Creating America’s Future Transportation System
Are we there yet in breaking free of congestion? Are we there yet in preventing over 40,000 highway fatalities a year? Are we there yet in providing the transportation system needed to revitalize our economy? We can be.
State transportation officials have developed solutions to meet the nation’s future transportation needs as Congress and the Administration consider a new and better federal transportation program.
Reform
Back to Basics—Accountability for Results
Americans have a right to demand that transportation investments meet community needs, are spent wisely and accountably, and improve their quality of life. While transportation investment must be increased, top-to-bottom reforms are needed to guarantee that taxpayers will get their money’s worth. What we need is a program that will be accountable for results, make investments based on community needs, and deliver projects on-time and on-budget. To achieve that goal, AASHTO recommends:
Refocus the Federal Program on National Objectives
The current laundry list of over 100 different program objectives for highways, and another 50 for the transit program makes it difficult to identify true program priorities. The federal program must refocus on six objectives of genuine national interest.
- Preservation and Renewal. Preserving highway, transit, and rail systems so they last for generations to come.
- Interstate Commerce. Supporting America’s global competitiveness, growth in productivity, economic development, and national defense through an improved multi-modal freight system.
- Safety. Reducing traffic fatalities, serious injuries, and property loss.
- Congestion Reduction and Connectivity for both Urban and Rural Areas. Improving the ability of highway, transit, and rail to advance personal mobility, connectivity, and accessibility.
- System Operations. Using advanced management techniques and technologies to assure travel reliability and provide effective emergency response in disasters.
- Environment. Enhancing community quality of life, and minimizing impacts on the environment and global climate change.
Establish Goals Through Which the National Objectives Can Be Achieved
To ensure accountability for federal funding, goals should be established for the national objectives. AASHTO, in consultation with Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), cities, counties, transit agencies, the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), and U.S. DOT, should develop national performance goals for each objective. The goals should be formally submitted to the Secretary of Transportation, and promulgated as guidance. No rule-making process would be required or desired.
Plan and Select Projects Based on a State-Driven Performance Management Approach
To align project selection with the national objectives, AASHTO supports the development of a state-driven performance management process in which each state DOT, and its MPOs, would focus federal funding on meeting national performance goals. Each state would adopt performance targets relating to the national goals in their long-range planning process.
Develop State-Driven Performance Measures Process
To improve accountability for achieving national objectives, each state will be called on to develop specific measures through which they can track and report on results.
Candidate measures will be recommended through an AASHTO-developed process to have all states use the same performance measures. Flexibility is key. The recommended performance management process would have key common elements and measurement areas among states, but each state would determine its own performance targets and the appropriate strategies to meet those targets.
Highways
Restructuring Our Transportation Programs on Six National Objectives
Too often today Americans find themselves stuck in traffic and frustrated by the loss of precious time. Fifty-three years ago the Interstate Highway System opened up America to trade and travel, and set a new standard for the world. But over the past 20 years, the once clear objectives of the federal-aid highway program have proliferated to more than 100 different categories. This makes it difficult to identify priorities or to make clear what the “federal interest” is in the federal program.
Two changes are needed to improve the highway program: refocus on six national objectives which meet real community needs; and second, restructure the program to directly address those objectives.
ASHTO recommends that the Federal Highway Program be restructured to address six key objectives, with core programs apportioned to states.
Preservation and Renewal Program. Create a program which has three subcomponents: Interstate Preservation, National Highway System Preservation, and Bridge Preservation. The largest share, approximately 42 percent of core program funding, would be allocated to this program. Maximum flexibility in the use of federal funds should be retained as well as all eligibility and transferability provisions that exist under current law.
Freight Program. Create a program to fund improvements in the national freight network. Freight system investments eligible for funding would include: freight bottlenecks, access to ports, airports, distribution centers, and border crossings, and improvements to routes that provide for interregional, interstate or international freight movement. Approximately 4.5 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to states for the freight program. The remainder of the program would be funded at approximately $7 billion per year from resources from outside the Highway Trust Fund. One half of these funds would be apportioned to the states. The other half would be distributed from a freight fund administered by U.S. DOT.
Highway Safety Improvement Program. The current Highway Safety Improvement Program administered by FHWA would continue the existing structure. Approximately 4 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to the states through the safety program. Additional funding for safety would be provided under the NHTSA grant program and the FMCSA grant program. Both should continue at expanded levels.
Operations and Management. Create a new program to fund improvements in system performance: real-time system management, traveler information, emergency response, and incident management. Approximately 4.5 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to the states for this program.
Transportation System Improvement/Congestion Reduction Program. Create a new program for system preservation, expansion, and congestion reduction which retains many of the features of the current Surface Transportation Program, including a 10 percent set aside for transportation enhancements. Just over 16 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to the states for this program, which is expected to be the primary source of federal highway funding for city and county governments.
In urban states with metropolitan areas of 200,000 population and above, 62.5 percent of funds would be suballocated to metropolitan areas, as in the current program. The remaining 37.5 percent of the funds would be distributed to any area of the state based on consultation between the state and its local governments.
In non-urban states, funds would be distributed to any area of the state based on consultation between the state and its local governments.
Environment Program: Air Quality and Climate Change. Approximately 5 percent of core program funding would be apportioned to the states for this program. Not less than 50 percent of these funds would be programmed to air quality solutions which address ozone and particulate matter requirements. The remaining funds would be used by states for climate change initiatives.
AASHTO proposes that 90 percent of federal funds be apportioned by formula to states to be spent on priorities established by the states and their MPOs. The remaining 10 percent would be used for: Research: 1 percent, Federal Lands: 2.2 percent, and Consolidated National Programs such as Scenic Byways, Rail Crossings, and projects of national and regional significance: 6.8 percent.
Doubling America’s Public Transportation Ridership
Transit plays a significant role in state and national efforts to reduce traffic congestion, conserve fuel, improve air quality, reduce green house gas emissions, and support emergency preparedness. The nation should establish a goal of doubling transit ridership by 2030.
Where transit service is already available, it needs to be expanded. Where it is not yet available, it will need to be provided. In order to meet these needs, there are several things AASHTO recommends:
Congress should increase funding for the transit program to $93 billion over the six-year authorization period, and should establish policies which over time will enable transit ridership to double by 2030. Federal funding for rural transit should more than double over the next six years. Operating assistance eligibility should be extended to transit systems in urbanized areas of more than 200,000 in population which operate less than 100 buses during peak operation.
Program and Funding Principles
In the next authorization, Congress should maintain a separate Mass Transit Account (MTA) within the Highway Trust Fund with current program funding guarantees and preserve, at a minimum, the current 20 percent general fund contribution necessary to support the federal transit program. Existing transferability between the Highway and Mass Transit Accounts should continue. The 80 percent federal share for transit formula and capital investment programs should be preserved.
Streamline Transit Program Delivery
The “New Starts” grant review and approval process should be simplified. The broader grant approval process should be streamlined to speed project delivery and reduce cost for routine projects. Replacement of buses, rolling stock, facility components, and other routine transit-related equipment should automatically be eligible for funding and not be required to go through the grant approval process. A needs-based approach to the distribution of federal funds for transit should continue as well as for increases to the federal transit program to address unmet needs.
Program Structure
The transit program can be restructured on a parallel with highways to include:
- Preservation and Renewal,
- Operations,
- Congestion Relief and Metro Mobility,
- Enhancements/Quality of Life,
- Research and Planning; and
- Administration.
Planning
Planning for public transportation alternatives should be conducted within a multimodal regional and statewide transportation planning process that includes consideration of sustainable outcomes in plans, programs, and projects.
Tax Clarifications
Employer-provided pre-tax qualified transportation fringe benefits should be equal for both public transportation and parking. These benefits should continue to be indexed at the same rate.
Multi-Modal Solutions Needed
All of our transportation resources will be needed to meet future national needs. This will require continuation of the ability to flex highway funds to transit, and vice versa, continuation of the current eligibility of rail projects for funding, investment tax credits for rail projects which benefit the public, and a planning process which considers all modal options and new funding programs to meet the substantial highway freight corridor needs.
Cut Project Delivery Times in Half
Time is money and lost time due to project delays comes at a very high price. Reform is needed to cut project delivery times in half.
Today, a typical highway project can take from 10 to 15 years to complete—up to six years for the environmental process, and up to nine years for planning, design, and construction. Federally funded transit projects face a protracted process as well. Congress should mandate that federal agencies collaborate with states to make it possible to do in 5 to 7 years what currently takes 10 to 15 years. Collaboration between natural resource protection agencies and transportation agencies should be mandated by Congress so they find “win–win” solutions to improve both environmental and transportation outcomes.
Eliminate or Limit Earmarking in the Federal Transportation Program
Earmark reform has emerged as a key issue for restoring public confidence.
No more than five percent of the overall program should be designated through Congressional earmarks, as was the case in the ISTEA authorization. All earmarked projects should be drawn from a program listing that has been approved by a state DOT and its MPOs.
