New York State devotes just 1 percent of its federal transportation funds to pedestrian infrastructure. Photo: Wikipedia

In the last 15 years, more than 76,000 Americans have been killed while crossing or walking along a street in their community. More than 43,000 Americans -- including 3,906 children under 16 -- have been killed this decade alone. This is the equivalent of a jumbo jet going down roughly every month, yet it receives nothing like the kind of attention that would surely follow such a disaster.

Counterintuitive as it may be, "Dangerous by Design" also finds that, when it comes to investing in pedestrian-friendly streets, New York has little room to boast. Here are local stats culled from the report, issued in a joint statement from TSTC, Transportation Alternatives, the Regional Plan Association and TWU Local 100:

• 22.5 percent of total traffic deaths in New York State are pedestrians
  
• 31 percent of total traffic deaths in the NYC metropolitan area are pedestrians
  
• Only 1 percent of New York State federal transportation funds are spent on pedestrian infrastructure, an average of $0.73 per person
  
• New York State ranks 44th in the nation for federal spending on walking and biking
  
• The NYC metropolitan area receives only $0.61 per person in federal funds for pedestrian and bike facilities, well below the meager $1.39 spent per person for metro areas nationwide

Advocates are calling on Governor Paterson and the New York State Legislature to designate 10 percent of federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) and 10 percent of federal Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding for pedestrian safety; to enact a statewide complete streets policy; to increase funding for Safe Routes to School and Safe Seniors programs; and to create a statewide Safe Routes to Transit program.

"From 2005 to 2008, New York has received $5.6 billion in federal transportation funds," reads the statement. "In the same amount of time there have been 1,215 preventable pedestrian deaths."

You can download "Dangerous By Design" in its entirety here. Elana Schor has more on the report's national implications at Streetsblog Capitol Hill.

(Photo: T4A)

T4A's report illustrates the punishing effect of such cuts on transit riders, many of them low-income workers, with a set of well-trammeled statistics: demand hit a 50-year high in 2008; every dollar invested in transit produces an estimated $6 in economic growth; transit is far safer than car travel and provides greater public health benefits.

But when it comes to the political battle over remaking national transport priorities, T4A's transit cuts map -- viewable right here -- speaks loudest of all.

Transit fare increases and service reductions, T4A found, are concentrated in major cities and along the coasts. And as the current health care conflagration has shown, lawmakers rarely wield political power that's commensurate with the share of the population they represent.

As the Washington Post's Alec MacGillis catalogued in a commentary last week, Senate influence is particularly concentrated in the hands of small-state denizens such as Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D) of Montana, who fought to remove a provision helping transit agencies with punitive tax shelters from last year's auto bailout bill.

Per MacGillis:

And then there's the Senate's age-old distortion of distributive politics, in which goodies are doled out on anything but a per-capita basis. California, Illinois, New York and New Jersey are among the 10 states that get the least back per tax dollar sent to Washington; Alaska, the Dakotas and West Virginia are among those that get the most.

In that context, it's not surprising that federal support for metro-area priorities such as transit is so perilously thin. Even in the House, where urban representatives lead several key committees, transit backers have yet to convince the Ways and Means panel to move forward with a solution to the immense revenue gap that has stalled progress on new long-term transport legislation.

A letter sent last month urging Ways and Means chairman Charles Rangel (D) -- who represents a transit-heavy district in New York City -- to press on with a transportation bill this year was signed by 15 of the committee's 26 Democrats. Yet metro-area members such as Rep. Pete Stark (D-CA), whose district is near Oakland, and Rep. John Lewis (D-GA) of Atlanta were absent.

And the legislation that T4A's report singled out as a concrete boost for transit agencies, Rep. Russ Carnahan's (D-MO) proposal to provide federal help with operating costs, does not count Rangel as one of its 60 co-sponsors. The bill also lacks a Senate counterpart, despite the presence of two transportation-minded Democrats in leadership positions (Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Environment Committee chairman Barbara Boxer of California).

Of course, the political savvy of rural lawmakers does not automatically mean transportation reform must fall by the wayside; West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D), chairman of the Commerce Committee, has taken the lead on a plan to set national performance targets for reductions in emissions and vehicle miles traveled.

Still, T4A's picture of cutbacks brilliantly illustrates where transit's congressional constituency should be leaping to its aid -- the question is what it would take to make that happen.

(Image: ARTBA)

Referencing lawmakers' reluctance to debate new funding sources for federal infrastructure investment, ARTBA suggested telling Congress to "make generating sufficient revenue for a $450 billion bill a priority."

That price tag matches the legislation released by House transportation committee chairman Jim Oberstar (D-MN) in June, which is headed for consideration by the full panel after Congress returns from its recess. Getting through to the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, as ARTBA mentions, is a crucial step for Oberstar allies; if that panel does not put forth recommendations on how to pay for the bill, the transport measure could stall before reaching the full House.

While ARTBA and Oberstar are aligned on the timeframe for proceeding with a new transportation bill, the construction group is not on board with all of the chairman's priorities. ARTBA opposes giving state and local governments the ability to "flex" highway funds into transit projects better suited for their needs.

ARTBA's transit policy also states that the 80-20 distribution of federal gas tax revenues to highway and transit projects "sets a fair modal balance which should be maintained." Oberstar's new legislation alters that balance only slightly, creating an estimated 78-22 split between highways and transit, respectively.

The construction industry isn't the only transportation player working on lobbying during the congressional recess. The pro-transit Transportation for America (T4A) is fanning out to contact lawmakers through its member groups and plans bulletins of its own in the coming days, spokesman David Goldberg said in an interview.

As for where T4A stands on the timing for a long-term transport bill, Goldberg added:

We want to pass a bill that contains the important, major reforms, and if it takes a few more weeks or months, we should take the time. What we don't want to see is a long delay where this falls off the radar. If there's going to be reform, we have to keep the conversation going.

This morning our friends over at Transportation for America are launching a new site called My Commute Sucks, designed to give people around the country a place to vent their frustration over the nation's overburdened and inefficient transportation systems. Commuters can share their tales of commuting woe, upload photos and videos, and also take action by contacting members of Congress to ask for a more sane and sustainable approach to transportation policy.

Already the stories are starting to pile up. Here's one from a New Jersey commuter named Betty:

The Garden State Parkway in New Jersey is a nightmare, just like Jersey's other main arteries.

I would love to bike to the train, but the town of Little Silver doesn't have safe cycling roads. Pedestrians are also at risk on some of the very busy, sidewalk-free and shoulderless roads. 

Finally, the trains are a mess with many discontinuous lines, requiring bus/taxi/light rail connections between stations. ugh 

Build bikeways and we will come! Fix the trains and we will ride!

Brian Fellows asks:

Why should we tolerate 1- and 2-hour commutes?  Think how much time we spend away from our families, burning fossil fuels, and getting stressed out -- every day, every month, every year.  The quantity is staggering.  Even now, just 5 months after the start of our metro area's light rail system (which people are flocking to!) it still takes me an hour to get to work.  Building more lane-miles simply induces more people to drive -- and there you have it: even more traffic.  I would like Congress to attach requirements to highway money that mandate recipients/states to design higher-density and mixed-use development along the highway corridors. 

Go ahead and add your own story. The site has lots of interactive features, including a Twitter feed for micro-rants (tag with #mycommutesucks). You can also follow them on Twitter, they're @mycommutesucks.

From the executive summary: 

The next transportation program must set about the urgent task of repairing and maintaining our existing transportation assets, building a more well-rounded transportation network, and making our current system work more efficiently and safely to create complete and healthy communities. It should invest in modern and affordable public transportation, safe places to walk and bicycle, smarter highways that use technology and tolling to better manage congestion, long-distance rail networks, and land use policies that reduce travel demand by locating more affordable housing near jobs and services. And it should put us on the path towards a stronger national future by helping us reduce our oil dependency, slow climate change, improve social equity, enhance public health, and fashion a vibrant new economy.

Getting there from here will require some significant reforms. To meet these goals, the T4 America coalition offers four main recommendations for the upcoming transportation authorization bill:

• Develop a New National Transportation Vision with Objectives and Accountability for Meeting Performance Targets.
• Restructure Federal Transportation Programs and Funding to Support the New National Transportation Vision and Objectives.
• Reform Transportation Agencies and theDecision-making Process.
• Revise Transportation Finance So We Can Pay for Needed Investments.

This transportation bill is going to be of crucial importance to all the issues we discuss on this site on a regular basis. The T4A report provides a great overview of the key points on which advocates can push for reform. Take a look.

Photo: AARP

Forty million Americans over the age of 50 belong to the organization, which is increasingly focused on the next federal transportation bill. "America is aging rapidly and transportation policy and spending must acknowledge this demographic shift," said AARP's Nancy Leamond in a press statement. "The upcoming transportation authorization can help the nation prepare both for its graying years and a greener future by making roads safer for drivers of all ages and also offering more user friendly options for pedestrians and transit users."

AARP's publications have been turning an eye toward the benefits of reducing car dependence and making streets safer for older Americans. Recent articles in the AARP Bulletin have examined Safe Streets for Seniors programs and the need to invest stimulus funds in infrastructure for walking, biking, and transit. An ongoing collaboration with Project for Public Spaces produced a series of three books about how citizens can improve their streets. You can meet the authors at a book launch and reception next Thursday at PPS's office on Broadway and 4th Street.

Advocates have to keep up the pressure on each count. Bond's amendments are still very much a threat, and the Boxer/Inhofe amendment, while malleable, is a disaster waiting to happen in its current incarnation. The latest action item from T4A takes aim at both.

I hope you noticed that our Streetsblog Network Action Widget -- it's there on the right sidebar -- is sporting a new call to arms for this latest fight in the Senate. If you'd like to add a dynamic action alert to your own blog or website, here are the instructions.

Transportation for America sends along some key points to make in your phone call:

• In the poll released a few weeks ago by Transportation For America and the National Association of Realtors, fully 80% of respondents said that stimulus funds should not only create jobs, but also help us meet the goals of reducing oil dependence, improving the environment and increasing transportation options. Now is the time to increase much needed funding for public transportation.
• Transportation For America has identified more than $5 billion in new transit extension and rail projects that could be ready to go in 120 days, generating over 178,000 new jobs. These investments could put people to work building and operating rail cars and bus vehicles, in the steel and concrete industries and in design and planning professions.

In the end, reports Politico, green transportation advocates on Capitol Hill had to focus on limiting the damage that would be wrought by unchecked highway building. So the relatively small dollar amounts for transportation -- half of some predictions -- are, in a perverse sense, something of a blessing. But the draft bill needs to get tougher on state DOTs to keep their bad habits in check, says Transportation for America:

Without explicit language prioritizing a fix-it-first approach to infrastructure investment written into the legislation, federal funds could be wasted adding new highways to a system the House bill describes as “crumbling”. This would have the effect of digging ourselves a deeper hole of oil dependence, even as we invest stimulus money elsewhere in the hope of finding a way out.

And they've got some fresh public opinion research to back up their message:

A new poll shows that most Americans would rather use federal dollars to repair highways and bridges and improve public transportation than expand highways through new construction.

In addition, fully 80 percent of respondents said stimulus investments should not only create jobs, but also help the goals of reducing oil dependency, improving the environment and increasing transportation options, even if the job creation took longer.

After the jump, why the stimulus draft is bad policy for cities.

All told, urban areas get left behind by the draft legislation. Get ready for some math. That $30 billion for "highways"? Some of it would go directly to metro areas, but not nearly enough. The bill sets aside $7.4 billion for cities and metropolitan planning organizations, leaving more than $20 billion in the hands of states and their highway-happy DOTs. Mayors, progressive think tanks, and green transportation types have been calling for more decision-making power in the hands of cities, but the meager sum on offer falls far short of what this bill should deliver.

An alternative proposal from Rep. James Oberstar would more than double the share for MPOs -- agencies that, in general, are more likely to spend money on things like buses and sidewalks, not highways. (Because some MPOs do have a weakness for highway building, however, T4A is calling for their funds to be subject to fix-it-first requirements as well.) This is an important fight to track as the stimulus debate enters the next phase. The more stimulus money gets directed to cities, the more leeway those cities will have to invest in bus, bike, and pedestrian infrastructure.

States should know better than to funnel more money into road expansion at the expense of maintenance.

U.S. PIRG just released a great report [PDF] outlining what's known so far (most states haven't even gone public with their requests). Here are some updates since the last time we checked in on these wish lists:

• The Texas ask includes a whopping $6 billion for roads (97 percent of the total wish list), including $3.4 billion for expansion projects.
  
• North Carolina is just as brazen, asking for $5 billion for roads, of which $3.4 billion would fund expansion.
• South Carolina wants to spend nearly all of its $3.2 billion ask on roads, 80 percent on expansion.
  
• New York pretty much splits the difference between roads and transit, asking for about $1.8 billion for each (the analysis does not break down the road requests by expansion and maintenance)
  

The best state? Probably Massachusetts, which asked for more transit funding than road funding, absolutely no highway expansion money, and $18 million for bike and pedestrian projects. While one state proves that stimulus spending can signal a shift to more progressive priorities, the report leaves little doubt that the bill can't give all states a blank check.

Transportation for America has a new petition online urging Congress to impose oversight on states and avoid throwing money down the sinkhole of new highway capacity. This is an important one to speak up on, with big implications for this year's huge transportation re-authorization package as well as the current stimulus bill. If you want to personalize your letter a bit, check after the jump for some inspiration from a Connecticut state legislator and U.S. PIRG.

From U.S. PIRG's press release for their new report:

According to incoming Deputy Speaker of the Connecticut House, Representative David McCluskey, "We have an opportunity to use stimulus dollars to provide the people of Connecticut with the transportation alternatives they need for the future. We need to focus on regional and state-wide projects that will allow Connecticut to grow economically and in an environmentally conscientious manner. The new Congress and President need to put their foot down if they will deliver on the forward-looking Green recovery they’ve promised."

The report calls on Congress, the Obama Administration, and state leaders to apply the following principles to the writing and implementation of the next federal economic recovery legislation: (1) Highways should receive no more funds than the combined total for public transit, intercity rail, and bicycle and pedestrian projects; (2) Any road funds should go first to maintenance and repair of structurally deficient bridges and roads, not new highways or lanes; (3) Public transportation funds should include support for operations so agencies can accommodate rising demand. (4) Surface Transportation Program highway funds should be distributed as under current law so that a portion of resources flow directly to metropolitan areas that know best about which local projects are needed; (5) All states, cities, and agencies should publicly disclose the stimulus lists they have submitted; (6) Direct recipients of stimulus funds should report on how money was spent and any transportation spending that it displaced.

Streetsblog Network (http://streetsblog.net) brings together more than 100 blogs from 31 states — and counting. Its purpose is twofold: to create a place where people who blog on smart growth, livable streets and sustainable transportation issues can come together and learn from each other. And to provide a clearinghouse for information related to the transportation bill, or "TEA," that directs the spending of hundreds of billions of federal dollars. The next such bill is set to come up for reauthorization in 2009.

Federal transportation policy has long been a Beltway insider’s game, one where the highway lobby held most of the cards. This time, a coalition of organizations called Transportation for America has come together with the aim of taking the next TEA bill in a different direction.

We'll be using the Streetsblog Network site to give readers and bloggers opportunities for action on the TEA bill, information about upcoming committee hearings — pretty much all the news on this legislation that we can get our hands on.

Think of it as a community that gets things done.

Union Station, Denver, CO

T4A has set up a page for members of the public to send their own version to Obama via e-mail.

While you're at it, you can also outline your vision for the country, complete with photos and video, for the incoming White House team at change.gov. The T4A vision summary and Obama urban policy platform might be good jumping-off points.

The T4A letter appears in full after the jump.

What will you say to President-elect Obama? 

Dear President-elect Obama:

First of all...Congratulations! Your election, and results from down-ballot votes around the country, represents a resounding call for a new direction.

The Transportation for America campaign, representing more than 100 organizations and thousands of energized citizens around the country, salutes you. And we join you in seeking infrastructure investment that will stimulate the economy now and lay the groundwork for a clean-energy future that is less dependent on oil.

Americans are ready for this bold vision. Even in this tattered economy, citizens in California, Washington, Hawaii, Colorado and at least 10 other states voted themselves a tax increase so they could jumpstart construction of light rail, commuter train service, high-speed rail and other clean transportation options. Now they, and dozens of other communities, need a federal partner that can step up and do its part.

We call on you to follow through on the vision you offered in the campaign by acting rapidly, starting with the transition and during the first 100 days, to urge Congress to pass a smart package of stimulus investments as well as a new national transportation program. Appoint a Secretary of Transportation with a proven record of understanding both urban and rural needs, as well as how transportation, growth and development, the economy and the environment interact.

You have expressed support for building complete streets that “make it easier for us to walk, bicycle and access transportation alternatives,” and for repairing and restoring our troubled highways and bridges - we call on you today to fulfill that promise in your first 100 days.

By fixing our highways, bridges and transit systems, and pushing ahead with ready-to-go rail projects, we can create millions of jobs that can't be outsourced, launch a clean, green economic recovery, and get started on building a 21st century transportation system.

To quote our next president: "Yes, we can!"

Photo: Sandy Leidholdt/Flickr

All around the country, local transit systems are seeing spikes in ridership caused by rising fuel prices, and oftentimes straining under the increased demand. As part of our participation in Transportation for America's Build for America campaign, we've been looking around the country for bloggers who are covering these issues and who can lend their voices to the call for more funding for public transit around the country. That's how we found The Fairbanks Pedestrian.

The blog's creator, Paul Adasiak, recently wrote an interesting post on increased bus use in his Alaskan city. He's pleased that more people are riding because it means fewer cars on the road, sure. But when he saw a well-dressed man with a briefcase board the bus, he saw the potential for an even more profound effect:

I’m happy because the bus is starting to be more of a social leveler, bringing together a wider variety of ages, races, educations, and incomes.  And that’s important.

How many people of another social class, or race, or educational level are you likely to meet while at work?  Probably few.  How many in your home, barring your own parents or children?  Very few.  And how many while driving alone in your car?  Absolutely none!  For much of our days, most of have no chance to rub elbows with people who seem unlike us, because we lack space in which this can happen.  Our stratification and our isolation dim our understanding and dull our sympathies.

I recall, growing up in Anchorage, some ordinance involving expanded bus service came up before the municipal assembly (I think), and Mayor Tom Fink, speaking against it, said, “Everybody I know drives a car.”  Well, wonderful.  That really spoke more to his own social class and his own isolation from others, than it did to the actual state of affairs.

If the privileged leaders of our community — if our City Council and Borough Assembly members, our captains of industry, our professors, the members of our Chamber of Commerce — got to ride the bus every day, and to rub elbows with their fellow citizens of all classes, no such ignorant statement could escape their lips without consequence.  And I expect it would be much harder for us all to hold on to our prejudices.

Photo: drniii/Flickr

Now, as the country teeters on the edge of a dire recession, increased transportation spending is starting to look like a core building block in a federal stimulus package that would, ideally, bring about job creation, increased international competitiveness and improved environmental sustainability. Today, Nobel Prize winning economist and New York Times columnist Paul Krugman helped make the case, using the kind of "fix it first" and pro-transit examples promoted by Build for America at Wednesday's press conference.

And this is also a good time to engage in some serious infrastructure spending, which the country badly needs in any case. The usual argument against public works as economic stimulus is that they take too long: by the time you get around to repairing that bridge and upgrading that rail line, the slump is over and the stimulus isn’t needed. Well, that argument has no force now, since the chances that this slump will be over anytime soon are virtually nil. So let’s get those projects rolling.

Photo: Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Janette Sadik-Khan, Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney and Lee Sander. Photo: Paul White.

The Build for America campaign officially launched yesterday afternoon at Grand Central Terminal, one of six events held in cities across the nation. DOT Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan -- joined by MTA chief Lee Sander, U.S. reps Jerrold Nadler and Carolyn Maloney, and a bevy of advocates -- advanced the case for committing ambitious levels of federal support to modernizing the nation's transportation system.

"America's transportation system is facing a perfect storm of huge costs, declining infrastructure, dwindling resources and dependence on foreign oil," said Sadik-Khan. "And while we're struggling just to fix and maintain our roads, our global competitors are building systems that we simply don't have." The United States does not have a high-speed rail system, she added, and the nation's transit systems are struggling just to keep up with ridership demand.

Most speakers hewed to an economic argument: Federal investment in transportation infrastructure can create jobs as the nation faces the prospect of a deep recession. Investing that money wisely, they said, requires re-orienting spending priorities away from new highway construction and toward rail and transit.

Noting that federal spending on infrastructure has declined since 1980 from 3 percent of GDP to 1.8 percent, Nadler set a target allocation of $500 billion for the next multi-year transportation spending package (the previous package authorized $248 billion over six years). "If we do it right, it will help us get out of the very deep recession we're going into," he said, placing an emphasis on investment in passenger and freight rail. "If we don't do it right, it will make the recession deeper and reduce our competitiveness."

New York has a lot riding on the re-authorization. With the MTA facing a funding crisis, Sander painted a bleak picture of how the city's transit system may deteriorate without more federal support, invoking its sorry state in the 1970s and 80s.

"The resurgence of New York is very much linked to the improved performance of the MTA," he said. "We will not be able to maintain this success without a renewed commitment from our funding partners, including the federal government. You can be sure that one finding of the Ravitch Commission will be that we cannot succeed without a strong federal bill."

Yesterday, Shelley Poticha, Transportation for America's co-chair, was joined by Gov. Ed Rendell of Pennsylvania and others in a telephone briefing for reporters. She said the campaign aimed to challenge Congress to "adopt a bold new agenda" by shifting emphasis away from building new roads and onto expanding mass transit, maintaining existing roads and bridges, and focusing on sustainable development. "We need to invest in infrastructure that will get our economy moving," said Poticha.

The campaign's five-point plan calls for Congress and the next president to:

• Build rail and transit networks that are competitive with those in China and Europe, reducing oil dependence and connecting metro regions.
• Invest in "the cleanest forms of transportation — modern public transit, walking and biking."
• Adopt a "fix-it-first" policy to repair crumbling roads and bridges rather than building new ones.
• Stop wasteful spending and re-evaluate projects that have already been approved.
• "Save Americans money" by providing them with cost-efficient, sustainable transportation options where they live and work.

Asked about the political will to increase federal funding for mass transit in the current atmosphere of economic crisis, Gov. Rendell acknowledged it would not be easy. "Is there an appetite for it?" he said. "I'm not sure there is. Raising revenue is always difficult....We have to build the appetite. The movement has to start in the hometowns and move to Washington."

"Build for America" officially kicks off today with events in New York, Madison (WI), Chicago, Phoenix, San Francisco and Seattle. The New York event will be held at Grand Central Terminal at 1 p.m., near Vanderbilt Avenue and E. 43 Street.