(Source: USDOT Press Release)

Dallas and San Diego selected as Integrated Corridor Management Pioneer Demonstration Sites

In an historic step towards ending gridlock in urban areas across the country, the U.S. Department of Transportation today announced that the Dallas and San Diego areas will receive $14 million as the nation’s first demonstration sites for new Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technologies that help fight congestion and enhance travel.  The Integrated Corridor Management (ICM) initiative will help the Dallas and San Diego metro areas become “living laboratories” in the fight against congestion.

“These communities are leading the way by using state-of-the-art technologies to create a commute that is safer, less congested and more convenient.” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood.  “America can’t simply build our way to a more modern and efficient transportation infrastructure.  These projects will show the rest of the nation that bumper-to-bumper traffic doesn’t have to be the status quo.”

Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) will contribute $3 million for an $8.3 million project. DART will use a transportation management model to predict travel conditions 30 minutes into the future, allowing diversion of traffic to other routes during freeway incidents and special events along US-75.  Travelers will have access to real-time information about traffic, public transit and expected travel times, through wireless and web-based alerts.

The San Diego Association of Governments and its partnering agencies will contribute $2.2 million for a $10.9 million project.  San Diego will use ITS investments along I-15 to enable a “smart” traffic management system that combines road sensors, video and traveler information to take steps to reduce congestion.  It will deliver information to commuters via the internet and message signs and will enable managers to adjust traffic signals and ramp meters to direct travelers to HOV lanes, HOT lanes, bus rapid transit and other options.

Since 2005, ICM has laid the groundwork for transportation agencies to use existing roads, intersections and other elements of urban transportation networks more efficiently

The demonstrations will build on past findings about ICM to provide a first-hand evaluation of the real-world impact.  The new technology will avoid the dangers of text-messaging and other distractions behind the wheel that result in distracted driving.

The initiative is jointly sponsored by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA).

Below is a summary of the ICM Pioneer sites (courtesy of the ITS JPO):

ICM Pioneer Sites–Dallas, Texas

The Dallas-Fort Worth area is currently populated by 6 million people, and is growing by 1 million every 7 years. Travel demand and congestion in this area continue to grow. Dallas’ US-75 ICM Corridor is the highest volume and most critical transportation corridor in the region. It has major employment centers and while there is no room for expansion of the corridor, it will be impacted by major construction planned in the surrounding area.

Dallas is creating an operational entity responsible for all ICM activities. In this region, transit availability and capacity is being increased, park-and-ride facilities will be improved, and intelligent transportation system elements are being deployed in the field. In addition, HOV and HOT lanes will be added, and value-pricing strategies are being explored.

The Dallas US-75 ICM corridor was chosen as a site for Analysis, Modeling and Simulation (AMS) of ICM strategies. Click here to learn more about this site’s Experimental Plans and early results.

More on Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas’ ICM Corridor:

The Dallas, Texas application proposed U.S. route 75 from downtown Dallas to SH 121 with the North Dallas Toll Way to the west and DART and various arterials to the east as their corridor. The Dallas Area Rapid Transit Authority was the lead agency, accompanied by the City of Dallas, the City of Richardson, the City of Plano, the City of University Park, the Town of Highland Park, the North Central Texas Council of Governments, the North Texas Tollway Authority, and the TxDOT Dallas District. In addition to the expected freeway and arterial capabilities, the corridor includes HOV, tolling, express bus, and light rail.

ICM Pioneer Sites–San Diego, California

San Diego experiences significant traffic congestion during peak travel periods, has limited HOV and HOT lanes, and has limited transit capacity. The strong consortium of partnering agencies in San Diego is increasing multi-jurisdictional and multi-agency collaboration on corridor management. Together, they are introducing dynamic ramp metering to reduce arterial spillover and they are looking to collect arterial data to support efficient signal timing strategies. This ICM team is implementing dynamic variable pricing along 21 miles of managed lanes and pioneering congestion avoidance awards.

The San Diego I-15 ICM corridor was chosen as a site for Analysis, Modeling and Simulation (AMS) of ICM strategies. Check back in late 2009 for updates on this site’s Experimental Plans and early results.

More on San Diego, California’s ICM Corridor:

The San Diego, California application proposed I-15 from SR 52 in San Diego to SR 78 in Escondido as their corridor. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) was the lead agency, accompanied by Caltrans, the City of San Diego, the City of Escondido, the City of Poway, the Metropolitan Transit System, and the North County Transit District. In addition to the expected freeway and arterial capabilities, the corridor includes HOV, tolling, value pricing, express bus, and BRT.

Click here to read more.

(Source: New York Times)

The Obama administration issued proposed rules on Tuesday that impose the first nationwide limits on greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles and that require American cars and light truck fleet to meet a fuel efficiency standard of 35.5 miles a gallon by 2016.

The government projects that the regulations will raise car and truck prices by an average of $1,100, but that drivers will save $3,000 over the life of the vehicle in lower fuel bills. Officials also said the new program, which is to take effect in 2012, would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by nearly a billion tons and cut oil consumption by 1.8 billion barrels from 2012 to 2016.

The 1,227-page regulation will go through a 60-day public comment period before it is completed early next year.

(Source: USDOT & Green Car Congress)

Preliminary reports from the State Highway Agencies show travel during June 2009 on all roads and streets in the nation increased by 2.0% (4.9 billion vehicle miles) resulting in estimated travel for the month at 256.7 billion vehicle-miles, according to the US Federal Highway Administration.

This total includes 89.6 billion vehicle-miles on rural roads and 167.1 billion vehicle-miles on urban roads and streets. Cumulative Travel changed by -0.4 percent (-6.1 billion vehicle miles).  Cumulative estimate for the year is 1,446.1 billion vehicle miles of travel.

While traffic volumes have shown some year-over-year gains earlier this year, June marks the first month when driving was higher in all regions of the United States and on all types of roads. US traffic volumes started declining in November 2007 as oil prices rose and experienced dramatic drops in 2008.

Click here to read the entire article.

Best Practices Illustrating the Benefits of Planning for Operations

On August 13, 2009, the USDOT released six case studies that provide strong examples of how planners and operators in a variety of different-sized metropolitan regions have worked together to advance utilizing an objectives-driven, performance-based approach to significantly advance Operations program in their areas.

A strategic approach to planning for operations that is guided by specific objectives and regular performance measurement will help ensure that the most effective operations strategies are incorporated into transportation plans. In many regions around the country, agencies are already applying elements of this approach in a variety of ways. The case studies below are just some of the examples of where this is being done.These case studies illustrate the benefits of planning for operations

Case Studies

• Capital District Transportation Committee (Albany, New York area) – Placing the Congestion Management Process in the Context of Metropolitan Transportation Planning Goals and Objectives
• Denver Regional Council of Governments (Denver, Colorado area) – The Denver Region Traffic Signal System Improvement Program: Planning for Management and Operations
• Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania area) – Planning for Congestion Management and Tracking Progress
• Metropolitan Transportation Commission (San Francisco Bay Area, California) – Developing Regional Objectives and Performance Measures to Improve System Operations
• Pima Association of Governments (Tucson, Arizona area) – Regional Concept for Transportation Operations Fosters Planning for Operations in the Tucson Metropolitan Area
• Wilmington Area Planning Council (Newark, Delaware area) – A Performance-Based Approach to Integrating Congestion Management into the Metropolitan Planning Process

Planning for Operations is a joint effort between operations and planning that encompasses the important institutional underpinnings needed for effective Regional Transportation Systems Management and Operations. For more information on planning for operations, please contact Rick Backlund at Richard.Backlund@dot.gov.

(Source: Fortune Magazine via CNN Money)

When lunch break comes at the construction site between Shanghai and Suzhou in eastern China, Xi Tong-li and his fellow laborers bolt for some nearby trees and the merciful slivers of shade they provide.

It’s 95 degrees and humid — a typically oppressive summer day in southeastern China — but it’s not just mad dogs and Englishmen who go out in the midday sun.

Xi is among a vast army of workers in China — according to Beijing’s Railroad Ministry, 110,000 were laboring on a single line, the Beijing-Shanghai route, at the beginning of 2009 — who are building one of the largest infrastructure projects in history: a nationwide high-speed passenger rail network that, once completed, will be the largest, fastest, and most technologically sophisticated in the world.

Creating a rail system in a country of 1.3 billion people guarantees that the scale will be gargantuan. Almost 16,000 miles of new track will have been laid when the build-out is done in 2020. China will consume about 117 million tons of concrete just to construct the buttresses on which the tracks will be carried. The total amount of rolled steel on the Beijing-to-Shanghai line alone would be enough to construct 120 copies of the “Bird’s Nest” — the iconic Olympic stadium in Beijing.

The top speed on trains that will run from Beijing to Shanghai will approach 220 miles an hour. Last year passengers in China made 1.4 billion rail journeys, and Chinese railroad officials expect that in a nation whose major cities are already choked with traffic, the figure could easily double over the next decade.

Construction on the vast multibillion-dollar project commenced in 2005 and will run through 2020. This year China will invest $50 billion in its new high-speed passenger rail system, more than double the amount spent in 2008. By the time the project is completed, Beijing will have pumped $300 billion into it.

This effort is of more than passing historical interest. It can be seen properly as part and parcel of China’s economic rise as a developing nation modernizing at warp speed, catching up with the rich world and in some instances — like high-speed rail — leapfrogging it entirely.

Last November, as the developed world imploded — taking China’s massive export growth and the jobs it had created with it — Beijing announced a two-year, $585 billion stimulus package — about 13% of 2008 GDP.

Infrastructure spending was at its core. Beijing would pour even more money into bridges, ports, and railways in the hope that it could stimulate growth and — critically — absorb the excess labor that exporters, particularly in the Pearl River Delta, were shedding as their foreign sales shrank more than 20%.

At a moment when the developed world — the U.S., Europe, and Japan — is still stuck in the deepest recession since the early 1980s, China’s rebound is startling. And the news comes just as Washington is embroiled in its own debate about whether the U.S. requires — and can afford — another round of stimulus, since the first one, earlier this year, has thus far done little to halt the downturn. Tax cuts made up about one-third of the $787 billion package, and only $60 billion of the remaining $500 billion has been spent so far.

Proponents of more stimulus are likely to cite China’s example of what a properly designed stimulus program can accomplish. Maybe so. But a closer look at China’s high-speed rail program also reveals some risks that should factor into the “Why can’t we do that?” debate that’s surely coming in Washington.

Last year China Railway Construction Co., the nation’s largest railroad builder, hired 14,000 new university graduates — civil and electrical engineers mostly — from the class of 2008. This year, says Liang Yi, the vice CEO of the CRCC subsidiary working on the Beijing-to-Shanghai high-speed line, the company may hire up to 20,000 new university grads to cope with the company’s intensifying workload. But with the private sector cutting way back on hiring — and university students desperate for work — taking on that many new engineers and managers hasn’t been too difficult.

Consider that the Northeast Corridor, between Boston and Washington, D.C., is served by Amtrak’s Acela train, which clips along at a stately average speed of 79 miles an hour. There’s a lot of talk now, as part of President Obama’s stimulus plan, about upgrading the system and building new, faster lines all across the nation. In his stimulus bill Obama has allocated $8 billion over three years for high-speed rail, and 40 states are now bidding for the funds, with results to be released in September. Among the possibilities, California wants to link San Francisco with L.A. via a high-speed link. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) wants the private sector to get into the act, proposing a high-speed spur to connect Las Vegas with L.A.

Click here to read the entire article.

(Source: Fortune)

President Obama may call a nationwide high-speed passenger rail network a priority, but it’s going to take a lot more than $8 billion to make it happen.

Though Thomas the Tank Engine earned a loyal following of American children in the 1980s and 1990s through his popular PBS television show, real trains have long been out of favor with the American public. Even Thomas was a British import.

Indeed, the fact that an early 20th-century steam locomotive — and not a sleek, high-speed model — so captured the modern young American imagination is an apt commentary on the state of train travel in the United States: The country lags years behind some of its peers.

America has 457 miles of high-speed track from Boston to Washington, D.C. In Japan, by comparison, trains netting speeds up to 188 miles-per-hour cross 1,360 miles of track; France features 1,180 miles of rail to support trains that can travel up to 199 miles-per-hour; and, as Bill Powell’s article, “China’s Amazing New Bullet Train,” shows in the latest issue of Fortune, China aspires to dart even farther ahead with its $300 billion high-speed rail project.

But President Barack Obama hopes to bridge this gap, emphasizing the importance of developing a nationwide high-speed rail network in several of his speeches. Just a month into his tenure, the President successfully urged Congress to dedicate $8 billion of February’s stimulus funds towards the system’s development.

“What we need … is a smart transportation system equal to the needs of the 21st century,” Obama said in a speech in April, the same month the Federal Railroad Administration released its prospectus for the high-speed program, “Vision for High-Speed Rail in America.” “[We need] a system that reduces travel times and increases mobility, a system that reduces congestion and boosts productivity, a system that reduces destructive emissions and creates jobs,” Obama continued in phraseology typical of his rhetoric. But it remains to be seen whether the U.S. government can translate “talk” into “walk” when it comes to high-speed rail.

Last month, 40 states — both individually and in groups — submitted 278 pre-applications for various stimulus-funded high-speed passenger rail projects, amounting to $102.5 billion in requests. Final applications are due August 24, and the FRA will begin distributing funds in September.

Click here to read the entire article. (Hat tip: WTSLosangeles@Twitter)

(Source: NY Times)

The Department of Transportation plans to hold a summit meeting on distracted driving in September, according to a safety advocate who was invited to participate reported NY Times on Monday.

David Teater, a spokesman for the National Safety Council, a nonprofit advocacy group, said the Transportation Secretary, Ray LaHood, plans to hold a press conference Tuesday to announce plans for the summit meeting.

The agency confirmed that Secretary LaHood is making an announcement Tuesday “about combating distracted driving,” including practices like texting behind the wheel.  As indicated the Secretary went public, outlining his plans for a summit this morning.  In late September, senior transportation officials, elected officials, safety advocates, law enforcement representatives and academics will convene in Washington, DC to discuss ideas about how to combat distracted driving.

“If it were up to me, I would ban drivers from texting, but unfortunately, laws aren’t always enough,” said Sec. LaHood. “We’ve learned from past safety awareness campaigns that it takes a coordinated strategy combining education and enforcement to get results. That’s why this meeting with experienced officials, experts and law enforcement will be such a crucial first step in our efforts to put an end to distracted driving.”

Secretary LaHood noted today on his Fast Lane Blog:

White House Says Transportation System Overhaul Must Wait (Washington Post)

After rejecting criticism that it is taking on too much, the Obama administration has identified one area where ambitious reforms will have to wait: overhauling the nation’s aging, congested and carbon-emitting transportation system.

It became clear at a contentious Senate hearing yesterday that the half-trillion-dollar question is how to pay for the bill. The 18.4-cent federal gas tax has not been raised since 1993, and revenue from it falls increasingly short every year because of inflation and the shift to more fuel-efficient cars.

The White House and some of its Senate allies are letting it be known, though, that this is not a discussion they want to have now, in the middle of a recession and as Washington is consumed with battles over health care and energy. Also, polls show that Americans are growing anxious about government spending.

“President Obama does have a vision for transportation. It’s not something he’s going to ignore or turn a blind eye to at all,” Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood told skeptical senators yesterday. “The timing is where we part company.”

Rep. Peter A. DeFazio (D-Ore.) is proposing that if the White House and the Senate will not consider a higher gas tax, then the bill could be paid for with a new tax on oil speculators.

Rep. Elijah E. Cummings (D-Md.) said: “President Obama said to us during the campaign that we must have the fierce urgency of now. And that’s what Mr. Oberstar has done.”

Boxer agreed but said a gas tax increase now is not feasible. “I would tell you if you go out to the people of America and say that’s the solution, I don’t think they will buy it,” she said. “They’re struggling right now.”

Click here to read the entire article.

Boxer and Inhofe Agree: Transportation Policy Reform Can Wait (Streetsblog)

Green transportation advocates are pressing Congress to refuse any new spending that’s not tied to reform of the existing system — a call that influential senators in both parties ruled out today.

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) joined Sen. Jim Inhofe (OK), the panel’s ranking GOPer, in endorsing another 18 months of the 2005 transportation bill.

The extension, Boxer said, should be “clean as it can be, clean as a whistle … not with these policy changes, because it will in fact jeopardize a quick passage of this extension.”

Boxer’s agreement to an extension free of policy reforms appears to be an acknowledgment that Inhofe and most other GOP senators would slow down approval of the short-term transportation measure. But she faced a lone critic today in Sen. George Voinovich (R-OH), who challenged Boxer to back down from her opposition to raising the federal gas tax during an economic recession.

Voinovich reminded the Californian that she “is always talking about the environment; [drafting a new transportation bill] is going to have a huge impact on greenhouse gas emissions.” He suggested that senators “look at” the House transportation bill offered by Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-MN) and pitch the American public on an increase in the gas tax, which has remained static since 1993.

In fact, recent polling supports Voinovich’s argument, not Boxer’s. A survey released earlier this year by the advocacy group Building America’s Future found that 81 percent of Americans would pay more in federal taxes to support infrastructure investments.

But the alignment of Boxer and Inhofe, as well as Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT) — whose Finance Committee must agree on a revenue source for the next transportation bill — in favor of a clean 18-month extension is enough to doom the House effort to pass a bill this year.

Click here to read the entire story.

Voinovich: Business Buy-in Can Get a New Transportation Bill Done (Streetsblog)

Getting business interests to work on methods for funding a long-term transportation bill can help shift the political climate, he told Streetsblog Capitol Hill today after Senate environment committee chairman Barbara Boxer (D-CA) vowed to continue searching for revenue raisers that can pay for massive new legislation.

“Right now, the president is frankly worried about health care, climate change, a lot of other things [and may have said] ‘see, I don’t need another thing on my plate,'” Voinovich said.

But, he added, the White House would likely come around if the private sector — which has “been heretofore reluctant … to step up” — is willing to shoulder some of the extra tax burden needed to pay for increased infrastructure investment.

The senator suggested pushing for a transportation funding extension shorter than 18 months, “to put the pressure on to get this thing done by next year.” In response, Basso would say only that “we’re supportive of the Oberstar [House] bill moving forward.”

Click here to read the entire article.

Congressman Peter DeFazio: Make Wall Street A**holes Foot The Bill For Infrastructure (The Infrastructurist)

Politicians agree that we need to invest in our transportation infrastructure, but ask any of them how we should pay for it and you’re likely to endure an uncomfortable silence. The problem is so bad that it seems to have derailed the new transportation bill until 2011.

There is at least one guy willing to offer a serious proposal though. Instead of taxing drivers more at the pump, says Peter DeFazio, why not make those finance guys that we all hate so much pay for it?

Specifically, the Democratic congressman from Oregon wants to impose a small tax–0.02%–on oil futures contracts.

From his office: “A transaction tax on crude oil securities will close the gap in funding a twenty-first century transportation system while lowering the price of oil. This is a win/win,” DeFazio said. “If we put off this transportation authorization, we will push off needed reform. Every day we wait people will sit in traffic instead of spending time with their families, every day people are not as safe as they could be because of our crumbling infrastructure, every day our economy suffers when our products sit in traffic jams. My proposal will not cost consumers one cent but will substantially increase our investment in our transportation infrastructure.”

The only trick will be selling it. That shouldn’t be hard with the right name. “The Oil Speculator Tax,” perhaps?

*We’re using “Wall Street” generically here, btw — a lot of oil trading occurs on Chicago Mercantile

Click here to read the entire article.

Senator Boxer is Right: There is No Consensus in Congress on Funding (The Transport Politic)

Today at a hearing on the reauthorization of the transportation bill, Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA) made it quite clear that Congressman James Oberstar’s (D-MN) proposed legislation won’t make it through the Senate over the next few months. Ms. Boxer’s testimony indicated that she’d push for a no-changes “clean” extension of SAFETEA-LU over the next 18 months, as proposed by Secretary of Transportation of Ray LaHood. More serious reforms will have to wait. This means fewer than hoped for funds for transit and high-speed rail, as well as no substantive improvements in the manner in which federal dollars are distributed.

Congress’ problems are two fold: it has too many other projects on the near horizon and it has no consensus, even along partisan lines, on how to fund a major expansion in transportation funding. Today’s fuel tax, which provides the primary source of revenue for the Trust Fund, is out of cash and cannot fund the nation’s transportation needs alone. A relatively simple extension of SAFETEA-LU, bolstered by an infusion of general fund dollars into the Highway Trust Fund, is the easiest answer.

Mr. Oberstar has been adamant in his desire to push forward the next transportation bill now, but this hearing made clear that the Senate is not going to play along. Ms. Boxer is chair of the Committee on Environment and Public Works, and her position will effectively block Mr. Oberstar’s bill even if that legislation passes in the House. Without the support of the White House, Mr. Oberstar is loosing ground. His inability to pinpoint a stable funding source is similarly problematic.

What hasn’t been suggested, but that which I will continue to bring up, is a simple abandonment of the idea that transportation must be sponsored by its “users.” We are all beneficiaries of a strong transportation network, and filling the Trust Fund mostly with general fund sources is a viable and long-term solution that would require none of the shenanigans that currently deteriorate efforts to raise the gas tax or impose a VMT. Whether now or in 18 months, we’re going to need something better than today’s non-proposals from Ms. Boxer.

Click here to read the entire article.

Transportation Bill Is Dead As A Doornail For 2009 Because Nobody Can Figure Out How To Pay For It (The Infrastructurist)

Over the past week or so, there has been a pretend drama in Washington about whether we’ll be getting a giant new transportation bill in 2009. The prospect is exiciting, of course, because in addition to $500 billion in loot that would be handed out, the bill would offers tantalizing opportunities for bureaucratic and policy reform.

On Monday, perhaps the most active and powerful Congressional player in these matters, Jim Oberstar, released his long-awaited draft version of the bill and, along with his committee-mates, vowed to push forward and get it passed into law by the end of September.

Oddly, that came on the heels of the Secretary of Transportation–a man who speaks for the president–requesting that it be kicked back to 2011 and that Congress craft an 18 month extension of the present legislation to cover the country’s needs in the meantime. Clash of the titans?

Now, at a hearing today in the Senate, Barbara Boxer pretty much closed the door on the idea the bill might happen this year. As chair of the Environment and Public Works committee, she would play a leading role in sheparding the bill through the upper house. And she’s saying unequivocally that the new bill will have to wait for 2011.

She gave a very clear reason: “It’s not because we [in the Senate] have a full plate”–dealing with healthcare, climate, and financial reforms–”it’s because we have no consensus on how to fund the new bill.”

“Oberstar wants to raise the gas tax,” she said, then noted it would have to go up by a dime just meet the current shortfall in the Highway Trust Fund. She took a spin through the math of how much it would have to go up to cover the new investment he proposed in the bill. And while she neither she or her witnesses stated an exact figure, it would probably be 25 cents or so more. (The tax now stands at 18 cents per gallon.)

Click here to read the entire article.

U.S. must boost gas tax, transportation expert says (Baltimore Sun)

The executive director of an influential group representing top transportation officials from around the country told a Greater Baltimore Committee summit Thursday that it is time for the United States to “grow up” and increase the federal tax on gasoline and other motor fuels.

John Horsley, executive director of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, warned that without new revenue, the U.S. transportation infrastructure faces a grim future.

“We’re in the soup,” Horsley warned the gathering of Baltimore business leaders, transportation officials and civic activists.

Horsley, whose organization represents state transportation secretaries and other top officials, noted that the 18.4 cents per gallon federal gas tax has remained level since the early 1990s and that the national highway trust fund is heading for depletion in August.

Horsley noted that two recent bipartisan commissions created by Congress concluded that federal fuel taxes must increase. One backed a rise of 25 to 40 cents; the other urged an increase of 10 cents a gallon on gasoline and 15 cents on diesel.

Those recommendations were opposed by the Bush administration, and President Barack Obama has ruled out any increase in gas taxes during the recession.

But Horsley said Thursday that a 10-cent increase in the gas tax amounts to “less than 60 bucks” a year for the typical driver.

Without new revenue, Horsley said, Congress must transfer $5 billion to $7 billion to replenish the highway trust fund during the current fiscal year or watch as road projects grind to a halt. He said $8 billion to $10 billion would be needed for the fiscal year that begins in October.

Obama and others have called for passage of an 18-month stopgap funding measure, saying that Congress has its plate full with health care, energy and other issues.

Click here to read the entire article.

Rep. John Mica on the transportation bill (PBS Blueprint America)

The proposed transportation bill calls for $450 billion in federal funding, which is a 57 percent increase over the $286.5 billion bill approved in 2005.

The following is an interview with Rep. John Mica (R., FL), ranking minority member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, about the recent developments of the transportation bill:

BLUEPRINT AMERICA: The current highway authorization expires at the end of September. So what exactly is expiring?

REP. JOHN MICA: Every six years Congress adopts a federal authorization for highways, which outlines transportation policy, projects, and funding distributions for the whole country.

BLUEPRINT AMERICA: Right now, however, the Obama Administration wants to delay authorization.

REP. MICA: We’re on the verge of a transportation meltdown. The Administration has proposed an 18-month extension of both the highway authorization bill and the highway trust fund. That will require, depending on how long it is extended, between $8 and $15 billion.

BLUEPRINT AMERICA: But, typically, the transportation bill is not authorized every six years – it’s generally extended.

REP. MICA: Right. I think the last time we tried to authorize it we had 13 extensions.

BLUEPRINT AMERICA: Are you opposed to this 18-month extension by the Obama Administration?

REP. MICA: Well, I think that it would be better to go ahead with the transportation bill Rep. (Jim) Oberstar has introduced. We have been working on the bill for some time.

Still, I think we take that bill as the starter. The problem you’ve got with an 18-month extension is that it puts many of the major infrastructure projects on hold. The 18-month extension is a job killer. It gives you a temporary relief with the highway trust fund, but because you don’t have projects approved and policy and funding mechanisms in place for the future, it ends up killing jobs and delaying decisions on projects across the country. For example, there are 6, 800 project requests in the House bill alone – all of these would go on hold.

Click here to read the entire interview.

(Source:  Minnesota Public Radio, The Hill, The Trucker, Detroit Free Press, Transportation for America)

Legislative Journey Begins:

Congressman Jim Oberstar’s transportation bill starts its legislative journey today with a draft session scheduled in a House of Representatives subcommittee.

It’s the one of the first steps toward a vote for the bill, which would nearly double current spending. The Obama administration has proposed postponing reform, but Oberstar says waiting dooms the country to years of delay on transportation projects.

Oberstar’s Surface Transportation Authorization Act would provide $337 billion in funding for highway construction, $100 billion for public transit and $50 billion to build a nationwide high-speed rail system–a grand total of nearly $500 billion over six years.

Funding for the bill remains sketchy, though Oberstar promises details as it progresses. There’s been no talk of increasing the federal gasoline tax which hasn’t been raised for 16 years.

Oberstar rails against the Obama administration position, saying an 18-month delay, given how Congress does its work, translates into a four-year wait for federal money from a new federal transportation bill. Oberstar’s timeline for finishing work on a new federal transportation bill is ambitious. He wants a vote no later than just after Labor Day.

LaHood told a Senate Appropriations transportation panel last week that he wants to work in the 18-month extension for the kinds of program changes that lawmakers seek.

“Our number one priority is to fix the Highway Trust Fund, to pay for it, to find money, and along the way here if we can have the discussions about these other things, I think we should,” LaHood said.

But Sen. Patty Murray, a Washington Democrat and the committee’s chairman, said: “Conversations are great; passing legislation is hard.” She said she was “concerned about some of the lack of details … You’re offering a general framework for us, but we can’t wait very long for a proposal.”

Unlikely Ally – K Street:

Rep. Jim Oberstar (D-Minn.) has a powerful ally in his battle with the White House over the highway bill: K Street.

Trade associations, unions and business coalitions are getting behind the House Transportation Committee chairman in his push to complete the $450 billion measure before the fiscal year ends on Sept. 30. The Obama administration has argued the transportation reauthorization bill is a bridge too far for an already jam-packed legislative agenda and wants to extend the current law at least 18 months before Capitol Hill can take on new reforms.

But lobbyists are arguing that the debate over how best to pay the increased transportation funding Oberstar is proposing — whether it is through raising the tax on gasoline or taxing vehicle mileage — cannot wait any longer.

But the administration has opposed lawmakers who wish to raise the gas tax to pay for the new transportation bill. LaHood and others argue the new tax hike would be overly burdensome on the pocketbooks of ordinary Americans during the recession.

Lobbyists believe the legislation, which will help fund repairs not only to highways but to transit systems and railroads, will provide a boost to the nation’s economy, much like the stimulus package was designed to do.

For his push to finish the bill before the end of the fiscal year, Oberstar can expect to find support among many of the trade associations that have been lobbying the transportation reauthorization this year. Like AAPA and LIUNA, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials and the Associated General Contractors of America are also supportive of the Minnesota Democrat’s desire to complete the bill in 2009, according to statements they released last week.

Many praised several reforms that were included in Oberstar’s blueprint released last week, including creating a Transportation Department Office of Intermodalism to better organize the nation’s transportation system and a national infrastructure bank to fund transportation projects.

Strong provisions for monitoring drug and alcohol abuse by truckers

The draft of the new highway reauthorization bill authored primarily by Rep. James Oberstar, chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee contains strong language requiring the Secretary of Transportation to establish a clearinghouse for records relating to alcohol and controlled substances testing of commercial motor vehicle operators.

It’s a clearinghouse long desired by federal officials and trucking executives and would be designed to keep repeat substance abuse offenders from jumping from company to company.

The clearinghouse would be a repository of records relating to violations of the testing program by individuals submitted to the DOT.

The bill requires the clearinghouse to be in operation not later than one year after the enactment of the new highway bill.

Under the present system, a CDL holder can fail a drug test and be fired from his or her present employer, but is not required to tell a prospective new employer about the failed test.

D.C. Metro Crash Spurs Transit Funding Debate

Public transit advocates seized on Monday’s commuter rail crash in Washington to make the case for overhauling the country’s transportation system.  Authorities were still searching the wreckage Tuesday when Transportation for America, a coalition of interest groups and local officials, cited the deadliest crash in the Metro’s 33-year history to make the case for advancing a new transit authorization bill on Capitol Hill this year.

“In the big picture, what we can say is that we have underinvested in taking care of our infrastructure, roads, bridges and public transportation,” said James Corless, director of Transportation for America.

Lawmakers from around the Washington area also spoke of the need to pay for rail projects in the wake of the crash, which killed nine people and injured 76, although some cautioned not to draw conclusions before investigators determine what led the two trains on the red line to collide.

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) called for a congressional hearing Tuesday to help determine how the crash occurred.

Norton, after meeting with officials of the National Transportation Safety Board, expressed outrage that the older car in the crash wasn’t retired, as those officials had recommended years ago. She noted that Congress once heard safety officials testify for more funding to maintain the Metrorail system, and that appropriators have failed to fully fund their request.

“Congress had the ultimate wake-up call yesterday,” she said. “The only appropriate response is to begin to eliminate the crash-unworthy cars with this year’s appropriations.”

(Source: Wall Street Journal, T4America@twitter)

Sec. LaHood proposes 18-month extension for SAFEAT-LU  and shortly thereafter Rep. Oberstar says delay is unacceptable (via T4America@Twitter & WSJ)

USDOT published a news release this afternoon offering Sec. Ray LaHood’s proposed extension:

“This morning, I went to Capitol Hill to brief members of Congress on the situation with the Highway Trust Fund. I am proposing an immediate 18-month highway reauthorization that will replenish the Highway Trust Fund. If this step is not taken the trust fund will run out of money as soon as late August and states will be in danger of losing the vital transportation funding they need and expect.

“As part of this, I am proposing that we enact critical reforms to help us make better investment decisions with cost-benefit analysis, focus on more investments in metropolitan areas and promote the concept of livability to more closely link home and work. The Administration opposes a gas tax increase during this challenging, recessionary period, which has hit consumers and businesses hard across our country.

“I recognize that there will be concerns raised about this approach. However, with the reality of our fiscal environment and the critical demand to address our infrastructure investments in a smarter, more focused approach, we should not rush legislation. We should work together on a full reauthorization that best meets the demands of the country. The first step is making sure that the Highway Trust Fund is solvent. The next step is addressing our transportation priorities over the long term.”

Shortwhile ago, WSJ published an article covering today’s development, which featured Secrtary’s proposal to delay the reauthorization.  This aricle also captured an interesting response from Rep. Oberstar, delivered his press conference Wednesday.  It notes that Rep. Oberstar was adamant that Congress must pass a new law before the current one expires.

“Extension of current law is unacceptable,” Mr. Oberstar said. “Now is the time to move.”

Bill in the Works at Congress (via WSJ)

House Democrats are busy crafting a transportation spending bill that would cost roughly $450 billion over six years, but no consensus has emerged on how to fund it, reports WSJ citing familiar sources.

The bill for the first time would establish standards — like reducing oil consumption and spurring economic growth — that would influence which highway and transit projects get federal funding. It would also consolidate to six or fewer the number of Transportation Department programs used to channel money to states, giving local officials more flexibility to combat their transportation challenges.

The legislation is being drafted by House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar (D., Minn.), who plans to release a blueprint of his bill tomorrow at a press conference starting at 11:00AM.  Since this is the internet age, there will be a live webcast of the news conference (an invitation-only press conference). Transportation for America informs that Chairman Oberstar is releasing a 12-page paper and a 100-page outline of the bill and it’s likely that at least one of those — probably the shorter white paper — will be released the first press conference.

The current system relies heavily on taxes from gasoline and vehicle purchases. Revenue from these sources is dropping as Americans drive less and opt for more fuel-efficient cars and trucks. Meanwhile, states are encountering similar funding problems due to declines in tax revenue. The result is a growing gap between the nation’s infrastructure needs and what is being spent to maintain and upgrade it.

The Obama administration has opposed any gas-tax increase. The White House also opposes any quick transition to a new system, which has been tested in Oregon, where drivers are taxed based on the miles they drive rather than the number of gallons they pump into their gas tanks.

People familiar with the matter say Mr. Oberstar hasn’t come up with a funding solution, and the task of writing the bill’s funding component will fall to the Ways and Means Committee. Things may proceed even slower in the Senate. That makes it unlikely Congress will pass a new bill by the time the old one expires at the end of September.

Meanwhile, states may be forced to further curb their transportation spending if Congress doesn’t come up with more money soon. Last year, Congress opted to transfer $8 billion from the Treasury’s general fund into the Highway Trust Fund to prevent last-minute cutbacks.   Click here to read the entire article.

Grading the Transportation Bill (via T4America)

To help us all judge whether the bill delivers the promised transformation, Transportation for America has developed this scorecard (see below) laying out the changes that must be included to clear the bar. When the bill is released, we can begin using this as our measuring stick. Click here to download the PDF version of this awesome scorecard.