|  Stats for Your State  |  Transportation Decoders  |  Issue Areas  |  In The News  |  Library  | 
 |  Transfer Bulletin  |  Reports  | 

Grassroots Coalition

 |  About Us  |  Home  | 
STPP
Reports
"Decoding"
Briefs
Transfer
Past Issues
Progress
Past Issues
Health and
Safety
Economic
Prosperity
Equity and
Livability
Environment
Join Our
Coalition
Action Center
Donate
3/1/2000
Changing Direction - Executive Summary

Executive Summary

Transportation is changing in the United States.  As highways fill beyond capacity, forward-looking transportation officials have started to invest in a diversified transportation system that gives residents options beyond driving. Changes in federal transportation law in the past decade have made this diversification possible. However our analysis of transportation spending patterns shows that the move toward greater choice is stalling, and we may be reverting back to strategies that won’t effectively address the transportation problems of the 21st century. This report details transportation trends from the past decade and what they mean for our future.

In this report, STPP analyzes ten years of data from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Fiscal Management Information System as well as reports from the Federal Transit Administration that track how the states have spent federal transportation dollars. These reporting systems cover more than 360,000 individual transportation projects undertaken with federal funds in the 1990s.

Our major findings are:

1) In the 1990s, federal transportation spending changed for the better. More money started going to fix bad roads, reduce impacts on the environment, and get people out of congestion by giving them a wider set of transportation choices. The share of federal funds going to road repair grew from 39 percent in 1990 to 49 percent in 1998. Spending on public transportation almost doubled, from about $3 billion in 1990 to almost $6 billion in 1999. These changes stem from new federal transportation policies adopted in 1991.

2) We’re seeing some improvements on the ground. Road conditions are finally improving after years of decline. From 1994 to 1998, the share of major roads in less than good condition fell from 67 percent to 56 percent. In addition, the long-term decline in public transit usage reversed in the mid-1990s as bus and train service improved. Transit ridership has increased by more than 15 percent since 1996. The policy changes of the 1990s are starting to work.

3) Unfortunately, the positive trends in spending have stalled. Funding that had been going to repair roads and bridges and provide people transportation choices is now going to build new and wider highways. As shown below, in the last two years, the portion of federal funds going to new and wider roads grew by 21 percent, just as the portion of funds going to transportation alternatives fell by 19 percent.

4) Spending is reverting to old, ineffective patterns that are not what the public wants. The upsurge in spending on new and wider roads shows that many transportation officials are trying to address congestion by building roads. However, a growing body of transportation research shows that such spending is not an effective method for fighting traffic congestion. In addition, polls and surveys from around the country show that most people want more travel choices, not more roads. For example, in a 1999 Hart Research poll in Washington State, suburban voters favored transit over roads by more than three to one when asked how state transportation funds should be used to reduce traffic and increase availability of convenient and safe transportation.

5) In many states, decision makers have been slow to innovate or respond to the public will. Although state and regional transportation officials have new opportunities to pursue innovative transportation strategies, few are seizing these opportunities. In spite of new policies, new research and new public attitudes, they’re doing things the same old way. States now have the discretion to use federal funds for a wide variety of projects, but less than 7 percent of this "flexible" funding has gone to providing new transportation alternatives. Almost 90 percent has gone to traditional highway projects.

Transportation Spending Trends

Federal transportation funding and policy took a new turn in the early 1990s, when the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 opened up federal transportation spending to uses beyond road building. The states, led by their Departments of Transportation, decide how to spend the money. This report details just how much the states have taken advantage of the new opportunities presented by ISTEA and its successor, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21). We measure progress in four areas: providing choice; fixing the roads; improving safety and the environment; and, improving accountability.

Providing Choice. Federal spending data show the states have invested more heavily than ever before in offering their residents transportation choices. Funding for bike paths and lanes, sidewalks, and other facilities for walkers and cyclists exploded, growing from $7 million in 1990 to $222 million in 1999. Funding for buses and rail transit nearly doubled. This means that more Americans have more travel choices, making it possible for more people to avoid driving on our increasingly congested road system.

But the state commitment to choice is still questionable. While the federal government has opened much of its transportation funding to a variety of uses, few state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) are taking advantage of this new flexibility. Only a tiny fraction of this money has been used to diversify citizens’ transportation options. The states have underspent in categories specifically designed to give people more transportation options, such as the Transportation Enhancements program, deciding instead to use the funds on roadways.

Road Repair. Over the decade, the states shifted their investment in roads toward repair as encouraged by Congress. The investment of more than $100 billion in repair resulted in a modest improvement in road condition nationwide. But as noted above, the trend may be reversing as state DOTs again invest more heavily in the construction of new roads and the widening of existing ones. Of all the road-building money spent in the 1990s, 16 percent was spent in the final year of the decade.

Safety and the Environment. While much has been made of safety improvements on our roadways, auto accidents remain the leading cause of death among Americans under 35 years of age. The amount spent per year on safety has risen throughout the decade, but curiously, the portion of federal funds spent on safety fell slightly, from six to four percent of all FHWA-administered funds. In addition, while nearly 16 percent of all traffic deaths in the 1990s were bicyclists or pedestrians, less than two percent of federal safety dollars were used specifically to improve safety for these road users.

The best financial measure of transportation spending on environmental problems is the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) program. This funding source is intended to help states meet air quality goals as set out in the Clean Air Act. The most effective use of these funds is on projects that will continue to reduce pollution for years to come by giving people choices beyond driving. Short-term benefits are achieved through inspection and maintenance programs and other measures that lessen auto pollution without changing automobile dependence. By our analysis, 42 percent of CMAQ funding went toward long-term benefits, 50 percent went toward short -term benefits, and eight percent was spent on road-expansion projects with no pollution reduction benefit.

Accountability. Federal funds for planning and administration grew dramatically during the decade, rising from $257 million in 1990 to $893 million in 1999. But it is hard to tell whether this investment in planning led to better outcomes. States are not required to establish any methods to measure progress toward transportation goals. This makes it difficult for policy makers or citizens to determine the effectiveness of transportation spending.

The Picture at the State Level

In order to draw a picture of state performance, we compared how the states have spent their federal transportation dollars, and then divided them into four categories. States that failed to take advantage of the broad range of new opportunities are categorized as "behind the times." These states underspent in at least five out of seven spending measures relating to everything from transit to safety to road repair. Another grouping of states show a weak commitment to improving travel choices, and are categorized as "offering few choices." The spending patterns of a third group of states are considered "middle of the road." They show mixed results, with strong spending in some areas analyzed, and weak spending in others. Some states, often led by officials in their metropolitan areas, used higher amounts of federal transportation dollars in the 1990s to begin providing their residents with more choices, better road conditions, and improved safety and environmental protection. These states are called "open to change," in recognition that while they have begun to shift transportation spending, they still have a long way to go.


The Surface Transportation Policy Project is a nationwide network of more than 800 organizations, including planners, community development organizations, and advocacy groups, devoted to improving the nation’s transportation system.

Copyright © 1996-2013, Surface Transportation Policy Project
1707 L St., NW Suite 1050, Washington, DC 20036 
202-466-2636 (fax 202-466-2247)
stpp@transact.org - www.transact.org