senate Archives - Page 4 of 7 - Transportation For America

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

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

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

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

[member_content]

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

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

The good

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

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

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

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

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

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

The bad

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

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

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

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

The ugly

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

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

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

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

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

Wrapping it all up — the big picture

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Full bill text (pdf)
Joint explanatory statement from the conferees (pdf)
Summary of the bill (pdf)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[member_content]

Senate THUD 2016 comparison chart

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

[/member_content]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Day 1 Wrap Up: Congressional Conference Committee Action

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

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

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

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

Senate Conference Members

Environment & Public Works Committee

Republicans

Jim Inhofe (R-OK)

John Barrasso (R-WY)

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

Democrats

Barbara Boxer (D-CA)

Commerce Committee

Republicans

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

Democrats

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

Banking Committee

Democrats

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

Finance Committee

Republicans

Orrin Hatch (R-UT)

John Cornyn (R-TX)

Democrats

Ron Wyden (D-OR)

Chuck Schumer (D-NY)

Other Conferees

Republicans

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK)

Democrats

Dick Durbin (D-IL) – Democratic Whip

House Conference Members

Transportation & Infrastructure Committee

Republicans

Bill Shuster (R-PA)

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

Sam Graves (R-MO)

Candice Miller (R-MI)

Rick Crawford (R-AR)

Lou Barletta (R-PA)

Blake Farenthold (R-TX)

Bob Gibbs (R-OH)

Jeff Denham (R-CA)

Reid Ribble (R-WI)

Scott Perry (R-PA)

Rob Woodall (R-GA)

John Katko (R-NY)

Brian Babin (R-TX)

Cresent Hardy (R-NV)

Garret Graves (R-LA)

John Mica (R-FL)

Barbara Comstock (R-VA)

Democrats

Peter DeFazio (D-OR)

Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC)

Jerrold Nadler (D-NY)

Corrine Brown (D-FL)

Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX)

Elijah Cummings (D-MD)

Rick Larsen (D-WA)

Michael Capuano (D-MA)

Grace Napolitano (D-CA)

Daniel Lipinski (D-IL)

Steve Cohen (D-TN)

Albio Sires (D-NJ)

Donna Edwards (D-MD)

Ways & Means Committee

Republicans

Kevin Brady (R-TX)

Dave Reichert (R-WA)

Democrats

Sander Levin (D-MI)

Energy & Commerce Committee

Republicans

Fred Upton (R-MI)

Markwayne Mullin (R-OK)

Democrats

Frank Palone (D-NJ)

Financial Services Committee

Republicans

Jeb Hensarling (R-TX)

Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)

Democrats

Maxine Waters (D-CA)

Other Committees

Republicans

Mac Thornberry (R-TX)

Mike Rogers (R-AL)

Bob Goodlatte (R-VA)

Tom Marino (R-PA)

Darin LaHood (R-IL)

Glenn Thomson (R-PA)

Will Hurd (R-TX)

Lamar Smith (R-TX)

Democrats

Loretta Sanchez (D-CA)

Zoe Lofgren (D-CA)

Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ)

Gerry Connolly (D-VA)

Federal update: Path clears on a short-term deal to avoid government shutdown

Though all federal funding expires on Wednesday, September 30, 2015, Congress appears poised to avoid a government shutdown and extend current funding levels through December 11, 2015. The U.S. Senate may pass a continuing resolution (CR) spending bill tomorrow with House passage expected the same day. What will happen between now and this new December 11^th spending deadline is less clear in light of Speaker of House John Boehner’s (R-OH) unexpected retirement announced last Friday.

Here’s our members-only look at what you need to know from Congress related to transportation funding & policy.

Short-term outlook

As reported last week, Senate Appropriations Chairman Thad Cochran (R-MS) introduced a CR proposal to provide funding through December 11, while also providing $700 million for wildfires, extending Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Authorization through next March, and restricting funds to Planned Parenthood. The Senate failed to pass Senator Cochran’s proposal on a 47-52 vote with 7 Republicans opposing the bill.

In response, the Senate removed language pertaining to Planned Parenthood as well as the FAA authorization from Senator Cochran’s proposal. The Senate tied his CR proposal to a House-passed bill (H.R. 719, the TSA Office of Inspection Accountability Act of 2015) to speed passage out of Congress. The Senate plans to force consideration in the near-term with a procedural move called a cloture vote this evening. If the cloture vote is successful, the Senate will vote on final passage late Tuesday. Outgoing Speaker Boehner has indicated that he plans to bring up the Senate’s version of the CR for a vote on Wednesday before the fiscal year 2015 expires at midnight.

Long-term outlook

The good news is that in this scenario, the federal government will remain open on Thursday, October 1 — a markedly different outcome than many expected last week. However, Congress has a full docket of pressing matters to deal with between now and the end of the year: including a modified FY16 budget that many hope will ease federal sequestration spending limits and include an omnibus spending package, tax extenders, a federal debt limit increase and extend the positive train control implementation deadline.

The House Republican Caucus will also hold leadership elections to replace outgoing Speaker Boehner and the remainder of the leadership team. Most believe current House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) will receive the necessary support to become Speaker, but he is expected to receive opposition from Congressman Daniel Weber (R-FL), among others. Many Capitol Hill observers are starting to look beyond the Speaker election to the expected campaigns for majority leader, whip and conference chair, and whether or not members from the House Freedom Caucus will receive any of these posts.

Speaker Boehner has indicated a desire to achieve much prior to his retirement, stating “I don’t want to leave my successor a dirty barn.” One item not yet addressed is House action on a multi-year transportation authorization. The House Transportation & Infrastructure (T&I) Committee is awaiting transportation funding levels from the Ways & Means Committee before T&I introduces and marks up their version of a surface transportation authorization. House action on a multi-year transportation authorization may very well be sidelined through the month of October due to the expected budget process coupled with House Republican leadership elections.

As always, we will update you as more information comes available.

The Senate’s multi-year transportation bill misses the mark on multimodal freight

Below is an in-depth explanation of one of the 10 things you need to know about the Senate’s DRIVE Act.

The Senate’s multi-year transportation bill recognizes that efficient freight movement is important, but the bill prioritizes freight moving on highways over that moving by rail, air, ports and pipelines.

The DRIVE Act (HR 22) is unique from past transportation bills in that it creates a program for freight. The bill includes almost $1 billion for freight in its first year and up to $2.5 billion toward the end of the authorization in 2021. (The bill was more robust when originally introduced in the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, providing $2 billion in the first year and rising to $2.5 billion. It was scaled back to a smaller cost when some of the DRIVE Act’s “pay-fors” were deemed too controversial).

The program features a comprehensive and thoughtful national- and state-level planning framework to analyze the condition and performance of the national freight transportation system. It would require states to identify priority projects for improving freight movement regardless of mode – including rail, seaports, pipelines and airports. Yet the program restricts the majority of funds to highway projects. Only 10 percent of the money it provides to states can go to other modes.

This funding model would fall far short of the costs of multimodal freight projects. California, for example, would be allocated $90 million under this program in 2016, only $9 million of which could be used for non-highway projects. The Port of Los Angeles’s West Basin Railyard project – a rail and port project – costs $137.7 million.

Similarly, Illinois would have less than $4 million available. Chicago’s CREATE program – one of the most significant freight projects in the nation, which would improve rail freight efficiency throughout much of the country – costs over $3 billion.

This restriction seems burdensome, particularly since the new program would be paid for out of the general fund, not by roadway users. Congress has taken funding from across the board and restricted it to highway projects, even if a state says that its priorities for freight are elsewhere.

Also troubling is the fact that the National Freight Program’s funding would be distributed among the states evenly, using a formula that ignores where freight volumes are highest or where goods get stuck in congestion or bottlenecks. It’s the equivalent of investing wildfire prevention dollars in all 50 states even though a majority of fires are in the dry, arid west.

Reducing the country’s freight bottlenecks and helping businesses efficiently move commerce is a worthwhile goal, and one that can only be achieved with a truly multimodal freight program. When the House takes up their transportation bill in the early fall, we hope they rethink the DRIVE Act’s distribution formula and the restrictive funding cap on non-highway projects to ensure this program lives up the goals outlined for the National Freight Program.

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.

10 things you need to know about the Senate’s DRIVE Act

The Senate approved their multi-year transportation authorization bill by a 65-34 vote this week. You can view our full statement on the DRIVE Act here from T4America Chairman John Robert Smith. Meanwhile, here are 10 things that you need to know about what’s in the Senate bill.

1) Funding from deficit spending vs. pay-as-you-go

How do you pay for a six-year transportation authorization when the transportation fund is broke and Congress is unwilling to raise the federal gasoline tax? For the DRIVE Act, the Senate bridged the gap between dwindling user fee revenues and total spending by getting creative. In the end, they cobbled together $46 billion in non-transportation-related funds, fees and accounting maneuvers.

Among some of the more controversial “pay-fors” in the Senate bill is a requirement to sell 100 million barrels of the 693 million barrels in the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) between 2018 and 2025, estimated to bring in $9 billion if it can be sold at $95 per barrel ($30-40 more per-barrel than today’s price). Add to that the indexing of customs fees (ironic for a Congress unwilling to index gasoline taxes), an extension of airport TSA fees through 2025, closing estate fee loopholes, and reducing the “fixed dividend rate” the Federal Reserve pays to banks.

But while the bill needs 10 years to recognize some of the new revenues or savings that won’t occur until the 2025, it would instantly transfer billions from the general fund to the transportation fund, increasing the deficit. Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) called it “generational theft,” while T4A Chair John Robert Smith asked, “Is it fiscally responsible to place the cost of paying for three years of transportation investments on the backs of our children and grandchildren?”

A final point of clarification on the length of Senate bill: the DRIVE Act authorizes six years of spending, but provides only three years of funding certainty. In 2018, Congress will have to find an additional $51 billion to fully fund the bill for the remaining three years of its authorization. Despite calls from a diverse cross-section of industry and advocacy groups for a “long-term, sustainable funding solution” for transportation, the DRIVE Act is patched together with temporary and speculative “pay-fors,” the type that are only going to get harder to find three years from now.

Policy	Ten-year savings
Reduce the fixed dividend rate the Federal Reserve pays larger banks	$17.10 billion
Sell 101 million barrels of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve	$9.05 billion
Index customs fees for inflation	$5.70 billion
Extend current budget treatment of TSA fees from 2023 to 2025	$3.50 billion
Use private debt collectors to collect overdue tax payments	$2.48 billion
Extend Fannie/Freddie guarantee fees	$1.90 billion
Require lenders to report more information on outstanding mortgages	$1.80 billion
Close an estate tax loophole about the reporting of property	$1.50 billion
Clarify the statute of limitations on reassessing certain tax returns	$1.20 billion
Revoke or deny passports for those with seriously delinquent taxes	$0.40 billion
Devote civil penalties for motor safety violations to the Highway Trust Fund	$0.35 billion
Stop paying interest when companies overpay for mineral leases	$0.32 billion
Adjust tax-filing deadlines for businesses	$0.30 billion
Allow employers to transfer excess defined-benefit plan assets to retiree medical accounts and group-term life insurance	$0.20 billion
TOTAL	$45.80 Billion

2) Local communities get the short end of the stick…again

The DRIVE Act bypasses America’s cities and towns, reducing the already small amount of funding they directly control to invest in locally-driven projects by nearly $200 million in the first year alone compared to MAP-21. We were extremely disappointed to see a bipartisan amendment from Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Cory Booker (D-NJ), with support from Sens. Casey (D-PA), Durbin (D-IL), Peters (D-MI) and Stabenow (D-MI) fail to receive a fair hearing on the floor. Their plan would have put a larger share of transportation dollars in the hands of local governments by increasing the amount of flexible federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) dollars directly provided to metropolitan areas of all sizes and allowing direct access to the funding for rural areas through a grant program. 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.

3) Progress on a national freight policy but with funding stuck in 20^th century silos

The Senate recognized the economic importance of moving goods efficiently throughout the country by including a new freight program that also includes real funding: almost $1 billion in the first year, and up to $2.5 billion annually towards the end of the authorization.

Unfortunately, 90 percent of the dollars reserved for the freight program are restricted to highway projects. This decision runs counter to the realities of how our freight moves: generally, no one product gets to its destination by one mode of transportation, but rather relies on a interconnected and efficient system of ports, rail lines, highways, urban streets and intermodal yards all working together.

There’s a mixed message here. The bill requires USDOT, states and MPOs to conduct thoughtful national- and state-level freight planning to analyze the condition and performance of the freight transportation system and identify the highest priority needs to create greater efficiency and reliability in freight movement, regardless of mode. After all this planning is done, the Senate bill instructs states and MPOs to focus only on highway projects at the expense of rail lines, ports and a truly intermodal network.

4) For the first time, intercity passenger rail is included in a surface transportation bill

While the popular shorthand for the transportation authorization is “the highway bill,” the nation’s transportation program has included dedicated funding for public transportation and bicycling and walking since 1982 and 1991 respectively. But intercity passenger rail has been consistently left out of the overall surface transportation legislation – until now.

For the first time, the nation’s passenger rail policy is included in the bill, laying the groundwork for further improvements and expansion of the nation’s passenger rail service to match the recent unparalleled growth in ridership. Previously, the passenger rail bill has always passed as a standalone authorization, but the DRIVE Act would enshrine the policy in the nation’s surface transportation bill. While the rail programs would still require annual appropriations for funding, it takes an important step forward in providing Amtrak sustainable funding and helping to expand service to meet booming demand.

5) Popular TIGER program fails to win a permanent seat at the table

The USDOT’s competitive TIGER grants represent one of the few ways local communities can directly access federal funds for their local priority projects. While disaster was averted as the bill was being drafted and TIGER hasn’t been changed in this bill, the Senate missed a major opportunity to authorize the program and make it a permanent part of the nation’s transportation policy. If this bill passed, supportive lawmakers will have to continue to fight each year for TIGER funding through the annual appropriations process, resulting in up and down fluctuations in available funding year to year. That makes it tough for local communities to plan and compete within this popular and oversubscribed program.

Nearly one-third of the Senate endorsed Senator Patty Murray’s (D-WA) amendment to authorize TIGER and provide $500 million per year in contract authority via the transportation fund. Unfortunately, along with the Wicker-Booker amendment, this important provision was not given an open and fair hearing on the floor.

6) TIFIA loans can fund TOD, but under a dramatically scaled back program

One of Senator Barbara Boxer’s (D-CA) signature achievements in MAP-21 was an expansion of the TIFIA loan program from nearly $125 million up to $1 billion in annual financing authority. This move greatly expanded an innovative program of low-cost federal financing that doesn’t have to be repaid immediately, allowing the financial benefits of a project to accrue before payments are due. While two good changes were made in the DRIVE Act — making transit-oriented development (TOD) an eligible expenditure and making it easier for local projects, TOD and ITS to access this program by lowering the total project cost threshold lowered from $50 million to $10 million — the program’s funding was scaled back significantly, from $1 billion to $300 million annually.

7) Transit wins additional funds, but projects with private involvement can ‘skip the line’

Overall, public transportation was spared any cuts and in fact received a larger portion of overall authorized funding. As initially introduced by Majority Leader McConnell (R-KY), the DRIVE Act provided transit with 24 percent of the bill’s funding, but the new money used to fill the gap in the transportation fund was directed almost entirely to the highway program. As a result, the mass transit account was set to end the third year of the bill (FY2018) with a negative balance of $180 million. This was fixed on the Senate floor with help from Sen. Durbin (D-IL) and others, and in the end transit received a nearly 25 increase in funding over the six years of the authorization.

One provision in the transit title of the DRIVE Act generating controversy is the ability for projects with any private sector involvement in design, construction, operation, or maintenance of transit projects to jump to the front of the line for the already oversubscribed transit New Starts Program.

8) Active transportation funding survives intact

While the bill represents a missed opportunity for local communities on the whole, the bill slightly increases funding for the popular Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) to $850 million, but it caps the growth there over the life of the bill. Unlike other programs, this means TAP will not be able to grow with inflation over the life of the six-year authorization.

On a positive note, communities that use TAP to help make biking or walking safer and more convenient will receive 100 percent of the program’s funds, meaning all $850 million will be available to communities. States formerly controlled half of the program’s funds — but no longer.

9) Limited progress to improve accountability through performance measures

The DRIVE Act takes one small step to build on project selection and performance management, a key reform of MAP-21. The DRIVE Act provides MPOs and states support in developing their performance measure programs by requiring USDOT to develop datasets and data analysis tools. This includes addressing data gaps for trip origin and destination, trip time and travel mode.

While USDOT has yet to complete their assignment to establish rules for the performance measures contained in MAP-21, there were steps available to the Senate such as including measures such as connectivity and access to jobs or improving project selection processes to open up the “black box” and provide greater transparency and understanding for why one project receives funds over another. None of these positive ideas were included in the DRIVE Act that passed the Senate.

10) Positive advances for next-generation transportation research

At a time when transformative changes in technology are beginning to reshape the transportation landscape, providing an outcome-based 21^st century transportation research program is needed now more than ever. Fortunately, this is an area that the DRIVE Act did well. First, the bill establishes competitive funding for local governments and MPOs, among others, to deploy and test innovative research. This is important, since MAP-21 provided limited dollars outside of formula funds to test and deploy the next generation of transportation innovations. Second, the bill would require USDOT to study “shared use mobility” (car-sharing, bike-sharing, ride-sharing, etc.) and other innovative concepts, and provide local and regional leaders best practices and better understanding of the shared use transportation sector. This is important since we need to provide our leaders the understanding of this new transportation sector so that they can adequately plan and provide for its growth.

The last thing you need to know is that the work is far from over. While the Senate passed this long-term bill, both chambers also passed short-term extensions to MAP-21, setting up October 29th as the next deadline to agree on a multi-year transportation bill. Will the House pass the Senate’s bill? Will they draft a bill of their own? Will they fail to do anything and move to another short-term extension in October? Stay tuned.

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

Amendment to provide stable funding for TIGER program has a long list of Senate co-sponsors

In the week before tomorrow’s final vote on the Senate’s three-year transportation bill, Senator Patty Murray’s (D-WA) amendment to enshrine the TIGER program’s funding into law picked up at least 27 co-sponsors. The TIGER program represents one of the few ways local communities can directly access federal funds for their local priority projects.

This amendment to the Senate’s transportation bill, though not currently included in the Senate’s draft bill heading for a vote tomorrow, would authorize the TIGER program and provide $500 million per year in contract authority via the Highway Trust Fund. This would provide this popular and oversubscribed program with some long-desired certainty and give local communities more resources they can access directly and win on the merits of their projects.

These TIGER grants have rewarded communities all across the country that are thinking outside the box to cut congestion, improve safety, promote economic development, or improve access to jobs and opportunities through smarter transportation investments.

Check the list below for Senate co-sponsors to date. If your Senator is on the list, call them and say thanks for co-sponsoring this important amendment. If you don’t see your Senator, call them today and ask them to join their fellow colleagues and co-sponsor this important amendment to make TIGER a permanent part of the nation’s transportation program.

Current co-sponsors of Senate Amendment #2416

Blumenthal, Richard – (D – CT)
Booker, Cory A. – (D – NJ)
Brown, Sherrod – (D – OH)
Cantwell, Maria – (D – WA)
Carper, Thomas R. – (D – DE)
Cassidy, Bill – (R – LA)
Cochran, Thad – (R – MS)
Collins, Susan M. – (R – ME)
Coons, Christopher A. – (D – DE)
Durbin, Richard J. – (D – IL)
Franken, Al – (D – MN),
Feinstein, Dianne – (D – CA)
Hirono, Mazie K. – (D – HI)
King, Angus S., Jr. – (I – ME)
Leahy, Patrick J. – (D – VT)
Markey, Edward J. – (D – MA)
Merkley, Jeff – (D – OR)
Mikulski, Barbara A. – (D – MD)
Murphy, Christopher – (D – CT)
Reed, Jack – (D – RI)
Schatz, Brian – (D – HI)
Schumer, Charles E. – (D – NY)
Shelby, Richard C. – (R – AL)
Udall, Tom – (D – NM)
Warner, Mark R. – (D – VA)
Warren, Elizabeth – (D – MA)
Wyden, Ron – (D – OR)

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.

US Senate Transportation Authorization – T4A Update

The US Senate continues to debate the federal surface transportation bill this week, with a series of votes taken last night by the full Senate. Individual senators filed over 200 amendments and T4America continues to track the latest developments on those amendments. We have compiled a brief update on where things stand and provide information on three amendments that we know would spur innovation, access and local control.

**It is rumored that another manager’s amendment package will be offered in the near future. T4A will update this information as needed.

Transportation Funding Timeline Update: Transportation funding expires this Friday and the House announced this morning that they intend to pass a 3-month extension to match the Senate’s; setting up a new October 29 transportation funding deadline.

Last week, Majority Leader McConnell (R-KY) introduced what is expected to be the first of potentially two or more manager’s amendment packages. Manager’s packages serve as legislative vehicles to modify a piece of legislation in committee or on the floor, wholesale. This first manager’s package makes a number of changes, including maintaining the historic 80/20 highway and transit funding split; increases funding for the FTA High Intensity/Fixed Guideway State of Good Repair Formula program by $100 million (paid for by cutting TIFIA and the Assistance for Major Projects by $50 million each) and requires 50% of the off-system bridge set-aside funding in the STP program to be used on bridges that are not on the federal-aid highway system.

Last Sunday, the Senate dispatched a couple of non-germane amendments, but voted to allow Senators to vote on whether or not to tie the Ex-Im Bank authorization to the highway authorization. Late last night, the Senate voted and approved that plan (64-39).

Under this new modified manager’s package, T4A believes that it is unlikely that few if any of the 200+ plus amendments filed by Senators will be considered or voted on. However, we do anticipate the introduction of a third manager’s amendment which will reflect additional changes. T4A continues to work to increase local control, innovation and access to jobs and opportunity through three primary amendments. They include the following:

Wicker-Booker STP local control amendment (corresponding fact sheet by USCM on changes to metro level funding)
Murray TIGER authorization amendment
Donnelly Job Access planning amendment (search for S. Amdt 2434, 2435 and 2436; this one is messy, our apologies)

Update: 5 Issues to Watch (for more information, please refer to T4A’s Member post on 7/23/15):

Pay-fors – Since the last post on 7/23/15, a number of items have shifted. A few provisions, considered poison pills, were removed, including the $2.3 billion that came from denying those with felony warrants social security benefits and $1.7 billion that came from rescinding unused funds for TARP’s Hardest Hit Fund. These rescissions leave the authorization with $43.7 billion, all of which are generated outside of the traditional transportation-user fee system. The measure would provide enough additional HTF revenues to provide the first three years of highway and transit investment, but Congress would be required to raise additional resources before October 2018 to be able to fund the final three years of the DRIVE Act’s authorized spending.

Transit funding – Changes in the manager’s package increased the levels of transit funding to be 24% of the authorized levels overall and 24% of any new funding generated annually.

Freight –The DRIVE Act creates a robust freight planning process that directs states to examine efficient goods movement and identify projects needed to improve multimodal freight movement. However, despite instituting a multi-modal freight planning process, the new National Highway Freight Program would require 90% of the funding go to highway-only projects rather than to multimodal projects using a performance-based system. What impact will this have?

Take, for example, the non-highway freight needs in the State of California. Ten percent of California’s funding would be only $9.3 million in 2016, growing to $23 million in 2021. Comparitively, one multimodal project at the Port of Long Beach in California to remove a railroad bottleneck and build more on-dock rail capacity cost the Port $84 million. T4A views this policy as a missed opportunity and not consistent with T4A’s freight policy.

Overall, due to removal of the TARP Hardest Hit Fund, the bill’s overall investment levels needed to be reduced. Under the first manager’s package, the freight program was set to receive $1.5 billion in FY2016 growing to $2 billion in FY2018. The program would now receive $991.5 million in FY2016 and increase to 1.9 billion in Fy2018.

Passenger Rail – No changes to note from the last update on 7/23/15.

Assistance for Major Projects (AMP) – Funding decreased by $50 million per year to increase funds for FTA’s High Intensity/Fixed Guideway State of Good Repair Formula program. AMP would now be authorized at $250 million in FY16 and rise to $400 million in FY2021.

*NEW* TIFIA – The initial manager’s package introduced early last week would cut TIFIA funding from $1 billion to $500 million per year. Removing the TARP Hardest Hit Fund and other payfors required additional cuts, which senate authorizers took out of the TIFIA program. Those cuts, plus the increase to the FTA’s High Intensity/Fixed Guideway State of Good Repair program, result in an overall authorized funding level for TIFIA at just $300 million per year over the life of the bill.

Support the new plan from a bipartisan duo of senators to send more transportation dollars to local communities

Two Senators championing the cause of giving local communities more control over their transportation dollars have introduced a modified plan to steer more federal transportation dollars directly to local communities of all sizes — reaching a compromise that they hope to incorporate into the Senate’s transportation bill as it heads to the floor.

The Innovation in Surface Transportation Act has been one of our biggest priorities for more than a year now. That bill would put a small share of each state’s federal transportation dollars into a competitive grant program so that towns and cities of all sizes could compete directly on the merits for transportation funds. Local communities get a seat at the table and get more access to federal dollars that can be spent on a wide variety of locally determined transportation projects and programs.

ISTA is a great proposal and it remains active in the House of Representatives, but the two Senators who introduced it have come together on a new plan to accomplish the same goal, one with even more widespread support.

A new proposal from Senators Wicker (R-MS) and Booker (D-NJ) would put a larger share of transportation dollars directly in the hands of local governments by increasing the amount of flexible federal Surface Transportation Program (STP) dollars directly given to metropolitan areas of all sizes.

This new proposal will hopefully be offered as an amendment to the long-term transportation bill currently before the Senate.

We need to drive up support for this plan now as the Senate considers their bill. Send a message to your Senators and urge them to support this provision from Senators Booker and Wicker.

SEND A MESSAGE

It’s a proposal that works for red states and blue states, heavily urbanized areas and smaller rural towns — evident from the support of a Democratic Senator from the most urbanized state in the country, and a Republican Senator from the deep south where a large percentage of his state’s population lives in smaller urbanized areas.

How the current system works for local communities, and how it falls short

Today, small metro areas (under 200,000 people) are at the mercy of their state’s decision-making process for transportation spending in their area.

Large metro areas (over 200,000 people) directly receive a share of flexible federal dollars through a process known as suballocation. But in the smaller metro areas under 200,000 in population, those “suballocated” funds go directly to the state instead, which has total control over spending that money. The only basic requirement is that the state must spend a predetermined share of those funds within the state’s smaller metro areas, but the local community gets little say on how those dollars are spent.

Those decisions are left entirely up to the state, even though the funds are expressly intended by federal law for those smaller cities and metro areas.

While there’s some variety from state to state in how this plays out — a few select states are certainly more respectful of local communities’ wishes — it means that a local community could see their priorities passed over completely by the wishes of their state department of transportation. A state could have a pressing local priority like improving an important downtown street, and the state could instead decide to add a lane on the state highway on the edge of town instead. As long as the state spends the appropriate amount of money within that small metro area, that’s considered a proper use of the money intended for use in that community.

What would this proposal change?

The overall funding intended for metro areas and cities of all sizes would increase in two ways: First, the size of the flexible program known as the Surface Transportation Program (STP), which can be spent on almost anything from roads to bridges to transit to bike lanes, would be increased. Secondly, the share of STP that gets suballocated to metro areas increases from 50 percent of STP funding to 67 percent. That means more money will be given directly to metro areas and metropolitan planning organizations.

Last but not least, an important change is made to ensure that smaller metro areas aren’t left behind. Instead of being put solely at the state’s discretion, the share of STP dollars intended for communities under 200,000 people will be put into a competitive grant program for these areas, so these smaller communities will be able to apply for their share of the funding in a competitive grant program for their local priorities.

Who supports this new proposal in the Senate?

A compelling case can be made that Americans are willing to contribute more to invest in transportation, but they absolutely want to know that the dollars a) will be spent wisely on the projects that do the most get to work, school and daily needs and b) they want more decisions in the hands of the levels of government closest to them so they can hold them accountable.

A number of groups that represent local elected officials in communities of all sizes sent a letter to Congress this week endorsing this proposal. The National League of Cities, the U.S. Conference of Mayors, the National Association of Development Organizations, the National Association of Counties, the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, and the National Association of Regional Councils all signed onto a letter to Congress supporting the Booker-Wicker proposal, urging it to be included as an amendment to the Senate’s full long-term transportation bill currently under consideration.

What does this mean for the Innovation in Surface Transportation Act

While numerous local mayors, county executives, chambers of commerce and other local leaders have backed the Innovation in Surface Transportation Act, it’s an even bigger sign of support to see these national associations which represent many of those leaders nationally endorse this new proposal, noting that it would be a win for mayors, cities, county executives, metro leaders and others.

But this new proposal wouldn’t have happened without the strong support that has been pouring in for months on the Innovation in Surface Transportation Act. Your emails, phone calls, letters and meetings have made it clear to these Senators that this idea has traction, and this new proposal is a direct result of your past support for the Innovation in Surface Transportation Act.

All of this means that in the Senate from here on out, we’ll be focusing our efforts on this amendment from Senators Booker and Wicker because it represents a far greater chance to accomplish many of the same goals as the Innovation in Surface Transportation Act. This new proposal is a smart compromise that should be incorporated into the full Senate long-term transportation bill currently on the floor, and one that will ensure that smart, locally-driven, homegrown transportation investments get the funding they need.

We’ll continue to drive up support for ISTA in the House, however, and we encourage you to continue supporting it in messages and calls to your representatives.

Send a message to your Senators and urge them to support this provision from Senators Booker and Wicker. It only takes a moment, and vocal support for this plan will be crucial to getting it incorporated into the full bill.

Senate Passes Cloture; 5 Things We’re Watching

***Please note, at 10:00am T4A received McConnell’s substitute amendment, which means that a number of these items may have changed. We’ll keep you updated as it proceeds.**

Last night, the US Senate passed a procedural vote called cloture. Like a starting pistol in a race, this means that they can now start debating, amending and eventually pass a federal surface transportation bill out of the Senate. While many things can, and will, happen over the next few days, there are a number of topics that Transportation for America is watching.

Want to know how your Senator voted on cloture? Click HERE.

1.Payfors – DC parlance for real and imaginary ways to pay for this bill.

At this time, there appears to be a wide-ranging list of payfors that run as small as $172 million up to $16 billion. Some of these include items like such as rescinding unused TARP funds or extending fees for TSA. There do not seem to be many that keep the traditional tie between users of the system and payments into the system.

The mass transit account appears to be running out of funding well before the highway trust fund. Initial T4A analysis seems to indicate that the legislation pulls in all 10 years of the proposed funding to pay for 3 years of the highway trust fund and 1.5 years of the mass transit account.

APTA transit funding table in current Senate transportation legislation

The legislation also appears to sell 101 million barrels out of the 693.7 million barrels of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR) between 2018 and 2025 to bring in $9B over 10 years. Critics of this funding scheme assert that we are selling the oil when prices are at record lows, making it a foolish idea. Sen. Murkowski (R-AK) is reportedly one of those critics.

Originally, this legislation withheld Social Security payments from recipients that are subjects of a felony arrest warrant and for whom the state has given notice that they intend to pursue the warrant, raising $2.3 billion over 10 years. T4A has heard that Senate negotiators have removed this provision due to the advocacy of a number of social equity and civil rights groups.

2. Transit
T4A and the larger transportation community have several concerns about this title, the main ones are:

US Banking Democrats chart on modal share under currently proposed Senate legislation

First, the DRIVE Act fails to provide public transportation with 20% of the new revenue dedicated to growth, which is a historical guarantee dating back to President Reagan’s agreement in 1982. Public transportation receives only 6% of the revenue derived from the future funding growth (see Senate Banking Democrats chart). U.S. DOT estimates that the Mass Transit Account ends the third year of the bill (FY 2018) with a negative balance of $180 million. Senator Boxer is reportedly negotiating a fix with Senate Republicans that will increase that percentage.

Second, projects with private funds get to “skip the line” for federal money, providing a major incentive for privatized service. The existence of a new expedited process could entice cities to pursue transit privatization on a large scale by using P3s to operate transit service. The labor community has expressed strong opposition and may oppose the entire bill if this provision isn’t removed.

Third, this legislation forces the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) to wait 6 months before increasing oversight of at-risk projects. Sec. 21015 requires the FTA to wait for a project to fail 2 consecutive quarterly reviews before providing more oversight to a project that is going over budget or falling behind schedule.

3. The Freight program

This legislation includes all modes of freight, including pipelines for the first time. It also requires the establishment of a new multi-modal freight network within 1 year of enactment, the establishment of which appears to be similar to the creation of the existing freight network (as well as a re designation of the existing highway freight network). It does, however, define economic competitiveness by the amount of traffic moved and not economic outcomes and will fund projects that reduce congestion, improve reliability, boost productivity, improve safety or state of good repair, use advanced technology or protect the environment on the national highway freight network.

You’ll recall that T4A sent out an action alert to keep the TIGER program multimodal and not let the US Senate Commerce Committee use it for freight-exclusive purposes. We’re happy to report that effort was successful, though the TIGER program is still not authorized or funded in the transportation bill.

4. Passenger Rail
This legislation authorizes passenger rail funding for the first time ever in a federal surface transportation reauthorization. The legislation calls for $1.44B in 2016 and growing to $1.9B in 2019. It maintains a national system and provides for clear cost accounting among the 4 business lines of Amtrak of the corridor, state-supported and long-distance trains. Provides for up to 6 new passenger rail routes on a competitive basis and for the first time makes operational costs eligible for grants.

5. AMP – Assistance for Major Projects
This is a new project for highway or transit projects that cost at least $350M or 25% percent of state highway apportionment (10% in a rural state). Applications should be reviewed based on consistency with federal goals, improvement to the performance of the system, is consistent with the statewide plan, can’t be completed without federal help and will achieve one or more of the following:

generate national economic benefits outweigh cost,
reduce congestion,
improve the reliability of movement of people and freight, or
improve safety

Grants under AMP must be at least $50M, with a rural guarantee of 20%. Eligible applicants for AMP include states, local governments (or group of locals), tribal governments, transit agencies, port authorities, public authorities with transportation function and federal land management agencies. It is not yet clear if this language is specific enough to include MPOs.

Amendments to be offered: T4A staff is monitoring a number of potential amendments. One of which (offered by Senators Wicker (R-MS) and Booker (D-NJ)) would increase the ability of communities to fund projects through the Surface Transportation Program. We strongly urge you to call your Senator and tell them to co-sponsor that amendment.

UPDATED: Senate reaches preliminary agreement on a long-term transportation bill

A group of key Senate leaders announced yesterday that they’d reached agreement on a bipartisan six-year transportation bill with three years of guaranteed funding. While it’s encouraging to see this agreement ten days before MAP-21 expires on July 31, forthcoming negotiations over the actual details of the bill will be crucial as most Senators have not yet seen the policy or funding language.

Senator McCcnnell announcing deal 2015-07-21 Senator Boxer announcing deal 2015-07-21

UPDATED Thursday 9:30 a.m.: Late Wednesday, the Senate reached cloture on the transportation reauthorization bill. It got just the required number of votes to pass, 60-38. We’ll move on to discussing and debating the bill today.

UPDATED Wednesday 5:30 p.m.: Yesterday (Tuesday) afternoon, a few hours after this bill was announced on the Senate floor, the Senate failed to pass a “cloture” vote to begin debate of the bill. Senate Democrats were unwilling to begin considering and debating a bill they’d had less than a few hours to read, and a few Republicans voted against cloture as well because of objections to particular funding mechanisms.

Senators McConnell, Boxer and the others assembling the funding mechanisms were only able to find sufficient funding for three years, using a mix of funding offsets that included selling oil from the nation’s strategic reserves, lowering the dividend paid to banks that join the Federal Reserve, and tinkering with fees from the TSA. You can read the full text of the bill here (pdf), a summary of the provisions from the EPW majority, and a summary of the funding mechanisms.

Stay tuned as we watch the Senate for more. Though a vote was mentioned to reporters as a possibility today by numerous Senators, the Senate recessed this afternoon at 4:30 p.m. (Wednesday) without any movement on the bill. There’s still a possibility they could return tonight for a vote, but the more likely option is Thursday.

Original post: Speaking on the Senate floor yesterday, Senators McConnell (R-KY), Reid (D-NV), Boxer (D-CA) and Inhofe (R-OK) announced their agreement on a long-term transportation bill that cobbles together sufficient revenue to carry the policy forward for three years.

The four Senators (and especially Senators McConnell and Boxer) had been “hammering out the details” over the last few days according to an article in The Hill this morning, and today Senator McConnell announced the deal on a “six year highway authorization that will allow for planning for important projects around the country…a long-term bill that’s in the best interests of our country.” (Note: Sen. McConnell repeatedly called the bill a six-year authorization with only three years of guaranteed funding.)

What’s next?

While an agreement has been reached in principle and procedural vote will be taken this afternoon at 4 p.m to consider debate on the bill, it’s far from a done deal at this point, and Senate Democrats will especially be curious to see the details of a bill that the rank and file (and possibly some of the leadership and relevant committee chairs) have not read at all yet.

It’s also notable that the Banking Committee and Finance Committees haven’t independently passed their portions of the full bill yet, so those committee members will be especially interested to see what the bill contains for their areas of jurisdiction.

After Sen. McConnell spoke, the two key Democratic negotiators in the Senate got up and made it clear that while the agreement is a step forward, they need to know more about what’s in the bill before they can proceed.

“We can’t go forward on a bill until we’ve read it and studied it,” said Senator Reid, one of the two main Democratic negotiators on the deal. “We need to look at this document,” he said. The other key negotiator in Democratic leadership, Senator Boxer, urged her colleagues to get the text posted as soon as possible. “We want to see the text — get the text up,” she said.

The vote coming today at 4 p.m. (originally scheduled earlier in the day but moved back during this time) will be a procedural vote to bring the bill to the floor and begin debate. That doesn’t mean there will be a vote on the final bill anytime soon — especially considering that all of the Senate Democrats who spoke made it clear that there’s still work to be done and that they need to carefully study the bill first.

We’ll be watching the vote this afternoon, so stay tuned, and follow us on Twitter to stay regularly updated.

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).

Over 150 elected officials, DOTs, MPOs, chambers of commerce and others voice strong support for restoring TIGER program

With the the Senate Commerce Committee due to mark up their portion of a long-term transportation bill that will eliminate the competitive TIGER grant program and refocus its funds on a multimodal freight program, more than 150 organizations and elected officials signed a letter urging the committee to restore and authorize the TIGER program.

In the full letter (pdf) delivered to Commerce Committee offices just a few moments ago, more than 150 organizations and individuals supported the simple ask of preserving (and permanently authorizing) the TIGER program while also keeping the committee’s smart multimodal grant program for freight projects:

We request that the Commerce Committee authorize a strong, multimodal freight policy and freight investment grant program, as well as pass a complementary, authorization of the TIGER grant program separate from the multimodal freight discretionary grant program at or near equal funding levels.

Without moving both of these critical investment programs forward, the Comprehensive Transportation and Consumer Protection Act removes local leaders’ access to one of the only federal transportation programs open to them today and miss an opportunity to establish transportation investment programs that both promotes the efficient movement of goods and provides affordable mobility and access to opportunity for all Americans.

The groups represented on the letter included 30 mayors/cities, over 30 chambers of commerce, businesses, metropolitan planning organizations, advocacy groups of all stripes, a few universities, and a few city departments of transportation.

Want to join them? It’s not too late to send a letter of your own to your Senator urging them to keep TIGER alive.

Here’s why some of the letter’s signatories say they support this effort:

TIGER has been incredibly important to supporting economic development in our thriving region. Here that means strong freight connections as well as connections to high tech and aerospace jobs in growing job centers in our cities – quality jobs that are supported by all sorts of transportation connections. – Rick Olson, Director of Government Relations, Puget Sound Regional Council (Seattle).

A flexible TIGER grant program is essential to ensuring the economic mobility and prosperity of communities across our country. America is great for the individuality that each of our community possesses. Our local diversity is our national strength. Preserving this invaluable transportation program in the flexible form it now stands ensures that the progress and momentum we are now experiencing is sustained as we emerge from the Great Recession into the future. – Paul F. Morris, President and CEO, Atlanta BeltLine, Inc.

Access to programs like TIGER to fund multi-modal improvements to our transportation system is critical to the future of our community. Please keep TIGER flexible and useful as a tool to meet the transportation goals of individual communities. – Bruce Knight, Planning and Development Director, City of Champaign, Illinois

The TIGER program has been invaluable to the City of Indianapolis. From the construction of our world-class and unique Cultural Trail, to the deployment of 22 all electric buses, to the planning and design of our first rapid transit corridor – TIGER has been there and made our dollars go farther, faster. Changing one of the most successful federal programs to restrict uses would be a mistake. – Gregory A. Ballard, Mayor, City of Indianapolis

As the only USDOT initiative that specifically recognizes the vital link between transportation & economic development, it is imperative that the Congress continue the TIGER program, allowing communities across the country to promote sustainable investments that not only maintain, but actually improve our transportation system. – Rick Dunne, Executive Director, NVCOG – Naugatuck Valley Council of Governments (Connecticut)

The TIGER grants have made some very important alternative transportation projects possible. The smartest way to solve congestion and pollution is to offer people alternatives to sitting in traffic jams. This is one of the most important ways the federal government can assist the local governments. It should not only be continued, but it should be increased. —Mark Gamba, Mayor of Milwaukie, Oregon

The TIGER program is a vital tool for local governments to enhance multimodal options, provide repairs to key pieces of infrastructure, and improve transit service. While the Broward MPO supports a national freight grant program, such a program should not be created at the expense of TIGER, especially when more and more Americans are demanding alternative transportation options. – Gregory Stuart, Executive Director, Broward Metropolitan Planning Organization (Florida)

TIGER is a tremendous program that allows communities to create the kind of 21st century transportation infrastructure that is the foundation for a robust economy. I strong urge all Members of Congress to continue to support this important program. – Dawn Zimmer, Mayor, City of Hoboken (New Jersey)

The Commerce Committee’s markup takes place at 4:45 p.m. (eastern) today.

Keep those letters to your Senators coming and help preserve TIGER and the good it does for local communities.

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.

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.

Cities and towns could lose one of their best options for funding smart local projects

The Senate Commerce Committee is marking up a version of a long-term transportation funding bill Wednesday morning with no authorization for the popular TIGER program, thus limiting the money available to local communities.

Let me tell you a short story.

In central Illinois, there’s a classic medium-sized American town that desperately wanted to revitalize their downtown, fan the flames of the community’s civic pride, and provide a new lynchpin to encourage development in a part of town that had been neglected for far too long.

The elected leaders, business leaders and citizens in Normal, Illinois had an ambitious vision for their city’s core to become a powerful asset; helping them compete and prosper economically and creating a new framework for creating value for decades to come.

save-tiger-featured Since 2009, the federal TIGER program has made projects like Normal’s downtown transportation hub and civic centerpiece a reality, directing a relatively tiny $4 billion into smart, ready-to-go homegrown transportation projects that bring a high return on investment.

Unfortunately, in the just-released proposal for a new long-term transportation bill, the Senate Commerce Committee has decided to entirely scrap the oversubscribed and woefully underfunded TIGER program that awards competitive, merit-based grants.

Can you send a message right now to your Senators and urge them to preserve TIGER?

The Senate Commerce Committee is marking up the bill on Wednesday morning (7/15), so there’s not a moment to lose!

The committee is creating a very smart competitive multimodal grant program explicitly for freight projects, but that shouldn’t happen at the expense of TIGER. We need more transportation dollars, not fewer, awarded competitively on the merits to the best projects.

When we choose projects on the merits, we can get a greater bang for the buck. In Normal, where the new transportation hub opened in 2012, a total public investment of $80 million has catalyzed $165 million in private development surrounding the station, with another $40-50 million in the works.

These TIGER grants have been rewarding communities all across the country that are thinking outside the box to cut congestion, improve safety, promote economic development, or improve access to jobs and opportunities through smarter transportation investments.

It’s time to take a stand for TIGER. Can you send a message today?