STAA Tuned

We now have in our hands the 775-page Surface Transportation Authorization Act, which was released yesterday by James Oberstar (D-MN), chairman of the House transportation committee. It is, in many ways, a remarkable bill — a blueprint for how transportation planning and infrastructure construction might undergo a significant shift away from the mindsets that have dominated for the past half-century. There is a lot to like in the bill.

As currently written, STAA would significantly strengthen the Office of Intermodalism and work toward making DOT planning "mode neutral" — that is, not operating under the assumption that highways will always get first priority in planning and funding.

It would create an Office of Livability, focused entirely on seeking balance in mode choice by boosting transit ridership, bicycling, and walking. The bill seeks to streamline the process by which new transit projects apply for funding, and it allows federal officials to consider likely changes in land-use from transit construction in considering whether a project deserves funding.

STAA aims to empower metropolitan planning organizations. It seeks to depoliticize funding decisions and support private investment in infrastructure by creating national and metropolitan infrastructure development banks. It lays the groundwork for significant new investments in high-speed rail in America (though it cuts the definition of high-speed to 110 miles per hour or higher).

The bill includes a push to support "complete streets" and a national bike route network. It establishes increased transit ridership and reduced carbon emissions as explicit goals. And of course, the bill is targeted to allocate a lot more money than in previous reauthorizations, with a lot more money for transit (though transit’s share increases only modestly).

But as Elana noted yesterday, what’s missing from the bill is as telling as what’s included. The 775-page length may suggest excessive comprehensiveness, but in fact much of the bill is little more than placeholders. "[To be supplied]" is in ample supply, as is "[$]." Ideally, actual numbers would follow immediately after the dollar sign.

These blanks hint at the challenge chairman Oberstar and fellow committee members John Mica (R-FL), Pete DeFazio (D-OR), and John Duncan (R-TN) will have in getting their bill through the legislative process any time soon. Time is scarce; Congress already has some substantial legislative challenges on its hands, and it may have to address the looming shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund before the August recess.

Political capital is also wanting. With most legislative eyes on health care and the Waxman-Markey energy and climate bill, there may not be enough chits available to strike the necessary deals on this transportation bill.

This is especially true given the money issue. STAA, as written, simply does not address the fact that current spending levels, to say nothing of the increases proposed in the bill, will be impossible to sustain in the absence of a new source of revenue. This is a huge obstacle to passage, and a major reason for the administration’s requested 18-month delay for the bill.

With the economy still in recession, the federal deficit approaching $2 trillion, a $1 trillion or so health bill in the works, and GOP legislators going all out to attack the climate bill under consideration as representing a major new energy tax, this is not a convenient time to be discussing transportation tax increases. If the funding issue cannot be resolved, and there is every indication that neither the administration nor a number of high priority legislators are anxious to solve it, then the reauthorization bill will probably not pass.

All hope for this particular bill is not yet lost, but a number of very difficult questions will have to be answered to turn this blueprint into a bold new transportation law.

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

The Capitol’s 10 Transportation Players to Know

|
Even occasional observers of the national transportation scene can probably recognize House transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) or Senate environment committee chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) — but what about the advisers who act as their eyes and ears in drafting policy? Here’s a look at 10 of Congress’ biggest transportation power players, courtesy of […]

Should a Climate Bill Even Try to Fight Sprawl?

|
The potential for a cap-and-trade climate bill to set aside significant amounts of money for reforming local land use and transportation planning is often touted by Democrats, environmental groups, and this particular Streetsblogger. Should the approach California used in SB 375 (being signed into law above) be applied to a congressional cap-and-trade climate bill? (Photo: […]

How — and When — Can D.C. Help Local Transport Reform Happen?

|
A map of the areas served by transport MPOs, pictured in color. (Photo: NARC via Kaid Benfield) In a new op-ed for Citiwire, former Indianapolis mayor and GOP member of Congress Bill Hudnut suggests six ways that Washington can train the nation’s 350-plus metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) into tools for smart and environmentally sound transportation […]

Obama Administration Working on Its Own Six-Year Transportation Bill

|
The annual powwow of thousands of transportation workers, planners, and wonks that’s known as the Transportation Research Board (TRB) conference kicked off in the capital yesterday with a candid admission from some senior U.S. DOT officials: reorienting American transport planning to accommodate the overlap with housing and environmental sustainability is proving pretty difficult. U.S. DOT […]

Reps. Matsui, LaTourette Introduce Complete Streets Bill

|
A bill to provide Americans with more transportation choices than just driving is one step closer to becoming law. Reps. Doris Matsui (D-CA) and Steve LaTourette (R-OH) just introduced the Safe and Complete Streets Act of 2011 [PDF]. The bill doesn’t have a number yet. The bill mandates the consideration of the “safety and convenience” of […]