- LaHood hits upstate New York to talk up the potential future of local high-speed rail (Roch Biz Jrnl, RocNow, EmpireStateNews)
- Passage of new sales tax to fund transit sparking recriminations among St. Louis tea partyers (Post-Dispatch)
- U.S. DOT pledges $200 million for the cross-Hudson River transit tunnel (Star-Ledger)
- Local crackdowns on distracted drivers touted as the start of a nationwide trend (Post-Standard)
- The home buyer's tax credit may be on its last legs in Congress ... (The Hill Blog)
- ... as its members return to Washington for a make-or-break attempt at climate legislating in the Senate (The Hill Blog)
- Pennsylvania state GOP lawmaker proposes a package of solutions to close the transport funding gap opened by the federal rejection of new tolls on I-80 (Prog. RR'ing)
- L.A. transit agency strikes deal to install natural gas fueling stations for buses (CEFC Press)
Streetsblog
Today’s Headlines
By Elana Schor
Stay in touch
Sign up for our free newsletter
More from Streetsblog USA
Talking Headways Podcast: Getting California High Speed Rail Done
It took a while, but California is figuring out the best, most-cost-effective way to do fast trains.
October 30, 2025
Spooky Stuff: On Halloween, Some States Will Have Deadlier Roads Than Others
Find out how yours ranks — and what policymakers can do to make streets less scary.
October 30, 2025
Who Are Thursday’s Headlines For?
Non-drivers still perceive streets as being for cars even when they have bike lanes. And that's because, in many cases, they are.
October 30, 2025
An Olympian Task: Replicating Paris’s Bike Boom in Los Angeles
The Olympics can help transform the streets of Los Angeles — if they look to the example of Paris.
October 29, 2025
Wednesday’s Headlines Are a Clear and Present Danger
Rescinding the "endangerment finding" could not only exacerbate climate change, it could also throw entire industries into chaos.
October 29, 2025
What’s More Regressive: Modest Driving Surcharges to Help Fund Transit, or Forced Car Ownership?
Do Illinois state senators and reps really want to make the financial burden on their constituents less "regressive"? If so they can start by ensuring that as many people as possible can live their lives without spending $12,000 annually just to leave their homes.
