes.”

In response to a question from Sen. Cory Booker (D-New Jersey), Westmoreland said he supported funding the Gateway tunnel project between New Jersey and New York.

In a questionnaire for the committee, Westmoreland said the biggest priorities for Amtrak were “encouraging individuals to choose its service over other competing methods of transportation”; maintaining safety and security; and “building out the high-speed rail plans it currently has.”

Westmoreland served in Congress for twelve years, including a six-year stint on the Railroads Subcommittee of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Tax reform package

On November 2 the House Ways and Means Committee released the “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act,” the Republican’s tax reform package.

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

Sign-on letter to support transit capital funding

Reps. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Jackie Walorski (R-IN) are leading a sign-on letter calling for funding for the transit Capital Investment Grant program in the FY2018 federal funding bill. These champions are collecting signers until the November 9 deadline and then will send the request to senior appropriators and leadership. Please let your Representatives know how important transit funding is to your region and encourage them to sign on to this letter.

T4America opposing USDOT rollback of greenhouse gas rule

T4America has submitted a comment opposing USDOT’s proposal to rescind a federal requirement for states and MPOs to measure their carbon emissions as part of a larger system of accountability for federal transportation spending.

Our comment in opposition focuses on three issues:

FHWA had legal authority to adopt the Greenhouse Gas (GHG) measure;
The Proposed Rule fails to account for the overwhelming benefits of the GHG measure and is inconsistent with the approach taken in related executive orders and rulemakings and the public welfare; and
Establishing a performance measure for GHG emissions is good governance and smart transportation policy.

The 2012 transportation law MAP-21 required transportation agencies to begin using a new system of performance measures to govern how federal dollars are spent and hold them accountable for making progress on important goals, like congestion, traffic fatalities, reliability, road/bridge condition, mode share and carbon emissions. For two years, USDOT worked to establish this new system, soliciting reams of public feedback, and finalizing the measures in January of this year. T4America worked to ensure that new performance measures would account for all people using the transportation system and supported measuring carbon emissions from the transportation system. Climate impacts aside, tracking carbon emissions is one of the best ways to judge how efficiently the transportation network is moving people and goods. If USDOT drops this measure, we will lose an important metric for determining who is using their funding to most efficiently connect people with destinations and move goods to market.

The Trump administration first attempted to revoke the greenhouse gas performance measure without public input but was sued by environmental groups. USDOT has launched a new rulemaking to propose removing the rule. T4America’s comment opposes revoking the requirement that transportation agencies measure carbon emissions.

Supporters spoke out for safer streets, and USDOT listened

Thanks to the action of supporters like you, all Americans will be safer on our streets. Yesterday the U.S. Department of Transportation released a much-improved ruling for how states and metro areas should measure — and be held accountable for improving — the safety of streets for everyone that uses them.

Back in 2014, 1,500 Transportation for America, Smart Growth America and National Complete Streets Coalition supporters sent a letter calling for the U.S. Department of Transportation to make the safety of all roadway users a top priority, and your voice has clearly been heard. Yesterday USDOT released its final safety rule for a new system of measuring the performance of our transportation investments that includes new and improved language to hold states and metro areas accountable for reducing preventable pedestrian deaths and injuries.

Under the last federal transportation law (MAP-21), USDOT was required to create a new system to govern how federal dollars are spent by measuring the performance of those dollars against tangible goals and outcomes. The first proposed measure dealt entirely with safety guidelines that would hold states and metro areas accountable for tracking their progress in reducing traffic collisions. But the proposal USDOT initially came up with was too weak to be effective.

That’s where supporters like you came in. Over 1,500 people mobilized to tell USDOT to make that measure stronger, and to hold states and metro areas accountable for the safety of everyone on the road — no matter how they’re choosing to get around. Smart Growth America’s President and CEO Geoff Anderson personally hand-delivered those letters to USDOT Secretary Anthony Foxx—all 1,500 of them.

Yesterday’s final ruling is leaps and bounds ahead of what was originally proposed. Some of the highlights include:

Five measures in total, and they include people on foot or bike: rate of serious injuries; rate of fatalities; total serious injuries; total fatalities; and the number of combined non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries.
States and MPOs must set targets for reducing fatalities for people on foot or bike. It’s treated as an equal measure to the others.
States and MPOs must make progress on four of the five measures.
Significant progress will be measured by beating targets. If that doesn’t occur, states must at least beat their baselines for each measure.
USDOT will not wait to finish developing the rest of the performance measures before they begin rolling out this safety measure.

Logged-in T4America members can read a more detailed memo on the final rule below.

[member_content]Members: Click here to access the policy memo.[/member_content]

Day 1 Wrap Up: Congressional Conference Committee Action

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

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

There are still a few sticking points that need to be resolved and came up today during each conferee’s opportunity to speak today. Many hold differing positions on the low funding levels for this authorization as well as the non-transportation generated revenue used to pay for the bill. Those in the Northeast took issue with a House provision to remove transit funding dedicated to high-growth states in the northeast and place it in a national competitive bus and bus facilities program. And others, while not objecting to including passenger rail authorization in the surface authorization for the first time ever as expected by this bill, wanted to include greater reform at Amtrak.

We do not expect any further public meetings until the Members of Congress return on November 30, at which time the conference is expected to have finalized this bill. This means that much of the work on the conference report will happen out of view and behind closed doors. If interested, we advise that you contact your member over the Thanksgiving recess and visit them in person if you can about items of importance for you and your community.

Senate Conference Members

Environment & Public Works Committee

Republicans

Jim Inhofe (R-OK)

John Barrasso (R-WY)

Deb Fischer (R-NE) – also a Commerce Committee member

Democrats

Barbara Boxer (D-CA)

Commerce Committee

Republicans

John Thune (R-SD) – also a Finance Committee member

Democrats

Bill Nelson (D-FL) – also a Finance Committee member

Banking Committee

Democrats

Sherrod Brown (D-OH) – also a Finance Committee member

Finance Committee

Republicans

Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

John Cornyn (R-TX)

Democrats

Ron Wyden (D-OR)

Chuck Schumer (D-NY)

Other Conferees

Republicans

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)

Democrats

Dick Durbin (D-IL) – Democratic Whip

House Conference Members

Transportation & Infrastructure Committee

Republicans

Bill Shuster (R-PA)

Reps. John J. Duncan, Jr. (R-TN)

Sam Graves (R-MO)

Candice Miller (R-MI)

Rick Crawford (R-AR)

Lou Barletta (R-PA)

Blake Farenthold (R-TX)

Bob Gibbs (R-OH)

Jeff Denham (R-CA)

Reid Ribble (R-WI)

Scott Perry (R-PA)

Rob Woodall (R-GA)

John Katko (R-NY)

Brian Babin (R-TX)

Cresent Hardy (R-NV)

Garret Graves (R-LA)

John Mica (R-FL)

Barbara Comstock (R-VA)

Democrats

Peter DeFazio (D-OR)

Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC)

Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)

Corrine Brown (D-FL)

Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX)

Elijah Cummings (D-MD)

Rick Larsen (D-WA)

Michael Capuano (D-MA)

Grace Napolitano (D-CA)

Daniel Lipinski (D-IL)

Steve Cohen (D-TN)

Albio Sires (D-NJ)

Donna Edwards (D-MD)

Ways & Means Committee

Republicans

Kevin Brady (R-TX)

Dave Reichert (R-WA)

Democrats

Sander Levin (D-MI)

Energy & Commerce Committee

Republicans

Fred Upton (R-MI)

Markwayne Mullin (R-OK)

Democrats

Frank Palone (D-NJ)

Financial Services Committee

Republicans

Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)

Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)

Democrats

Maxine Waters (D-CA)

Other Committees

Republicans

Mac Thornberry (R-TX)

Mike Rogers (R-AL)

Bob Goodlatte (R-VA)

Tom Marino (R-PA)

Darin LaHood (R-IL)

Glenn Thomson (R-PA)

Will Hurd (R-TX)

Lamar Smith (R-TX)

Democrats

Loretta Sanchez (D-CA)

Zoe Lofgren (D-CA)

Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ)

Gerry Connolly (D-VA)

A proposal in the U.S. House could send more transportation funding to local communities

Last week, the Senate passed their multi-year transportation bill, the DRIVE Act, which authorizes funding for six years but with only enough funding for the first three years. The House left for August recess before taking up the Senate’s long-term bill, so Congress passed a three-month extension of MAP-21 that extends the program until the end of October.

Unfortunately, the Wicker-Booker amendment that local communities across the country pushed so hard for did not make it into the Senate’s DRIVE Act.

But there is still an opportunity to get a similar proposal into the final bill. The House is expected to begin debate on their own multi-year transportation bill when they come back in September and it’s critical that they hear strong support for the Innovation in Surface Transportation Act (ISTA) to ensure it is included in their bill.

Send a message to your Representative and urge them to support ISTA to give local communities more control over their transportation funding while also ensuring the best projects receive the necessary investments.

SEND A MESSAGE

ISTA provides local communities access to a larger share of federal transportation funding by setting aside a portion of statewide transportation money and allowing communities to compete for funds to pay for their innovative and ambitious transportation projects. Those awarded funds will provide the greatest return on investment and ensure every dollar is spent on the most cost effective project.

For more information on the DRIVE Act, you can read Transportation for America’s statement on the bill on our blog, as well as read our list of the top 10 things to know about the bill.

Congress returns in September after Labor Day so stay tuned for further information.

Help fill your Representative’s inbox to tell them to support this critical proposal.

Senate’s DRIVE Act Bypasses America’s Cities and Towns

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

WASHINGTON, DC — Following the Senate’s successful vote to approve the DRIVE Act, a six-year transportation reauthorization bill with three years of funding, the Honorable John Robert Smith, former mayor of Meridian, MS, and the Chairman of Transportation for America, issued the following statement:

“While the Senate is to be commended for taking the lead in moving beyond the repeated short-term extensions to the nation’s transportation program, this bill represents a major missed opportunity to give cities, towns and local communities of all sizes more control over and access to federal transportation dollars. We were extremely disappointed to see a bipartisan amendment from Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) to direct more funding to towns and cities of all sizes fail to receive a fair hearing on the floor.

Instead of increasing funding for local communities, as the Wicker-Booker proposal would have done, the DRIVE Act bypasses America’s cities and towns, reducing the overall amount of funding they control to invest in their locally-driven projects by nearly $200 million in the first year of this bill alone compared to the 2012 authorization (MAP-21). By failing to bring more dollars, control and accountability closer to the local level, the bill fails to restore the trust of the American people in how our transportation decisions are being made.

The Senate also failed to tackle the hard choices required to raise new, sustainable revenues — as at least 21 states and governors have done over the past three years — in order to truly put the nation’s transportation trust fund on stable footing. The Senate cobbled together $46 billion in non-transportation-related funds, fees and accounting maneuvers to keep the nation’s transportation trust fund solvent for the next three years — in some cases by relying on funding from sources ten years in the future to pay back the next three years of spending. Is it fiscally responsible to place the cost of paying for three years of transportation investments on the backs of our children and grandchildren?

The Senate bill does take a few positive steps forward. We’re encouraged to see the nation’s passenger rail policy finally included in the surface transportation program for the first time ever, laying the groundwork for continuing to improve and expand the nation’s passenger rail service in the years to come. Congress recognized the economic importance of moving goods efficiently throughout the country by including a new freight program — though the bill shortsightedly chooses not to take a more comprehensive approach, restricting 90 percent of the freight dollars to highway projects and ignoring ports, rail and other multimodal solutions that are urgently needed to unclog America’s freight bottlenecks. The bill also preserves funding for the popular Transportation Alternatives Program and public transportation in general, and includes an important Safe Streets Act provision that ensures a more comprehensive approach to road design and safety for everyone.

While we’re thankful that the Senate has finally moved beyond short-term extensions and toward the multi-year funding certainty needed by states and cities to see their ambitious plans come to life, the final product needs to do much more. We look forward to working to improve it as the House drafts their bill and Congress seeks consensus on a multi-year transportation authorization bill before the recently-extended MAP-21 expires on October 29.”*

* The Senate is expected to approve a three-month extension to MAP-21 this afternoon.

CONTACT: Steve Davis
Director of Communications
steve.davis@t4america.org
202-955-5543 x242

Senate on the verge of passing a multi-year transportation bill

After several contentious procedural votes to keep the bill moving forward over the past week, the Senate is likely to be taking a final vote on their three-year transportation bill at some point before the end of the week. Here’s a short update on where things currently stand.

First, here are the six most useful tidbits to know right now:

The Senate is a few more procedural votes away from a final vote on their three-year transportation bill.
Little in the bill has substantially changed since it was first introduced, though a few fixes were made to issues in the first draft having to do with transit funding and complete streets language.
The contentious amendment to reauthorize the Export-Import Bank through 2019 was approved and included in the base bill last night.
The first manager’s package of amendments has been moved to consideration, though nothing has actually been approved yet.
Whether this long-term bill passes the Senate this week or not, there will likely be an extension to MAP-21 for 3 to 5 months. This is intended to provide time for the House and Senate to negotiate a final agreement.
Including the Wicker-Booker amendment to increase transportation funding going directly to local communities is still our best chance to improve this bill. Getting more support for this amendment from other Senators is the best method to have it included in a manager’s package or as one of the few (if any) amendments considered on the floor. But the prospects are not good without more support. We’re working hard to drive up sponsors — Sen. Durbin from Illinois and Sen. Peters from Michigan hopped on as co-sponsors yesterday! — but we still need your help. Send another letter, or make a phone call as soon as possible.

After one failed vote early last week, the overall Senate transportation bill passed a cloture motion late last week that cleared the way for the bill to be considered and debated on the Senate floor.

Before they can take a final vote on the bill, the Senate has to work through the amendment process. Because of Sen. McConnell’s parliamentary actions to “fill the amendment tree,” we don’t forsee the usual open amendment process playing out where individual amendments are offered on the floor and debated. Instead, for the most part, any amendments to the bill will have to be included in the manager’s package to be voted on all at once or adopted by unanimous consent.

Last night, the Senate took small steps toward a final vote by successfully voting to include a reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank in the base bill and begin the debate on the manager’s package of amendments. Whether there is a third manager’s package or not, once they are approved, it clears the way to take a final cloture vote to halt debate on the underlying bill and move to a vote on final passage.

If that passes, we’ll have 30 hours of debate on the bill before a vote on final passage sometime before Friday night.

As to MAP-21’s expiration, the House already passed a five-month extension. However, the House has now agreed to move a shorter 3-month extension tomorrow and Speaker John Boehner has said they are leaving town after the vote for August recess. We expect the Senate to take up and pass the House’s 3-month patch and very likely pass their multi-year surface transportation authorization package this week as well.

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

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

Access the webinar powerpoint here.

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

Two action items stemming from that conversation include:

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

Join us on Thursday for an inside look at transportation reauthorization in Congress

The current federal transportation bill will expire on July 31, 2015, with the nation’s transportation fund reaching insolvency near the same time. Join us Thursday for a public conversation about what’s likely to happen in Washington and what it all means for your community.

In the coming weeks Congress will likely be negotiating an extension to MAP-21 before its July 31 expiration while also debating the policies in a long-term transportation bill — a process that has already started. How will the decisions made in Congress and the current political landscape impact local transportation projects, Complete Streets, and transit-oriented development?

Join Smart Growth America and Transportation for America for a special open conversation about what’s happening right now in transportation policy this Thursday, July 16, 2015 at 4:00 PM EDT.

You can register for the event here.

Hear from Joe McAndrew, Policy Director at Transportation for America; Christopher Coes, Director of LOCUS; and Stefanie Seskin, Deputy Director of the National Complete Streets Coalition. Each speaker will focus on a different aspect of the current negotiations.

The federal transportation bill will have huge implications for development across the country. Join us on Thursday to learn more about where Congress currently stands and what you can do to help shape the debate.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Exclusive Member Summary – 6/18/15 Senate Finance Highway Funding Hearing

June 18, 2015 — US Senate Finance Committee — “Dead End, No Turn Around, Danger Ahead: Challenges to the Future of Highway Funding”

Witnesses:

Dr. Joseph Kile – Assisant Director for Microeconomic Studies Division, Congressional Budget Office

The Honorable Ray LaHood – Senior Policy Advisor, DLA Piper

Mr. Stephen Moore – Distinguished Visiting Fellow, The Heritage Foundation

At this hearing, Chairman Hatch (R-UT) looked to explore every possible option to address the long-term fiscal challenges of the Highway Trust Fund. However, at the hearing he mentioned that he does not see any large-scale gas tax increase as politically possible. That said, Hatch pressed the need remove the “highway cliff” by finding funding to do a multi-year authorization.

Senator Carper (D-DE) called upon Senator Hatch to ensure no options like the gas tax are taken off the table, and referred to T4A analysis that showed state legislators who vote for a gas tax increase were not punished. Carper mentioned that at a minimum we should be able to index the gasoline and diesel tax and then come up with other creative sources to fund infrastructure.

Witness Stephen Moore with Heritage Foundation floated the idea of devolution, but the proposal was very unpopular for a majority of committee members and was shot down by former Secretary Ray LaHood as an irresponsible notion. Senators Thune (R-SD), Heller (R-NV) and Menendez (D-NJ) all voiced devolving the program. Transit came under attack for receiving gas tax dollars, but Senator Thune mentioned kicking transit out of the program is a political non-starter after it failed in the House during debate for MAP-21, and Senator Menendez and former Secretary Ray LaHood both stood up strongly for the need for more robust transit investment, not less.

Senator Thune (R-SD) mentioned that we should be treating general fund transfers as adding debt to an already debt-burdened country, since those funds ultimately do account for part of the deficit. He said it is time we stop the easy solution of general fund transfers and find a way pay for it. Senator Hatch agreed that long-term action is absolutely needed, and mentioned it will be difficult, but that the Committee will be working to look at all the different options to come up with a solution that stops the country from kicking the can down the road.

House extends MAP-21 to July 31, aligning it with impending insolvency of nation’s transportation fund

After a short debate yesterday, The House of Representatives voted to extend MAP-21 for two months past its May 31st expiration to the end of July, aligning the end of the nation’s transportation law with the latest projection for the insolvency of the nation’s transportation fund. The Senate is expected to act before Friday to approve the bill before the Memorial Day recess begins.

Updated 5/26

The bill to extend MAP-21 two months was approved by a vote of 387-35. There was just one amendment considered, from Rep. Esty (D-CT), for $750M to passenger railroads to help them implement positive train control, but that amendment failed on party-line vote, 182-241.

It was a mostly uneventful debate, though a handful of legislators loudly decried yet another short-term extension of the nation’s transportation law. But most if not all of those legislators speaking against short-term extensions also know that May 31st is right around the corner, a long-term bill isn’t going to happen between now and then with recess next week, and would prefer to keep the program from shutting down entirely.

If the Senate does as expected and approves the bill and sends the extension to President Obama for his signature before the 31st, Congress will have officially kicked the can down the road another two months. This marks the 33^rd time Congress has passed a short-term extension over the last six years rather than do what Americans sent them to Congress to do: legislate and make the tough decisions to move America forward.

“While the certain disaster that would result from a shutdown of the federal transportation program has been avoided temporarily, legislators now have just have two months to put together the full multi-year authorization that we so desperately need,”said James Corless, T4America director. “Come July 31, we’ll once again face not only the expiration of our nation’s transportation policy, but also the insolvency of its funding source. With no consensus yet on how to fund a long-term bill, lawmakers have their work cut out for them.”

We’ll update this post as soon as the Senate takes action on the extension, which could come as early as Wednesday afternoon.

With MAP-21 extended an additional two months, the next immediate item of transportation business coming up in Congress will be next year’s transportation appropriations bill. Shortly after Congress returns from the Memorial Day recess on June 1st, the full House is expected to consider their version of the yearly spending bill for FY 2016 which features heavy cuts to TIGER, New Starts and Amtrak, with the Senate likely to begin their process sometime in June as well.

Update: The Senate passed the two-month extension of MAP-21 last weekend, extending the law until July 31st. The president is expected to sign the law by the May 31st deadline.

May 31st transportation funding deadline looming over lawmakers

We’re only three weeks away from the expiration of MAP-21, the transportation law of the land, and Congress still does not have a solid plan for renewing or extending it — or for keeping the nation’s transportation fund solvent past the first days of summer.

Well, we’re here. Seems like just yesterday we were writing the news that Congress had finally passed a new transportation law. But that law, MAP-21, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21^st Century Act, was only two years in length instead of the customary six, and it will expire at the end of the month after its first short-term extension concludes. Congress is no closer to agreeing on a multi-year replacement than they were when they kicked the can down the road last summer. To complicate matters, the temporary funding patch that Congress passed in 2014 to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent will run dry by mid-July, according to USDOT projections.

So far, Congress has not hatched a concrete plan to reauthorize MAP-21 and find a long-term stable funding source, but lawmakers do have some ideas.

In February, Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) introduced a bill that would nearly double the federal gas tax over the next three years to help fund a long-term transportation bill.

Last month, a bipartisan group of Representatives led by Reps. Renacci (R-OH) and Pascrell (D- NJ) introduced The Bridge to Sustainable Infrastructure Act, which seeks to raise the gas tax by indexing it to inflation by January 2016. The gas tax would then rise every three years unless Congress finds another funding source for the Highway Trust Fund, ultimately guaranteeing 10 years of funding for the transportation program. This bill is the only plan with any bipartisan support that proposes to raise user fees (i.e., the gas tax) in any way. It currently has 20 cosponsors: eight Republicans and 12 Democrats.

Several lawmakers and the Obama Administration have proposed using a one-time repatriation of corporate profits as a source of funding. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) and Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced a bill that would encourage corporations holding profits overseas to return these profits to the US through voluntary “tax holiday” at a decreased tax rate of 6.5 percent. The Obama Administration’s plan would force companies to return their overseas money to the U.S. and pay a 14 percent tax rate on that money. Both repatriation proposals would transfer a portion of the earnings from the tax on returned corporate profits to the transportation trust fund.

Reps. John Delaney (D-MD) and Richard Hanna (R-NY) introduced a bill that would tax overseas profits by 8.75 percent, and would potentially raise $170 billion for the Highway Trust Fund.

What will happen before May 31?

Several lawmakers have sounded the alarm on finding a plan to reauthorize MAP-21 and keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent before the May 31^st deadline passes.

U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx called the short-term extensions that several lawmakers have proposed an “outrage,” saying that a long-term plan was necessary so transportation planners could be sure that they’d have the funding needed to move forward with long-term plans.

Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) is rallying fellow Democrats in the Senate to block a Republican-backed trade deal until the Senate deals with funding the Highway Trust Fund (and the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act). Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY), meanwhile, also cited the need to address MAP-21, calling it a “must-do” item that needs to be completed by Memorial Day.

Over in the House, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) sent a memo to his fellow House Republicans that urged them to act to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent, which is set to go broke by midsummer. He said that any proposals to increase the gas tax, however, would be dead on arrival this Congress.

Next year’s budget

Whether Congress reauthorizes MAP-21 and extends the Highway Trust Fund will affect funding for next year’s budget for all transportation and housing programs. The House’s Transportation, Housing and Urban Development subcommittee released a transportation budget that proposes heavy cuts to TIGER, New Starts and Amtrak capital funding while holding steady funding levels for highways and other programs. The full House is expected to consider the Committee’s transportation appropriation bill upon return from a weeklong recess. The Senate Appropriations Committee has yet to release their proposed fiscal year 2016 transportation budget. While slow on the uptick, we expect this Congress to be more active on transportation items over the coming summer months. Stay tuned.

House proposes cuts to TIGER and transit construction, stable funding for other programs for fiscal 2016

The House Appropriations Committee introduced a Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (T-HUD) bill for fiscal 2016 that, as in years past, features heavy cuts to TIGER, New Starts and Amtrak.

The bill, approved by the T-HUD subcommittee and headed back to the full Appropriations Committee for markup and a vote, maintains funding rates for federal highway and mass transit formula dollars, $40.3 billion and $8.6 billion respectively. Of course, these funding levels assume that Congress is going to act to find enough money to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent past this June or July, and also move to either reauthorize or extend MAP-21 after its May 31^stexpiration. Without either action, there won’t be any money for transportation past that deadline, much less for the entire next fiscal year.

Meanwhile, other key programs are facing heavy cuts.

TIGER: The overwhelmingly popular TIGER program would shrink from $500 million to $100 million. In addition, the size of grants would be far smaller, within a range of $2-15 million, down from last year’s range of $10-200 million. This year’s T-HUD also reduces the share that the federal government will cover for TIGER projects, from 60 percent to 50 percent, requiring more local or state money to be brought to the table.

The silver lining in all this is that the House did not repeat last year’s attempt to limit eligibility to only road and port projects, a move that would have left out the wide range of multimodal projects that have benefited the most from this innovative program.

New Starts & Small Starts: These programs that fund new rail, rapid bus and streetcar construction would receive $1.92 billion in funding, down from last year’s $2.12 billion in the final budget. The new bill would also reduce the federal government’s share of New Starts projects from 60 percent to 50 percent.

Amtrak: Amtrak would have a budget of $1.1 billion. The bill actually adds $39 million to the rail service’s operational costs, but cuts $290 million from its capital budget.

The Senate has yet to release its own budget, but for the last few years, the Senate has prioritized funding for many of these important programs. However, with the change in leadership in the Senate in this Congress, it’s unclear if things could play out similarly this year compared to years past.

Members can read our full summary memo on the THUD bill below.

[member_content] Members, you can read our full members-only THUD summary here. (pdf)

And, have you been to the new portal for all members-only content? https://t4america.org/members [/member_content]

15 issues to watch in ’15, Part I: Capitol Hill developments

Already, 2015 feels like it could be a big year for transportation, at the federal, state and local levels alike. As the year began, we thought it would be fun to identify 15 people, places and trends that seemed to be worth keeping an eye on the next 12 months. In some years, 15 would be a stretch, but this year we had a tough time whittling the list to match the number of the year.

We will roll out the list in three posts, starting today with five issues to watch at the federal level. The next two posts will cover “places (states and cities)” and “people.” We plan to pay special attention to these 15, but we will by no means limit ourselves to them. So tell us what you think we missed, in your area or elsewhere.

1. The federal gas tax and Congress – will they or won’t they take it on as MAP-21 expires and we face the “fiscal cliff” in early 2015?

You won’t hear more about any single transportation-related issue this year than the erosion of the gas tax, the future of federal funding and the expiration of the current federal transportation law.

The gas tax continues to lose value through inflation, more efficient vehicles, and the ongoing trend of Americans driving less. Policy changes aside, there’s not enough money to even extend the current law (MAP-21) for a few more years. Last summer, Congress had to pull out every trick in the book just to keep the nation’s transportation funding solvent until close to the expiration of MAP-21 until May 31, when MAP-21 expires – just in time for construction season.

Suddenly, though, with gas prices plunging, some members from both parties have indicated at least a willingness to talk about a gas tax increase to make up the gap between needs and existing revenue. One thing is certain: Congress can’t extend the federal program at anything like the current level without finding money from somewhere. There are literally no other options. It’s encouraging that this Congress appears to be ready to give that conversation more attention than the last.

2. National passenger rail policy could be the first major issue up in 2015.

Even before Congress takes up how to fund a multi-year transportation bill or an extension of MAP-21 in May, members are likely to debate the reauthorization of our nation’s passenger rail policy (including funding for Amtrak). Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure committee, has declared a high priority on adopting the measure early this year.

Last September, his committee passed a version of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act (PRRIA) with a handful of positive changes, including stable funding for Amtrak. A key indicator to watch is whether consensus on those improvements persists when the bill is reintroduced in the new Congress, and whether action on this bill occurs in the Senate. After several years of House proposals that either made huge cuts to our country’s rail network or hearings that focused heavily on issues like privatization or the food vendors serving Amtrak, 2015 might just be the year we see a reasonable and responsible passenger rail law.

3. Implementing accountability: How will the U.S. DOT choose to measure congestion and safety?

Ok, yes, it’s a terribly wonky issue and will likely not take over the discussion around your water cooler at work, but this transition to a more performance-based system of transportation investment was one of the key reforms of MAP-21 and could represent a sea change in how funding decisions are made and our transportation system performs. This is the year when the new standards, and the requirements for meeting them, are expected to be set.

Signals have been mixed so far, though recent developments are encouraging. The first attempt at a safety standard was far too lax, and gave states and metros a potential pass on improving the safety of their transportation systems and survival rate of people on foot and bicycle. The feds heard the public protests and now propose more exacting performance to earn passing grades. The latest proposal on standards for keeping roads and bridges in reasonable condition is much better.

The real test will come this spring, when DOT officials unveil how they propose to measure improvements around the effects of roadway congestion (as well as some other measures.) Choose a method to measure congestion that only values free-flowing highway traffic at any time of day (even if the length of the trip is exceedingly long), and states could reward sprawling development patterns and longer commutes. Choose instead to consider how many people can enjoy a predictable commute to work and you’re likely to see investments in a range of cost-effective solutions. It might not seem sexy, but it is definitely one of the transportation issues that could have the greatest impact beyond 2015.

4. Will the much-loved TIGER grant program survive, and if so, in what form?

The TIGER program, designed to get funding to innovative projects that solve multiple issues but don’t fit into mode-specific funding categories, dates all the way back to the beginning of President Obama’s first days in office as part of the economic recovery package. Five rounds of grants have been handed out to date, totaling over $4 billion. The program was threatened in the last-minute budget dealmaking at the end of last Congress, but survived with $500 million for a sixth round of grants. Though funding drops by $100 million from 2014, it’s still $400 million better than what the House proposed for this year. The “cromnibus” budget compromise also dropped a House requirement to limit TIGER grants to highway, bridge and port projects. That means TIGER in 2015 will operate the same as the previous rounds, supporting innovative projects that take a multimodal approach and address needs as local communities define them, rather than Congress.

The big question for 2015 is whether the new Congress will include TIGER or something like it — a pot of money that is open to competition from local communities with innovative projects — in the next transportation law. As popular as it is — and it is extremely popular — TIGER’s future is unclear.

5. Local control and the Innovation in Surface Transportation Act.

We spent a lot of time in 2014 making the case for more transportation dollars, and control over those dollars, to be directed to the local level where a community’s leaders know their needs best and can make decisions accordingly. So it was a huge milestone when a bipartisan group of House and Senate members introduced a bill to do just that near the end of the last Congress. In a Congress where acts of bipartisanship were rare, it was encouraging to see representatives teaming up and responding directly to the pleas they’d heard from the mayors, business leaders, and citizens in their communities for more of a voice in the process of selecting and funding transportation projects in their communities. We expect to see both House and Senate bills re-introduced sometime early in the 114th Congress by Representatives Rodney Davis (R-IL) and Dina Titus (D-NV), and Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), and we look forward to seeing the case for greater local control gain more momentum in 2015 and hopefully result in this provision’s incorporation into MAP-21’s replacement.

—

Up next in 15 for ’15: The states and places to watch for transportation developments this year.

Helping interested communities make better use of land around transit lines and stops

A new pilot program from the Federal Transit Administration will help communities make better use of land around transit lines and stops. For those interested in applying, T4America recently pulled together several experts in a session to help them understand how to best take advantage.

One of the few bright spots in MAP-21 was the creation of this small pilot program of competitive grants for communities trying to support better development within their new transit corridors — a smart way to boost ridership and support local economic development.

With applications due in November, this T4America webinar was timely for those municipalities hoping to take advantage of federal dollars intended to better capitalize on the value of past investments in transit.

Nearly $20 million is available to support transit-oriented development around “fixed guideway” projects, which includes light rail, subway, streetcar, commuter rail, and bus rapid transit running in separate lanes. Grants from $250,000 to $2 million will be allotted to the best applicants from across the country that are focused on mixed-use development, affordable housing, and bicycling/pedestrian needs and have a strong, proven partnership with the private sector.

John Hempelmann, founding partner of Cairncross & Hempelmann, praised the private sector for leading the way on partnerships with transit agencies, realizing that projects like these bring both jobs and economic opportunities to the area.

“Urban growth is happening all over the country. We have this opportunity and we need to do this right.”

Hempelmann also stressed that while the program was over-subscribed, applicants should take heart. Because it’s oversubscribed, he said, it shows the Department of Transportation that local communities want this type of development. And just by applying communities are making progress by working to get private businesses on board and form coalitions. Even for the applications that don’t win funding, these critical partnerships can be of benefit in the future.

It’s not just about partnership with the private sector, though. The U.S. Department of Transportation has made it clear that if a project spans multiple jurisdictions, they want to see partnerships between the communities to show dedication to the project.

Beth Osborne, senior policy advisor for Transportation for America, highlighted the absolute necessity for these kinds of partnerships throughout the community, since it proves to the Department of Transportation that there is not only local interest, but also local support and commitment to the project.

“They want local commitment to the project; people can often be just as important as cash,” Osborne said.

Private and institutional land-owners and developers are critical to the long-term success of transit-oriented development, because they’re the ones most often putting their capital up or building the actual product in these areas around transit lines. Creating partnerships that can do it right offer the greatest opportunities for creating walkable, connected neighborhoods with good access to jobs and affordable housing.

We’ll continue providing similar resources like this webinar, and we’ll be tracking the progress of these applicants and reporting back on the winners hopefully in 2015. To keep updated on these kinds of webinars, sign up for our newsletter here, follow us on twitter, and check back here regularly.

(Ed. Note: Also featured as speakers were Homer Carlisle, Senior Professional Staff for the U.S. Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and Sarah Kline, policy director for Transportation for America.)

On C-SPAN, T4A’s Beth Osborne finds agreement with Heritage on HTF, walkability

Beth Osborne appearing on C-SPAN July 3, 2014. Click the image or here to watch the full video

Our compatriot Beth Osborne engaged in a spirited discussion on gas taxes and the crashing highway trust fund this morning on C-Span’s Washington Journal. Her co-panelist was Curtis Dubay, taxes and economic policy research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.

Dubay took less of a hard line than have some of his colleagues, who have suggested we could wind down the federal program and make the states take on everything themselves. (As an aside, can you imagine the gory fights in 50 legislatures as they try to raise gas taxes as much as 20 cents a gallon to replace the federal tax, on top of state gas taxes, which some have recently raised? How many legislative sessions would it take, and how many would just punt and let the highways, bridges and transit go to hell?)

As taxes go, Dubay said, the gas tax is a “good one”, because the people who use the resulting system are paying for it. Most people agree that infrastructure in a primary government responsibility. He even agreed a higher tax might be warranted, but only if it is restricted to highway construction.

Dubay complained that the gas tax has been diverted to “non-infrastructure purposes” like subways, ferries and road safety projects that save the lives of pedestrians and bicyclists (and motorists). To which Osborne responded:

Transit is a form of infrastructure. The purpose of the federal program is to move people and goods efficiently, not to require that people move a particular way. From the driver’s perspective it’s just as helpful to get somebody out of their way, particularly [those traveling] short distances. And it can be cheaper to move them outside their cars. … We’re looking for efficiencies and good outcomes in the program. These taxes are being used to move people the way they want to move.

There are lots of good reasons why federal gas tax dollars should be used to build and maintain a truly complete network. Transit projects in major cities make the morning commute possible for drivers, plain and simple, because without it gridlock would be absolute. Federal dollars were used to build roads that cut through neighborhoods without providing for the safety of people walking along or across them, and need to be fixed. Ferries, in states such as Washington, are part of the highway system, connecting roadways across bodies of water. These are not “diversions” from our surface transportation infrastructure; they are key components that must be part of a complete system that offers fair access for all.

In terms of who’s paying the federal gas-tax “user fee”— it’s everybody. You’re not exempt if you only use local roads and no federal highways in your commute. The cost of transporting goods, including gas and diesel taxes, is in the price of everything you buy. In the name of fairness, our taxes should be buying the safest, most efficient, most accessible system possible for all Americans – well-off or poor, young or old, whether living in cities, suburbs or small towns.

Today, market and demographic changes are demanding a new focus for our transportation investments, and that’s because … well, lets give Mr. Dubay the floor:

The market is solving the livability and walkability issue. People are moving in closer to cities. It’s a generational shift… . They are not living in the suburbs as much as they used to, largely because people don’t want to drive like they used to. Having a car and driving isn’t as romantic as it once was, that’s for sure.

If, indeed, people are going to be living in higher concentrations – and they are doing so in both cities and older suburbs – they will still need to get around. What they will need is a seamless, fully integrated network. Many will still own cars and drive them when it makes sense for them, paying gas taxes when they do. They will hope that when they need to use the highway, enough of their fellow residents will be using transit that there is actually room for them on the road.

The local leaders we work with know this, and that’s why they are trying to save the nation’s infrastructure fund from insolvency and win reforms that give them the latitude to do what they need to do. We’re glad to see folks at Heritage acknowledge the changes, and we hope that soon they will join us in declaring an end to the days of the government mandating a top-down, single-mode approach.

In state elections, voters decline to punish pols for raising transportation taxes

UPDATED: July 14, 2014

Raising the gas tax is a political death sentence, right? Well, not necessarily. In at least two states where legislators raised gas taxes or other fees in the last two years, voters have responded by sending almost all of the supportive members of both parties back to their state houses. Could it be that voters are more supportive of raising revenue than we think?

States are finding it more and more difficult to find funding for transportation and other infrastructure. The 2012 MAP-21 law kept federal funding essentially flat, even as the lingering effects of the long recession have left states in desperate need of infrastructure repair and renovation. Meanwhile, gas taxes are not yielding what they once did, thanks to rising construction costs, growing fuel efficiency and a drop in miles driven per person. With no other solution in sight, some states have concluded they have little choice but to increase gas taxes to maintain and build a 21st century transportation system.

In the last two years, at least seven states have done the “unthinkable” and either increased their gas tax or otherwise changed their revenue model to raise transportation funding: Maryland, Massachusetts, Wyoming, Vermont, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania and Virginia. (For a complete run-down of state revenue moves, see our tracker here.)

With expected insolvency of the Highway Trust Fund occurring as soon as next month, its important that Members of Congress take a scan of what is happening in their states and districts. Of the seven states that raised taxes for transportation, Pennsylvania and Virginia have had primary or general elections since passing those bills. We took a look at how legislators who voted in favor fared in those contests to see if the mantra that gas tax votes lead to an early end to political careers is true.

In 2012, before the legislation passed, Pennsylvania was faced with transportation cuts creating worries of an increase of structurally deficient bridges under weight restrictions, road mileage rated in “poor” condition, and a decrease in transit service throughout the Keystone State. At the time, it led the nation in the number of structurally deficient bridges with 4,700.

Pennsylvania’s changes to fuel-related taxes and fees gave the Department of Transportation $2.3 billion to repair and maintain the state’s roads, bridges and mass transit system. The revenue package amounted to a 40 percent increase in the department’s budget, and created an annual $20 million statewide multimodal competitive transportation fund accessible to local governments and businesses. The measure passed 113-85 in the House and 43-7 in the Senate.

Of the 156 aye votes, 90 of the favorable votes were Republicans and 66 were Democrats. Thirty-two of the members that voted “yes” were not on the ballot for reasons such as retirement, seeking different elected office or term not yet expiring, leaving 124 “yes” vote members on the primary ballot on May 20, 2014. Of the members on the ballot, just 5 lost their primary, meaning that 96 percent of those who voted for the transportation revenue won their election. Just one Republican lost his primary Republican Representative Michael Fleck (R-Huntingdon) — but he won the Democratic primary through a write-in campaign. Fleck will be on the November general election ballot, but doesn’t have plans to switch parties. Four House Democrats did lose their seats: Leanna Washington (D-Montgomery) and J.P Miranda (D-Philadelphia), who were both indicted for misusing campaign funds; Erin Molchany (D-Alleghany County) who was re-districted and lost her seat to a Democrat who had voted No on the legislation; and James Clay (D-Philadelphia).

“Pennsylvania legislators showed political courage in voting for the transportation revenue package in 2013 to guarantee the state’s economy and overall mobility of the population would continue to prosper,” said Pennsylvania’s Secretary of Department of Transportation, Barry Schoch. “In return, Pennsylvania’s voters supported those that stepped up to the plate and took this crucial vote by supporting them in our primary election.”

In Virginia, legislators last year replaced the state’s 17.5 cents-per-gallon tax on gasoline — which had not been changed since 1987 — with a new 3.5 percent wholesale tax on gasoline (6 percent on diesel) that will keep pace with economic growth and inflation. It also raised the state’s general sales tax and gave the increment to transportation, and created a regional funding mechanism that boosted the sales tax to six percent in Northern Virginia and Hampton Roads and required those funds to be spent only on transportation projects in those areas. The measure passed 64-35 in the House and 26-12 in the Senate.

The commonwealth’s 100 House Delegates were on last November’s general election ballot, while the 40 Senate seats, whose elections are not staggered, will have their election next fall. Of the 64 House Delegates that voted for the transportation revenue package, 31 were Republicans and 33 were Democrats. Five of the “yes” vote members weren’t on last fall’s ballot due to retirement or seeking different elected office. No Democrats lost their seats and just four Republicans were on the losing end in their elections, including: Joe T. May (R-Clarke), Mark Dudenhefer (R-Prince William), Beverly Sherwood (R-Frederick), and Michael Watson (R-James City). Of the 183 elected officials who showed the courage to support necessary infrastructure in Virginia and Pennsylvania, just 9 lost their general or primary elections representing less than 5 percent of those who voted “yes” in these states.

As Wyoming, Massachusetts, Maryland, Vermont, and New Hampshire have their primaries throughout the summer, we will be keeping tabs and will let you know if this trend holds true. But to this point, all indications are that a Congress facing a deadline to salvage our nation’s transportation program can safely follow state legislators’ lead on transportation revenue. In return, they are more likely to earn gratitude than ire from constituents eager to ensure a sound transportation infrastructure.

We recently published the results from Mayland’s primaries and the results following their gas tax legislation.

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

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

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

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

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

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

U.S. DOT offers great proposals, but the program needs more money to make them real

The Obama Administration last week unveiled its bid to save the federal transportation program with only months to spare before most states and metro areas lose the majority of their funding to maintain and improve transportation networks – unless Congress acts.

While the Administration foreshadowed its priorities in its March budget request, the proposal – dubbed GROW AMERICA – marks the first time since the mid-2000’s that an Administration has submitted a full reauthorization bill to Congress. [See our summary of the provisions here.] While it stops short in some respects, the Administration bill is an important acknowledgement that we need not only to shore up the funding, but also to update the program goals and structure to support today’s economy.

In one sense, the $302 billion, four-year GROW AMERICA Act was drawn up by the people most intimately familiar with what is working, or not, in the current program – the DOT leaders who must interact with communities every day as they work to implement it.

Reading between the lines, they found that rigid adherence to funding silos for each mode does not work for today’s needs. They learned from the TIGER program that there were countless projects that could solve multiple problems for communities, businesses and freight handlers, but that existing, single-mode programs did not allow them to happen.

The first, critical, change the U.S. DOT suggests is to put all dollars for transportation infrastructure into a unified trust fund and shield it from budget fights such as the recent sequestration. During that budgetary debacle, some transportation programs – such as transit construction – were slashed while others were unhurt. Communities that are investing to preserve and improve the infrastructure our economy depends on deserve to know that all their promised funding is safe, not just some of it.

The GROW AMERICA Act would begin to infuse the federal transportation program with the promising ideas of competition and incentive-based funding. While most funding under MAP-21 is distributed automatically by formula, the GROW AMERICA Act would establish several new competitive and incentive grant programs. One, modeled after the highly successful TIGER program but more than twice as large, would provide $5 billion over four years for competitive grants to fund projects with a mix of modes, including highways, bridges, transit, passenger and freight rail, and ports.

Another program – Fixing and Accelerating Surface Transportation, or FAST – is modeled after the Department of Education’s Race to the Top. It would allocate $4 billion to support incentive grants to states or metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) that adopt innovative strategies and best practices in transportation, such as creating their own multimodal trust funds or giving local governments more latitude to raise their resources.

The biggest problems with the bill come down to money. The Administration proposes $87 billion to rescue the highway trust fund and provide new resources, but has said only that the money would come from unspecified corporate tax reforms. While that one-time infusion would be welcome, it does not address the ongoing shortfall resulting from declining gas tax revenue. Worse, without the additional increment of funding, very little about the current program would change, because the most exciting proposals are layered on top of the basic structure of MAP-21. Meanwhile, the bill makes no provisions even to study or pilot future revenue sources, such as vehicle miles traveled fees.

These are just a few highlights of the GROW AMERICA bill. Read our summary for more details, and watch this space over the next couple of weeks as we take a closer look at some of the individual proposals in the bill.