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 21 st
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.
|