The Long, Ugly Road to a Federal Transportation Plan
You’ve likely been hearing a lot, on this blog and others, about the coming expiration
of the federal transportation bill. Come September 30, Congress has to
have a plan in hand to fund the nation’s trains, buses, bikes, bridges
and roads — or pass an extension of the 2005 federal bill, locking in the same spending patterns that have nurtured Americans’ addiction to the automobile.
the odds are that you haven’t heard much about how the process works.
What has to happen in order for Congress to meet that September
deadline? Well, if you’re a fan of unnecessarily complicated Washington
jargon, the federal DOT has a flow chart on the subject (pictured on
Let’s break it down a bit. The hardest step in
the transportation policy-writing process will be getting past the
chart’s third box, out of the congressional committees.
Remember that immortal Schoolhouse Rock tune, "I’m Just A Bill"?
The Bill famously sang that "it’s a long, long week when I’m sitting in
committee," but it’s almost certain to take longer than a week to get
the transportation bills onto the floors of the House and Senate.
are two reasons for the delay. First, Republicans in Congress are
salivating at the opportunity to rap Democrats for the local projects
they prioritize in the bill — what you often hear called earmarks or
Now, what looks like "pork" to some looks like
progress to others; House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee
Chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) took heat from
reporters in his own state for using earmarks to expand bike trails and
commuter rail. But Republicans love starting earmark fights, no matter
how counter-productive they are, and this year’s federal transportation
bill will be no exception. (In fact, the process is already starting.)
second reason that the transportation bill is almost sure to be delayed
is money. Few people on Capitol Hill are ready to debate raising the
gas tax or imposing a tax on vehicle miles traveled (VMT), although
those are the only two concrete options on the table for bringing
much-needed new money to the federal transportation trust fund.
higher gas taxes and a VMT tax are good ideas, you may be thinking.
Members of Congress, meanwhile, are thinking one thing: Why should we
support new taxes on driving when President Obama doesn’t?
So getting out of the chart’s third box is going to be the hardest step. Still, that’s only the beginning.
can skip the box marked "Any Differences?" because the chances of the
House and Senate passing identical transportation bills are about as
good as those of Transportation Secretary LaHood changing the name
of his blog. The process of smoothing out differences between bills,
called "conferencing," can take weeks or even months, depending on the
circumstances. Then both chambers of Congress have to approve the
unified transportation plan before it reaches Obama’s desk.
after the federal bill passes, however, state-level Departments of
Transportation still have wide latitude to determine whether money gets
spent on repaving a crumbling highway or adding a lane to one that’s
hardly used. Lawmakers such as Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) have adopted a policy of steering cash directly to state DOTs.
As crazily complex as this process sounds — and it stalled spectacularly four years ago, when Congress was forced to pass twelve temporary extensions
before they could agree on a transportation plan — there is an upside.
The train-using, bike-riding public is watching closely this year, and
any delay in passing the federal bill will provide more opportunities
to get Congress on board with reforms such as "transit equity," which would require Washington to pay the same share for transit that it does for roads.
The first step, a transportation draft bill in the House, is expected just after the week-long Memorial Day recess.
no matter how long the bill takes to pass, one thing is assured: It’s
going to be an interesting summer for transit fans in Washington.