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

GOP Budget Would Cut Transpo to the Bone

Wednesday night, the House Budget Committee narrowly passed -- by one vote -- the 2013 federal budget proposed by chairman Paul Ryan. It calls for all kinds of spending cuts, casts aside the bargains struck during last year's budget debacle, and asserts that by 2050, all federal spending outside of entitlement programs (Medicare, Medicaid) should only equal 4 percent of America's GDP. For comparison, most peer nations spend around 5 percent of GDP on infrastructure alone.

Just to be clear, the budget is separate from the two-year transportation bill passed by the Senate two weeks ago, the House's five-year drill-and-drive bill, and the 90-day extension of transportation programs introduced yesterday. Think of it as the national wish list, a policy statement that tries to set a tone for subsequent spending bills.

Compared to President Obama's transportation plan, which Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood has been defending for the past month, the House GOP plan would essentially cut transportation spending by 25 percent. The Ryan document singles out high-speed rail for criticism, saying its job creation potential has been exaggerated.

In making the case for his budget plans, Obama has emphasized the word "investment," especially when it comes to transportation infrastructure. The president has asked for a six-year, $476 bilion transportation program, including a $50 billion injection available for projects immediately.

The House GOP's plan undercuts the President's by 25 percent on transportation, which would force state and local governments to pick up the slack, or else.

There are at least two problems with relying more on states to handle the construction and maintenance of a national, multimodal transportation system. First, state DOTs are in many cases set up to be highway-building agencies and not much more, and they're not often held accountable for their expensive, car-centric boondoggles.

Second, cities and states are even more constrained than the feds right now. That's because they have two things working against them: the growing reluctance of the feds to invest in transportation, and the disproportionate rise in construction costs, as Brad Plumer wrote for the Washington Post.

Keep in mind that this is all happening at a time when infrastructure is getting increasingly expensive to build — the CBO notes that the cost of building highways has tripled since 1980, far faster than inflation. States are spending the same, but getting less and less.

Basically, states haven't been able to keep up with their own needs for years, so to assume that they will start doing so is more magical thinking from House Republicans.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog USA

The Paris Plan for Olympic Traffic? Build More Bike Lanes

A push to make Paris fully bikable for the Olympics is already paying dividends long before the opening ceremonies.

July 25, 2024

Thursday’s Headlines Face Our Fears

What happens if Republicans win the trifecta in November? Judging by the GOP-controlled House budget, a lot less money for transit, Smart Cities Dive reports.

July 25, 2024

N.Y. Gov Must Put Up or Shut Up on Congestion Pricing, New Senate Transportation Chair Says

Gov. Hochul must produce a "100-day plan" to replace the $16.5 billion MTA funding shortfall created by her decision to cancel congestion pricing.

July 24, 2024

Wednesday’s Headlines Are in a Good Place

How should we react to public indifference about the danger cars pose to society? Perhaps a sitcom has something to teach us.

July 24, 2024

Opinion: Is Kamala Harris ‘The Climate President We’ve Been Waiting For’?

Kamala Harris fought hard for a better transportation plan in the San Diego region despite big political risks. If elected president, will she do the same for the country?

July 24, 2024
See all posts