Skip to main content

With conference underway, how do the House and Senate bills stack up?

While the multi-year transportation bills passed by the House last week and the Senate back in July are fairly similar, there are still some notable differences between the two. With the conference committee getting underway to reconcile the bills, it’s worth looking at the similarities and differences.

While we believe both of these bills largely represent three (or possibly six) more years of the status quo for the most part, there are still some provisions within each bill worth fighting for in conference. Unfortunately, however, for some of our most significant priorities, that ship may have sailed. It’s unlikely that anyone will be successful in getting provisions inserted during conference which aren’t currently found in either bill. So if something isn’t already included in the House or Senate bill, it’s almost certainly not going to be included during conference (e.g. the Davis-Titus/Wicker-Booker local control amendment).

We’ll be keeping a close watch on the conference committee over the next week, so stay tuned. The staff of the conferees is meeting this week while Congress is on recess, and the members will meet next week for the first time. They’ll have to produce a deal and pass it through both chambers again before next Friday (November 20th) in order to avoid having to pass another short-term extension of MAP-21.

We produced a much more detailed summary for our members that also includes all named and likely conferees and how the bills stack up to T4America’s platform, available below.

[member_content]Members, we produced a much more detailed memo for you, which provides a detailed chart comparing each bill to one another as well as a comparison to the seven goals contained in our policy platform. You can access that detailed summary here.[/member_content]

The two bills are similar in their overall approach to funding. The overall levels are slightly better in one bill or the other for several key programs, and neither bill made any progress toward providing new sustainable revenues for our nation’s transportation trust fund.

This searchable table below covers 11 key provisions or big-picture goals and how the Senate and House bills stack up on each point.

ItemSenate DRIVE ActHouse STRR Act
Does the bill stabilize the trust fund with new sustainable revenue sources?No. It does not raise or index transportation user fees.

The bill uses $45 billion in largely non-transportation funding sources to fill the gap between gas tax revenues and spending in the bill. Unlike the House bill, it only partially funds the bill for 3 out of 6 years.
No. It does not raise or index transportation user fees.

The bill adopted most of the Senate's funding sources and added the option of using an infusion from the Federal Reserve surplus account to fund the last 2-3 years of the bill. (Where did that extra funding come from? Read this post.)
Funding levelsThe Senate bill provides about $350 billion over six years.The House provides about $325 billion over six years.
Complete Streets

Join with the National Complete Streets Coalition in sending a message to the conferees urging them to adopt the Senate language.
The Senate bill requires states and MPOs to incorporate Complete Streets standards.

It allows NACTO’s Urban Design Guide as a required design manual to be used by USDOT when developing the nation’s design standards, and will permit a local government to use its adopted design guide, even if it differs from the state’s.

The House bill only "encourages" states and MPOs to incorporate Complete Streets standards.

The House bill does also include NACTO's design guide and allows local governments to use their preferred guide even if it conflicts with the state's
Local control & fundingThe Wicker-Booker amendment to increase local funding and control was not included. The Senate bill provides less money for local communities than the House bill.

• It suballocates 55% of the Surface Transportation Program to locals instead of 50%.
• A smaller pot of STP funds overall = fewer total dollars going to local communities.
The Davis-Titus amendment to increase local funding and control was not included.

House bill does provide slightly greater funding for local communities. The Surface Transportation Program increases with inflation, and the amount suballocated to local governments increases by 1% per year until it reaches 55%.
TIGER grantsDoes not authorize TIGER or any other multimodal discretionary grant program.Does not authorize TIGER or any other multimodal discretionary grant program.
TIFIA loans for TOD projectsYes. The Senate bill lowers the cost threshold for local, TOD and ITS projects to apply for TIFIA loans from $50 million to $10 million, and makes transit-oriented development projects eligible.No. The House lowers the cost threshold for projects to apply for TIFIA loans from $50 million to $10 million. It does NOT make transit-oriented development projects eligible.
Rail improvement grants for TOD projectsNo. Transit-oriented development projects are not eligible to apply for loans from this financing program that provides low interest federal loans to public and private entities to improve rail infrastructure and assets.No. Transit-oriented development projects are not eligible to apply for loans from this financing program that provides low interest federal loans to public and private entities to improve rail infrastructure and assets.
More performance measures?No significant progress. MAP-21 took the first step in a transition to a performance-based system of investing dollars based on measurable outcomes and return on our investments. Neither bill takes the next logical, significant step forward in this regard.No significant progress. MAP-21 took the first step in a transition to a performance-based system of investing dollars based on measurable outcomes and return on our investments. Neither bill takes the next logical, significant step forward in this regard.

The House bill does include a new performance measure intended to “assess the conditions, accessibility, and reliability of roads in economically distressed urban communities.”
Transportation Alternatives ProgramSenate caps the TAP program at $850 million per year (higher than the House), and suballocates 100% of it to metro areas.House caps the TAP program at $819 million per year (less than Senate) and moves it within the STP program. It maintains status quo of sending 50% of the program to states and 50% to metro areas.
Passenger railBoth House and Senate will likely include a passenger rail title in the final bill. The Senate incorporated theirs into the DRIVE Act while the House passed theirs separately.Both the House and Senate will likely include a passenger rail title in the final bill.

The House rail proposal will effectively separate the Northeast Corridor from the rest of the national system and prioritize funding for this segment at the expense of planned rail development throughout the rest of the country.
Transit & transit fundingThe Senate bill marginally increases funding for transit. Other policy changes are relatively minor.The House decreased the allowed federal match in New Starts capital transit grants from 80 to 50 percent and restricting locally-controlled STP funds for counting as local match dollars.

What we’re watching: Senate Commerce Committee to mark up six-year transportation bill today

[This blog post is cross-posted from Smart Growth America. – Ed.]

Later today (Wednesday) the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation is scheduled to mark up the Comprehensive Transportation and Consumer Protection Act of 2015 (S. 1732), a proposed six-year transportation reauthorization. As we’ve mentioned here before, the federal transportation bill has huge implications for development across the country. Here’s what we’ll be looking for during today’s proceedings.

The bill currently includes legislation that supports and expands opportunities for transit-oriented development (TOD). The bipartisan Railroad Reform, Enhancement, and Efficiency Act (S. 1626) would expand the capabilities of the Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) Act, a $30 billion loan program to provide needed financing for transit-oriented development projects and infrastructure near passenger rail stations. This provision also includes provisions to improve rail safety and enhance existing rail infrastructure. These provisions are a big deal: previous transportation bills have not included a rail title, and it’s noteworthy that this bill would include both rail and surface transportation. We’re looking for S. 1626 to remain included in the final bill.

In addition, an amendment to the bill would include components of the Safe Streets Act, originally introduced in the Senate in 2014. The provision would require states and metropolitan planning organizations to adopt Complete Streets policies for federally funded projects. We’re looking for the Safe Streets amendment to be adopted in the final bill.

Finally, the bill would dramatically alter the U.S. Department of Transportation’s highly successful Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) grants. As written, the bill would refocus TIGER funding towards a new multimodal grant program exclusive to freight infrastructure. Hundreds of communities have used TIGER grants to catalyze local transportation investments and safety improvements. We’re looking to see the TIGER program retain its competitive, multimodal mission in the final bill.

Help defend the TIGER program: Send a message to your Senator TODAY >>

Ultimately the Senate Commerce Committee’s bill will be combined with bills from the Environment and Public Works and Banking committees. The final resolution could come to the floor for consideration by the full Senate as early as this week. The House of Representatives is also currently considering its strategy for transportation. No word on when the two chambers will come together on a final resolution.

Congress kicks into high gear on transportation — let’s summarize the action

During an extremely busy week in Congress in several key committees, a long-term transportation bill and a multi-year passenger rail authorization were introduced and passed committees, along with hearings on possible ways to keep our nation’s transportation fund afloat, rural transportation issues, rail safety, and autonomous vehicles.

For those of you who don’t regularly follow Congress, this is often how things go: nothing seems to happen for a long time, and then there’s an explosion of activity all at once. That’s certainly what took place this week in the Senate, with some important ramifications for the future of transportation funding and policy. We hope that Congress shows the same focus when they return from their weeklong July 4th recess.

Four of the five Senate committees with jurisdiction over either transportation policy or funding were active this week. Two notable transportation policy bills (and one yearly spending bill) were advanced out of committees this week, and the Senate made the first big move toward passing a long-term transportation reauthorization ahead of the July 31 expiration of MAP-21, the current law. So what happened, and what should we be expecting next?

Here’s our brief rundown of what you need to know.

First up, in news we haven’t covered here yet, the Senate Appropriations Committee this morning marked up and passed their version of the yearly transportation and housing spending bill that was passed out of the House several weeks ago — a bill that cut TIGER, passenger rail, and transit construction. Unfortunately, the news out of the Senate today was only marginally better. On the plus side, TIGER funding is maintained at this year’s level: $500 million again for competitive grants this upcoming year. But the Senate actually makes deeper cuts to New and Small Starts transit construction than the House did — $520 million in cuts over last year, and $320 million more than the House passed a few weeks ago. Passenger rail funding gets a marginal increase over last year’s level.

While we were hopeful that the Senate could possibly restore some of these cuts made by the House — as had happened in several years past — the consensus by House and Senate Republicans to stick to 2011 budget sequestration-level discretionary funding amounts for all of their FY2016 spending bills result in cuts across the board to discretionary programs like these. All Democrats on the Appropriations Committee opposed this bill.

Smart Growth America offered up this statement on the THUD bill today. T4America is a program of Smart Growth America.

The United States is in the middle of an affordable housing crisis. Rents are rising, the homeownership rate is declining, and federal housing programs are already failing to meet the need for affordable homes. Gutting the HOME program at a time like this is the wrong response. If Congress’s budget caps force this outcome, the budget caps need to be changed.

Logged-in T4America members can read our full THUD summary below:

[member_content]June 24, 2015 — The Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies (Transportation-HUD) marked up and reported its FY2016 appropriation bill to the full committee on June 23 without amendment. This is T4America’s short members-only summary of the THUD bill as reported to the full committee. Read the full memo.[/member_content]

Second up was the release and the subsequent committee markup of the Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee’s six-year transportation bill known as the DRIVE Act. The EPW Committee is responsible for the largest portion of the full bill known as the “highway title” — more on the other portions below. In case you missed any of our posts about the EPW bill over the last few days, you can catch up with those below. Long story short? EPW released a bill with some modest improvements that represents a good starting point for debate, they approved it unanimously in committee while making a few small improvements, and important amendments that could ensure our investments best maintain and improve our transportation system are still outstanding and will hopefully be considered by the full Senate.

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

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

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

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

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

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

While the Senate Appropriations Committee marked up the transportation & housing spending bill this morning, the Senate Commerce Committee — the committee with jurisdiction over rail policy in the Senate — considered the Railroad Reform, Enhancement, and Efficiency Act — a bill to govern all passenger rail policy and authorize funding for the next several years. The RREEA bill is a good step forward, supported by T4America wholeheartedly:

Statement in response to introduction of the Railroad Reform, Enhancement and Efficiency Act

Senators Wicker and Booker are doing the nation a great service in crafting a bill that ensures Americans will see continued and improving passenger rail service in the years to come. Passenger rail service is vital and growing in popularity, and keeping the system working and safe requires investment. The Wicker-Booker bill embraces both those ideas. It authorizes necessary funding to start to return the system to a state of good repair and make targeted investments to improve service.

The committee markup of the bill known as RREEA was mostly uneventful, and it passed by a unanimous vote with mostly minor amendments and issues raised — some of which were safety-related and expected in the wake of the recent derailment in Philadelphia. The Commerce Committee is also responsible for freight and rail policy for the long-term bill, and we’ve heard that they could be releasing their draft long-term bill shortly after the July 4th recess.

Lastly, both House and Senate committees tasked with finding the funding to pay for the next long-term transportation bill (or finding the money to extend MAP-21 past July 31) held hearings this week to continue their work along those lines. In the case of the House, they were specifically discussing repatriation of corporate earnings as a possible revenue source.

Repatriation is the process by which companies can bring offshore earnings back to the U.S. at a reduced tax rate, and then all or a share of those tax revenues would be directed to the trust fund, providing revenues for a long-term transportation bill. It’s an idea that’s gotten some traction in the Senate — Senators Barbara Boxer and Rand Paul have introduced a proposal — but it’s still a one-time fix that’s still not a fee paid by the users of the transportation system.

A House Ways and Means subcommittee held a hearing today to discuss repatriation, and the overall takeaway from the hearing seemed to be that while repatriation may be the most feasible option after a gas tax increase was ruled out by Ways and Means Chairman Paul Ryan, there’s still little consensus in the House, and many representatives want to tie it to more thorny issues like corporate tax reform, reducing the chances that it could pass quickly or easily.

In the Senate, the Finance Committee held a hearing today as well to discuss the use of public-private partnerships — a growing trend in many states as they look to up-front cash from the private sector to help fund longer-term projects where the private party defers their payment or profits. Despite the way P3s, as they’re known, are frequently invoked as a possible funding solution, almost all the panelists today noted that although having a greater range of financing options will certainly be a boost to many states and cities, P3s won’t be sufficient without also increasing overall revenues. They’re not a panacea.

Which leads us right back to the elephant in the room: finding and agreeing upon a new, stable revenue source that can keep the nation’s transportation fund solvent for years to come. It was indeed a busy week, and we hope that Congress will keep up the momentum when they return from their weeklong July 4th recess.

Statement in response to introduction of the Railroad Reform, Enhancement and Efficiency Act

press release

Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Cory Booker (D-NJ) today introduced a multi-year bill to authorize funding to Amtrak and support passenger rail, dubbed the Railroad Reform, Enhancement and Efficiency Act. It would be the successor to the existing rail authorization, the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act. 

In response, T4America Chairman John Robert Smith, a former chair of the Amtrak board, released this statement:

“Senators Wicker and Booker are doing the nation a great service in crafting a bill that ensures Americans will see continued and improving passenger rail service in the years to come. Passenger rail service is vital and growing in popularity, and keeping the system working and safe requires investment. The Wicker-Booker bill embraces both those ideas. It authorizes necessary funding to start to return the system to a state of good repair and make targeted investments to improve service.”

In addition, this bill would:

  • Sustainably grow funding authorization levels to Amtrak, which would enable the nation’s passenger rail corporation to address the long ignored need to seriously invest in our passenger rail system and its supporting infrastructure
  • Create a Rail Service Capital and Operating grant program, funded at $350 million next year and rising to $900 million in FY2019, to assist regions in planning and deploying new or expanded passenger rail service;
  • Unlock billions in private capital to develop transit oriented developments that support passenger rail stations, service, and increased ridership potential through the underutilized Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing (RRIF) program — a $35 billion program that provides direct loans and loan guarantees to finance development of public and private railroad infrastructure.
  • Ensure the Amtrak Board of Directors is representative of the entire nation’s interests by guaranteeing seats for voices representing State-Supported and Long-Distance corridors, as well as the Northeast Corridor.

Transportation for America strongly supports Senators Booker and Wicker in their proposed authorization for passenger rail and look forward to its passage from the Senate Commerce Committee.