Key Findings for America’s Future
To support their economic development, nearly all the major players on the world stage are investing aggressively in their transportation infrastructure. The two questions this raises for the United States are: First, does not the United States also need to invest to compete? And second, if so, how much?
Investing to Meet Increasing Global Competition—China, with a population of 1.3 billion, is building a 53,000-mile National Expressway System which, when complete in 2020, will rival the 47,000-mile U.S. Interstate System. India, with a population of one billion, is building a 10,000-mile national expressway system. Europe, with a population of 450 million, is spending hundreds of billions of euros on a network of highways, bridges, tunnels, ports, and rail lines/
Increased Costs of Construction—Between 1993 and 2015, construction costs will have increased more than 70 percent. To restore the purchasing power of the highway and transit programs, funding will have to be increased to levels which match the increase in costs. For highways, that would mean increasing the Federal program from $43 billion in 2009 to $73 billion in 2015. For transit, it would mean increasing the Federal program from $10.3 billion in 2009 to $17.3 billion in 2015.
Restoring Purchasing Power—Because of the rising costs of construction, the value of the 18.3 cents Federal gas tax rate will decline 55 percent or to 8.3 cents between 1998 and the end of 2015 if corrective action is not taken to preserve Federal capital investment. To restore the purchasing power of the program to 1998 levels and sustain it into the future would require the gas tax rate to rise from 18.3 at the close of fiscal year 2009 to 28.3 cents by fiscal year 2015. The rate will have to be increased by 3 cents or its equivalent in 2009 to sustain the program at the level guaranteed in SAFETEA-LU. Between 2010 and 2015 it would have to be increased by another 7 cents to restore the program’s purchasing power.
Phasing-In Transportation Investment—The program needs to be increased over many years and several phases. In the first phase, from 2008 to 2010, the objective should be to assure sufficient revenues to sustain the highway and transit programs at the levels promised in SAFETEA-LU. In the second phase from 2010 to 2015, the objective should be to restore the purchasing power of the highway and transit programs to 1993, the last time the Federal gas tax was increased. In the third phase, from 2015 and beyond, the objective should be to close the gap between current spending and the “cost to improve” goals.
Time for Phase II of the Interstate—AASHTO Vice President Pete Rahn, Director, Missouri DOT has stated, “If the Interstate System planned in the first half of the 20th Century and built in the second half is considered Phase I, it is time to modernize the system in place and build the additional capacity needed for the 21st Century in Phase II.”
A Strategy for a 21st Century Interstate System—AASHTO believes the Interstate Highway System for the 21st Century can be brought about through four strategic actions: preserve the current system, enhance its performance, expand capacity to meet future needs, and reduce growth in highway demand by expanding the capacity of transit and rail.
Expanding Capacity to Meet Future Needs—To remain competitive in the global economy and meet America’s 21st Century mobility needs, we will need to add nearly as much capacity to the Interstate System in Phase II, as we did over the past 50 years in Phase I. Studies show there is a need to add as many as 10,000 miles of new routes on new corridors, 20,000 miles of upgrades to National Highway System routes to Interstate standards, and 20,000 new lane-miles on existing Interstate routes. These could include exclusive truck lanes and value-priced lanes. System improvement would also include correcting bottlenecks, upgrading interchanges, and improving intermodal connections.
Doubling Transit Ridership—To reduce congestion and meet the demand of those dependent on public transportation, we believe the United States will have to build enough transit capacity to double ridership by 2030. Substantial freight rail capacity will be needed to handle the 63 percent increase in demand expected by 2035. Additional capacity will be needed as well to make expansion of intercity passenger rail service possible.
Interstate Highway System Needs Assessments—Congress should call upon the State DOTs and the FHWA to undertake two comprehensive Interstate needs assessments during the period from 2010 to 2013. The first should study the costs of rebuilding or replacing the 55,000 bridges on the system, the 15,000 interchanges and the pavement foundations for the system’s 210,000 lane-miles. The second should study long-term system-wide expansion needs of the network, taking into account the global economy, population and economic growth, safety, national defense, and homeland security needs. Initial analysis shows the need to nearly double the lane-miles on the existing Interstate System.
Reducing Highway Demand—FHWA forecasts that highway travel will increase at 2.07 percent per year through 2022. If this rate of increase holds for the next 50 years, highway vehicle miles traveled will more than double from 3 trillion today to nearly 7 trillion by 2055. That is more traffic than the system can accommodate. In order to reduce highway demand, a policy objective should be set to double transit ridership over the next 20 years. With supportive land use and transit-oriented development, many trips which would otherwise take place by car, can be shifted to transit.
Need for a New National Rail Transportation Policy—A new National Rail Transportation Policy must be established to increase freight rail capacity and intercity passenger rail services. Federal incentives, such as investment tax credits, should be provided to make it feasible for rail companies to invest in capacity improvements for the future. Federal funds outside the Highway Trust Fund should be provided to states who participate in “public-benefit freight rail projects. AASHTO recommends that the National Commission develop and recommend a National Rail Policy, in consultation with U.S. DOT, State DOTs, railroads, and shippers.
