How TIGER Transformed Transportation Planning — And Lived to Tell About It

When the buzz about a new, stimulus-funded, discretionary transportation grant program started to circulate in 2009, some environmentalists opposed it. They worried it would be a slush fund for the Federal Highway Administration, used to build unnecessary roads that would aggravate sprawl and pollution. But insiders knew that wasn’t how the new Obama administration would be handling things.

The CREATE freight rail project, funded by TIGER I and II, will relieve costly bottlenecks in Chicago -- but will benefit the entire country. Photo: ##https://enotrans.r.worldssl.net/wp-content/uploads/wpsc/downloadables/TIGER-paper.pdf##Eno##

TIGER, the Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery program, has been praised from the left, right, and center for rewarding innovation, leveraging scarce dollars, breaking down modal silos, and funding non-traditional projects that don’t fit well under formulas.

Though Republicans have sometimes grumbled that the program has merely replaced Congressional earmarks with “administration earmarks,” or that it’s rewarded Democratic districts, they’ve continued to approve funding for the program. Even as House members have zeroed out high-speed rail funding for each of the last three years, they’ve gone along with five separate appropriations for TIGER without too much fuss.

Yesterday, the Eno Center for Transportation released a paper [PDF] investigating what TIGER has done well, what challenges remain, and what could be improved.

How TIGER changed the way states think about project planning

TIGER blew open the traditional processes for funding transportation. Rather than just submitting a list of projects on the wish list and getting formula funds in return, grantees had to pick their best projects with the greatest benefits; after the first round of grants they also had to have at least a 20 percent match from state, local, or private interests. TIGER has transformed the way transportation officials think, even beyond the grantees – failed applicants have sometimes gone back and tweaked projects, brought in new partners, lowered costs, and improved plans. TIGER has helped transportation officials around the country see a new, more strategic way to plan and carry out projects – a method that is beginning to be expected at the federal level.

Plus, state DOTs aren’t the only entities eligible to apply for TIGER grants – MPOs, port authorities, and transit agencies can apply on their own, too.

The intermodalism of the program has encouraged U.S. DOT to hasten the process of breaking down its own “modal silos” as well, with people from different modal agencies working together to select projects. Intermodalism is also a challenge: It’s not easy to compare a bike trail to a freight rail project or a highway interchange – they are judged on completely different metrics – but DOT has sought to choose the best projects put before them. And, as U.S. DOT Undersecretary Polly Trottenberg said at Eno’s panel discussion yesterday, of all the criticism of the program, there’s been almost no criticism of the individual projects they’ve selected.

Charges of bias

Even last week, when Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) accused the administration of “potential” political bias in the selection of TIGER projects in favor of Democratic-leaning districts, he had very little to back up his claims. His map, showing that Democratic districts got $346 million, compared to Republican districts’ take of $132 million, is probably largely explained by the fact that urban districts, which have more transportation needs, tend to vote Democratic.

The Eno report analyzed per-capita TIGER spending per state and found, perhaps not surprisingly, that states with small populations got a proportionally large amount of money – including some deep-red states like Montana and the Dakotas.

Per capita TIGER funding by state. Image: ##https://enotrans.r.worldssl.net/wp-content/uploads/wpsc/downloadables/TIGER-paper.pdf##Eno##

Besides, Trottenberg said, who was the constituency pushing for projects like CREATE, which will relieve freight rail bottlenecks in Chicago? “People in the reddest parts of heartland, who want to get their agricultural products and energy products moving across this country quickly,” she said. “But that’s a ‘Democratic’ project – it’s in Chicago!” It can take two-thirds as long for a train to get through Chicago as it took to get to Chicago from the port of Los Angeles.

Meanwhile, Vitter himself wrote a letter in support of the New Orleans streetcar project – a transit project in a Democratic district. Joshua Schank of Eno said their attempt to analyze Vitter’s claims were fruitless because there was simply no objective way to analyze whether a project was “Democratic” or “Republican.” Besides, Blakey said, it’s not like states don’t make political decisions with their money.

Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) wasn't worrying about political bias when he supported a TIGER grant for a streetcar project in Democratic New Orleans. Photo: ##https://enotrans.r.worldssl.net/wp-content/uploads/wpsc/downloadables/TIGER-paper.pdf##Eno##

The TIGER program pioneered the use of a benefit-cost analysis for projects, which Eno applauds. State DOTs are now also beginning to use it more and more in order to choose projects more strategically, which is a big win all around. But still, different projects can have wildly different kinds of benefits, from vehicle throughput to carbon reduction to social equity, and it’s hard to quantify them and rank them. “I don’t think the state of the art of benefit-cost is that good,” Trottenberg said. “The math is not as precise.”

The administration’s initial focus on “shovel-readiness” for projects has been discarded – or at least, the rhetoric has. In reality, projects still need to be ready for relatively quick turnaround, especially with the current round, which needs to be fully obligated 16 months after the grant decisions are made. Projects don’t necessarily need to be completely finished that fast, but they should be well underway. (Most of the funding cycles have had a slightly longer turnaround time of about 22 months, but the budgeting process was so behind schedule this year that everything got delayed.)

This article will continue tomorrow, with more about how — to U.S. DOT’s surprise — freight ended up being a big winner with TIGER. And perhaps it was no surprise at all when a small grant program prizing innovation ended up being an excellent source of funding for bicycle and pedestrian projects, too.

  • Anonymous

    Though it is difficult to compare different kinds of projects, I would argue that it is better than the traditional methods, and that all transportation projects should be awarded on TIGER-like criteria, at federal, state, and MPO levels.

  • Jack Jackson

    Nothing more than an executive branch earmark. The first and foremost consideration for a TIGER project should be what the law says it should be – a project of national and regional significance.

    CREATE is such a program.

    New Orleans street cars and Tampa Riverwalks are not.

  • Mike

    How much of each tax dollar ends up being spent on the final product? TIGER seems to be working well within the current system of federally funded grants, but what I would like to see is a move toward keeping more funds closer to the locality where the funding originated. I work in government and see how a dollar of funding gets whittled away by administration of the funding and bureaucracy. It’s frustrating as too high a percentage of funding for a project is spent on unnecessary paperwork. Rather than tax a city resident to send it up to the feds who will filter it back down to cities via state DOT administrators, let’s let cities (or MPOs or states) keep their own funding and reduce the dilution of limited tax funds. This is not a political statement – I just wants taxing and funding processes to be more efficient.

  • Can you include a description of what the y-axis for the “TIGER funding by state” graph represents?

  • Z. Fechten

    Mr. Jackson, I bet that there would be a lot less opposition to congressional earmarks if they had to pass the same level of scrutiny as TIGER projects.

  • Sure, Shane, just added it to the caption. It’s per-capita funding — I should have said that. The average per-capita TIGER funding nationwide is about $10.

  • Anonymous

    Small-scale projects can still have regional significance, if enough people in the region will use them.

    Here in Seattle, we have a single cross-town city bus route that moves nearly 14,000 people a day. That’s regionally significant even though it never leaves city limits.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

LaHood Wants More TIGER Aid in the Congressional Jobs Bill

|
Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood made a splash yesterday by announcing that the U.S. DOT would look at the environmental and community-building benefits of transit projects, not just their adherence to a government cost-effectiveness standard. Washington D.C.’s proposed K Street transitway, pictured above, is one of many projects vying for TIGER money. (Photo: The City Fix) […]

TIGER’s Love Affair With Freight — And Bikes

|
This article is the second of a two-part series about how U.S. DOT’s Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery program — TIGER, a discretionary grant program that got its start under the Recovery Act in 2009 — has made transportation planning more strategic, based on a benefit-cost analysis and national goals. Read the first part here, about […]

Obama’s New Transportation Budget: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

|
With federal transportation funding on track to run dry by May 31, Washington lawmakers are gearing up again to reset national transportation policy… or, if that doesn’t work out, to limp along indefinitely under the status quo. Today President Obama unveiled his opening bid in this process. The $478-billion, six-year plan from the White House includes many […]

House Poised to Vote for Cuts to TIGER, Amtrak, Transit

|
Debate began yesterday on a House appropriations measure that substantially cuts transit, rail, and the TIGER program, but of course doesn’t touch highway spending. American democracy in action! Stephen Lee Davis at Transportation for America has the ugly details: The programs targeted by the House for cuts are precisely the ones that cities, towns and metro regions of all […]

House Bill Proposes to Slash TIGER Funding

|
Federal lawmakers are running out of time to come up with a long-term transportation funding solution by May 31, when the current bill expires. Meanwhile, the House Appropriations Committee has released a budget for FY 2016, which begins in October, that proposes to drastically reduce funds for projects that promote walking and biking. The budget proposal calls for keeping transit and highway funding […]