Finally, the Presidential Race Turns to Transportation

The Obama campaign has fired the opening salvo in a new presidential campaign front: transportation.

Mitt Romney may be President Obama's opponent in the race for the White House, but VP pick Paul Ryan is the real target of a new ad on transportation. Photo: ## Press##

The campaign released seven radio ads in key swing states, each playing to major concerns of voters in those states. The ad now on the airwaves in Virginia focuses on the differences between the two tickets on infrastructure spending. Here’s how Politico describes the ad:

The 60-second radio bit imitates a local traffic report and targets congested routes oft-cursed by northern Virginians: Interstates 395 and 66. The area is part of the sprawling D.C. region and consistently rated as having some of the nation’s worst traffic.

“Could things get any worse?” the faux anchor asks of another broadcaster, who replies, “Paul Ryan put forward a budget plan that slashes investments in road and infrastructure projects.” The two then agree that the Ryan’s “budget plan devastates infrastructure and roads projects.”

The ad also highlights the House Budget chairman’s opposition to “bridge repair and safety bills,” referring to votes against a bridge repair bill written in the aftermath of the 2007 I-35 bridge collapse in Minneapolis, the 2009 stimulus package and a 2011 appropriations bill written by Democrats.

The ad ends by saying that Romney’s pick of Ryan sends a message:

“Mitt Romney doesn’t understand northern Virginia.”

Given that nearly 40 percent of radio listeners are in their cars at any given time, this radio ad is likely to hit people at the time they can most relate to the message. But they should note – and the president’s policies do reflect this – that the cure for morning rush hour on 395 isn’t just a faster-moving road for them to drive on.

After all, parts of Northern Virginia are leaders in congestion mitigation solutions that don’t involve mindless road widening schemes. The region is served by the second-busiest rail transit system in the country, and even suburban areas have built high-density development around transit stations. Arlington, Virginia was a pioneering host of Capital Bikeshare, with Alexandria now deciding they want in on the action.

Support for these types of innovative programs is the real difference between President Obama and the Romney/Ryan ticket.

When Obama released his vision for the nation’s transportation program, the plan increased transit’s share of funding, created an infrastructure bank to fund big-ticket regional projects, increased discretionary grants for innovative transportation projects, and dedicated $4.5 billion a year (on average) to livability programs.

Romney doesn’t say much about transportation. His oft-repeated pledge to destroy Amtrak is pretty much the sum total of his words on the subject, though his record as governor is more nuanced than that would indicate.

While Romney has stayed mum on the matter (for now, at least), his VP pick has a more polarizing record, and he’s the real target of Obama’s campaign ad. Paul Ryan’s budget proposal – a banner that the Republican party has marched behind – would have slashed the transportation budget by about a third, holding spending to Highway Trust Fund levels and eliminating any programs not covered by the Trust Fund, including TIGER, the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, high-speed rail, and potentially the New Starts program for transit expansion projects.

Ryan is against virtually all spending on transportation, convinced that it’s all at least potentially wasteful, except for subsidies to the auto industry, which he voted for.

4 thoughts on Finally, the Presidential Race Turns to Transportation

  1. The essence of G.O.P. transportation is about roads and gas extraction. This is considered “efficient” or “good for the economy.” We know, however, that road building is the preferred strategy of Mr. Paul Ryan, whose family has been enriched by building roads in Wisconsin.
    It’s disappointing, though not surprising, that the G.O.P. is continuing its policy of general disdain for all walkers, transit riders, and cyclists – we’re not users of “real” transportation because we don’t drive private cars.

  2. If Ryan is against federal transportation spending, I agree with him there!  Attempts to “invest” in roads always make things worse rather than better, and that’s all the federal government seems able or willing to do.  Better to keep transportation decisions local, harder to control by the corruption of lobbyists,

  3. I live in Northern Virginia and drive in the traffic everyday. We do not think a “faster moving road” will improve the poor driving conditions. We are looking for improvements concerning public transportation. The last metro stop leaving the DC area is in Vienna, and a great deal of commuters live 20+ miles from Vienna. Also, a HOV only policy during rush hour past the beltway leaves many commuters to drive down the already croded Routes 28 and 50. Leaving at 6:15AM to be at work at 9AM in a city only 47 miles from your home is insane. Also, the Gainesville and Manassas areas are seeing contruction down 28 and 29 that will help with congestion that is only getting worse. If we cut back on funding for these plans, people will be leaving at 3at work by 9. No thank you! So, no, faster roads will not help the commuters of NOVA – an improved public transportation system, more realistic HOV restrictions, and better highway infrastructure will.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Would Dems’ Pledge for “Change” Bring Transportation Reform?

Hillary Clinton ad now airing in Southern California  This is part two of a two-part series on where candidates for president stand on transportation issues, authored by Streetsblog Los Angeles correspondent Damien Newton. Damien currently runs the blog Street Heat, which is soon to become Streetsblog L.A., our first foray into foreign territory. Damien was […]

On Election Eve, Reading the Transpo Tea Leaves

Though we found plenty of fodder this election season, transportation policy never emerged as a consistent talking point in the presidential race. This is more than a little surprising, considering the sad state of American infrastructure and the importance of same to this country’s economic and strategic well-being. Then again, what kind of dialogue can […]

Don’t Forget the Third Party Candidates!

In recent posts, we’ve explored the impact President Obama has had on transportation and land-use policy, and we’ve tried to square Candidate Mitt Romney’s oil-soaked rhetoric with Governor Mitt Romney’s smart growth record. We don’t want anyone protesting outside our offices, so our coverage of the presidential election must include the third party candidates. Green […]