Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In
Federal Funding

What the Feds Giveth, the States Taketh Away — From Bike/Ped Programs

It’s rescission time again, folks. That Washington lingo for “gimme gimme.” We had a name for people who “rescinded” gifts back in elementary school but it’s ethnically insensitive so I won’t say it. Suffice it to say, if little kids call you a name for doing something, it’s probably not a super popular thing to be doing.

The Hammonton train station pedestrian link was funded by transportation enhancements, which could be cut as part of the latest round of rescissions. Photo courtesy of the ##http://enhancements.org/index.asp##National Transportation Enhancements Clearinghouse##

The FY2011 budget deal that Democrats and Republican finally agreed to recently requires states to send back to Washington $2.5 billion in unspent transportation funds. Who decides what programs to target for rescissions? Your state DOT.

Darren Flusche of League of American Bicyclists wrote this on the League’s blog:

Historically, some of the strongest programs for bicycle and pedestrian projects – Transportation Enhancements (TE), Congestion Mitigation & Air Quality (CMAQ) – suffer dramatically higher rescission rates than other programs.

For example, TE and CMAQ made up just 7.3 percent of state DOTs' 2010 transportation apportionments, but they made up a much larger share of what a state sends back. In August 2010, out of the $2.2 billion rescinded, $968 million (44 percent) came from CMAQ and TE. Not all these funds would have gone to bicycling and walking, of course, but based on historic spending rates, some $330 million would have.

Flusche said that one reason that states often disproportionately target bike and ped projects for rescission is that they often spend those dollars slower than highway dollars – so come rescission time, when DOTs are looking around for unspent funds, they pull from bike projects they hadn’t started yet.

I asked RIDOT Director Michael Lewis what his state was going to rescind this time around. He said (as of this morning) they hadn’t decided yet, but “it shouldn’t have a real negative effect on our program.” He said they try to take rescission money from areas where it would have “the least impact on our needs,” so they won’t be taking from high-priority areas like “bridge rehabilitation and roadway reconstruction.” Lewis didn’t mention where transit and non-motorized modes fit into that.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Monday’s Headlines Go to War

The conflict with Iran is set to send oil and gas prices skyrocketing. But there are alternatives.

June 23, 2025

Are Tesla’s First Robotaxis Safe For U.S. Roads?

Safety advocates warn that Tesla is failing informal safety tests — even as their taxis take to Austin, Texas roads.

June 23, 2025

The Sound and the Fury of Friday’s Headlines

The tales of internal combustion engines may be told by an idiot, but an EV's silence signifies nothing.

June 20, 2025

Friday Video: Public Art That Saves Pedestrian Lives

What's better than an intersection designed for walking safety? A beautiful intersection designed for walking safety.

June 20, 2025

Talking Headways Podcast: Small Scale Manufacturing in Cities

It's clean, It's quiet, and it's really cool to walk by and see things being made.

June 20, 2025

As ICE Continues Assault on Vulnerable Workers, Groups Launch Fundraiser to Assist Street Vendors

Empty streets and fears of being disappeared off street corners are hurting vendors' ability to stay afloat.

June 19, 2025
See all posts