Skip to Content
Streetsblog USA home
Streetsblog USA home
Log In

The House transportation committee's new $450 billion bill provides for a national infrastructure bank intended to "maximize the limited resources available for our surface transportation needs," as the panel's early outline puts it.

This sounds a lot like the infrastructure bank proposed by Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT) and 35 other House members -- indeed, Streetsblog Capitol Hill noted the similarity yesterday -- but in fact, Oberstar's proposal is likely to look different from his colleagues'.

Details on Oberstar's infrastructure bank plan are expected to be filled in after his legislation is officially introduced early next week, a Democratic committee source said yesterday. Yet the transportation panel's outline notes one crucial difference: Oberstar's infrastructure bank would be "located within" his proposed new DOT office of intermodalism, while the bank backed by DeLauro and Sen. Chris Dodd (D-CT) would be independent of the government.

Why is this significant?
An independent bank, backed nonetheless by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Treasury, would be free to make funding decisions without being swayed by political ties or the ability to gain from managing any particular transportation project.

Take South Carolina, for example. It's home to an infrastructure bank that accounted for 55 percent of the nation's state-level transportation loan guarantees in 2006, according to the National Governors Association (NGA).South Carolina's bank has its own board, separate from the state DOT, and cannot own or manage any aspect of a project that is seeking its funding help.

A similar restriction is included in DeLauro's national bill. But Oberstar's infrastructure bank, as an arm of the federal DOT, easily could be tied to the agency's internal culture and priorities.

Many state infrastructure banks also evaluate projects using specific criteria. Arizona ranks its proposed projects based on "financial considerations, economic benefits and safety" while allowing applicants to choose between "mobility" and "air quality and environmental impacts" for theit final standard, the NGA found in its study of the issue last year.

DeLauro's bill asks the national bank to evaluate proposed transportation projects based on six factors: job creation, emissions reduction, congestion reduction, "poverty and inequality reduction," the furtherance of urban smart growth, public health benefits, and the use of "smart tolling" methods such as congestion pricing.

For Oberstar, then, the devil may be in the details. Will his bill's infrastructure bank use criteria similar to the DeLauro plan or to those used at existing state-level banks? Will his bill require that project sponsors repay the government using direct revenue from the projects that get funds (i.e. tolls)?

The answers to those questions could determine how much support the transportation bill receives from fans of the infrastructure-bank concept.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

Friday Video: The Massachusetts Company That Traded the Trash Truck For a Bike

This small worker-owned cooperative is reimagining how to do recycling, composting, yardwork and more — no diesel required.

August 29, 2025

Friday’s Deadly Headlines

Reducing our reliance on fossil fuels would bring immediate health benefits for hundreds of thousands of people.

August 29, 2025

Talking Headways Podcast: The Menace of Prosperity

Daniel Wortel-London on his new book, "The Menace of Prosperity: New York City and the Struggle for Economic Development, 1875–1981."

August 28, 2025

Thursday’s Headlines Are a Sneak Preview

Want to see what happens when a city makes major transit cuts? Just look at Philadelphia. It's not pretty.

August 28, 2025

What I’ve Learned From Getting Transit Wrong

"Advocacy isn’t about pretending you’ve always been right. It’s about learning, adapting, and bringing those lessons into the fight for better transit and better cities."

August 28, 2025
See all posts