Session: The Reauthorization of TEA-21

March 31, 8:45 AM

Mary Peters
Federal Highway Administration

Forums like this give us a chance to share best practices and explore opportunities for partnerships. No group can go it alone . . . we have to cooperate to succeed.

With strong support from Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta, we at DOT are moving away from the silos, the narrow thinking of individual modes. Highways, rail, transit, motor carrier and aviation administrations are talking to each other and cooperating on projects and programs across modal lines. Partnership is particularly crucial on the security efforts that have occupied so much of our time since 9/11.

Each mode is doing a better job of understanding other points of view. After all, each of us is multi-modal. How did you get to this event? Did anyone use only ONE mode to arrive at this room?

We have broadly defined livable communities as places where the young and old can walk, bike, and play together; where historic neighborhoods are preserved; where farms, forests, and other green spaces are protected; where parents spend less time in traffic and more time with their children, spouses, and neighbors; where older neighborhoods can thrive once again.

A livable community has safe streets, good schools, and public and private spaces that help foster a spirit of community. Who wouldn’t want to live in this kind of place? Transportation policy and programs play a major role in the livability of our communities.
Few other issues have as great an impact on our economic development, on the pattern of growth, or on the quality of life in our nation’s communities.

Every man, woman and child in our country has the right to expect us to provide a safe, accessible, affordable and reliable transportation system -- one that meets their varied mobility needs. We owe the public a good return on their investment, based on the taxes they pay. In the private sector, this is termed a dividend . . . in the public sector, it is public value.

I’ve been administrator since October of 2001, but I know FHWA has changed a lot in the past ten years. The core of our work for 50 years was building the interstate system. That system is built. Today, we are deeply concerned with maintaining the system . . . rehabilitating parts of the system that are nearly half a century old . . . and improving how we operate the existing network of highways and bridges, as well as their connections to other modes of transportation.

We have an obligation to improve and reconstruct our transportation system. But we also have a strong obligation to protect the environment, improve livability, and preserve our historic landmarks as we meet our nation’s mobility needs. If we are successful, we will have brought community voices into the process at the beginning. The community’s first knowledge of a project should not be when the asphalt lay-down machine is in the neighborhood.At the end of the day, we need to give people choices, not mandates. To quote Alan Pisarski, a transportation consultant and writer: “Transportation policies should facilitate Americans’ lifestyle choices, not thwart them.”

I don’t think that any of us would want to live in communities that are not safe and secure, that do not reflect environmental stewardship or that do not have measures in place to mitigate congestion. These communities would not be very livable. So livability is at the core of what we do at FHWA.

I strongly believe that land use decisions are state and local decisions and should remain that way. Communities know their own needs best. Coordination among the residents of a metropolitan region, state and local planning, zoning, and housing authorities, and environmental and transportation officials is, of course, critical.

In the past we have not always acknowledged the fact that transportation decisions influence land use decisions and vice versa. We want to move away from the mindset that denies transportation's influence on local land use decisions. We all win when there is more coordination, more integration, between transportation and land use. I also believe that there is clearly an opportunity for more dialogue among state and local decision makers and transportation professionals on how to strengthen the linkages between land use and transportation.

FHWA currently supports a number of programs that contribute to livability:

Transportation Enhancements Program

Since 1992, more than 16,000 TE projects have been selected for funding, totaling more than $4.5 billion. 42 percent of funds have been used for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, 20 percent for historic preservation, including rehabilitation of historic transportation facilities.

Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ)

The CMAQ program, created by Congress under ISTEA in 1991 and continued under TEA-21, is a highly flexible program designed to improve air quality through transportation. About $11.3 billion has been invested in more than 12,000 projects through the CMAQ program, making incremental improvements to air quality and congestion levels. About 44 percent, or $4.8 billion, has gone for transit improvement with another 32 percent, or $3.5 billion for ITS and other traffic flow improvements such as HOV lanes and traffic signal coordination.
CMAQ has funded valuable projects, such as alternative fuels, transit, traffic flow improvements, auto emissions inspections, ridesharing, teleworking, and bicycle and pedestrian projects.

During our TEA-21 reauthorization efforts, we will look for opportunities to enhance the CMAQ program by increasing funding for worthwhile projects, working to improve the effectiveness of individual projects, and raising the awareness of the benefits of the CMAQ program, so that there will be a greater range of air quality improvement projects submitted for funding.

Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot Program (TCSP)

From FY 1999 to FY2002, 421 TCSP grants were awarded, totaling $369 million. The program will be in our reauthorization bill – we hope to streamline the delivery of funds.

Context-Sensitive Solutions

Context Sensitive Solutions means fitting transportation into the community it serves. The old way was the DAD Method – Decide, Announce and Defend. “Our way or no way.”

The interstate was built with a production mode standard. Each road was essentially made the same way. CSS is more like custom home building as opposed to tract housing.

Safety is a major consideration. In the past, highways were designed with the primary objective of assuring safe travel for the motorist.

Context Sensitive Solutions provides a focus for improving safety for all types of surface transportation and for all types of users, bicyclists and pedestrians, as well as motorists. So, can a policy change the way people think about highway projects and people that build them? The answer is yes, it can, but on a case-by-case basis. The more consensus at the front end, the less litigation later. The policy itself is not what alters the way things are perceived, it’s the day-to-day work and the thoughtful consideration of how that work is carried out that makes the difference.

Two current initiatives of FHWA and FTA support strong, effective planning:

Planning Capacity Building Initiative

• Philosophy: Improve planning by providing tools, recognition, reinforcement, networking – not heavy-handed regulation or penalties. It is not a one size fits all mentality.
• Aimed at educating elected officials, as well as strengthening planning organizations and staff.
• Case studies.
• Video for elected officials.
• Briefing book for elected officials.
• Training courses.
• Website and written reference materials.
• Peer-to-peer exchanges

One peer-to-peer exchange occurred in December right here in Denver. The relationship and partnership between the Colorado DOT and the MPOs in Colorado needed work. Let's just say it wasn't a marriage made in heaven.

CDOT and the large MPOs sought assistance through the Metropolitan Capacity Building Program’s Peer-to-Peer Program to identify ways that their partnership could be strengthened.

In particular, CDOT and the MPOs were interested in learning about successes in -- --

• Revenue Forecasting
• Cooperative Funding Allocation
• Development of Plans and Programs
• Cooperative Decision-making and Conflict Resolution

The FHWA Colorado Division office invited staff from departments of transportation and MPOs in Pennsylvania and Arizona to discuss how they have successfully addressed the issues. Both of these states experienced what Colorado is now facing and have taken positive steps to chart new processes in the spirit of TEA-21.

New undertaking by FHWA and FTA to blend our planning workforces more effectively in the field and at HQ.
Better distribution of workload. Avoid duplication. Concentrate on key areas. Increase responsiveness.
We are in the early stages of mapping this out, but hope it will bear fruit later this year.

In all these programs, Federal Highway’s ongoing role is as a partner with state, regional, and local governments, providing technical expertise, funding, and research to assist communities in attaining their goals. We are all partners in protecting the country’s economic vitality, quality of life, and the preserving our historic resources. We all want to improve transportation so citizens have mobility options. Eventually we can reach a point where we do not need the term "livability” to define an essential part of the development process because it will be a routine, day-to-day way of doing business. When we do so, we will truly be on the road to making livability everyone’s business and everyone’s responsibility.

Now, let me turn from livability to the other broad issue I was asked to address, the reauthorization of TEA-21, the surface transportation act that expires at the end of September. As we were discussing some strategic issues at FHWA recently, I recalled hearing that the Iroquois people, whose descendants now live in the New York state area, believe that tribal elders should consider the impact of their decisions on the next seven generations. Given current challenges, it is perhaps not the best of times, nor the worst of times, but it is an important time for America – a time that will shape our country, indeed the world, for many years to come. The decisions we make now will affect the next 10-20 years – perhaps even the next seven generations.

As Secretary Mineta has said, a safe and efficient transportation infrastructure is absolutely essential to business and rural development, for economic growth, and the quality of life of every American. No federal policy has a greater impact on planning and community livability than transportation. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) and its successor, the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) revolutionized transportation planning and policy.

As we shaped our reauthorization proposal, please be assured that we are building on the philosophy and principles of ISTEA and TEA-21.
DOT remains committed to a strong transportation planning process – one in which MPOs and local officials have a strong voice. Indeed, Secretary Mineta was a principal author of ISTEA, and he is particularly proud of ISTEA’s emphasis on planning and involvement of local officials in transportation decisionmaking.

2003 is a unique year for transportation. For the first time in recent memory – maybe the first time ever – Congress will have a chance to reauthorize our aviation, surface and intercity passenger rail programs in a single session. For that reason, teams at the Department of Transportation have been working hard for several months to develop proposals for reauthorizing these programs. I want to give you a status report on President Bush’s proposed 2004 budget and the reauthorization of the surface transportation act that will, in all likelihood, guide our programs and spending for the next six years.

The President’s budget is both responsive and responsible for this nation at this time. In developing the ’04 budget the President outlined three national priorities: winning the war against terrorism, securing the homeland, and generating long-term economic growth. The proposed spending levels reflect difficult choices as the president balances domestic needs with international responsibilities.

The Administration understands the importance of transportation to the economy.

• Transportation infrastructure, with a value of $1.75 trillion, represents approximately ten percent of the value of the nation’s productive assets.
• 91 percent of all person-miles is traveled on highways.
• Personal miles traveled have grown by 40 percent in the past 20 years and is expected to grow by another 40 percent in the next 20 years.

Most crucial, every $1 billion invested in transportation creates about 47,500 jobs, more than $1.3 billion in wages, and more than $6 billion in goods and services throughout the economy. Still, keeping our country safe and secure has to be our number one priority. We are fighting a war against terrorism at home and abroad and an actual war in Iraq. Resources are stretched, especially during a time of budget deficits and growing security needs. In times like these, setting budget priorities is a tough business – one that requires determination and leadership. That is the kind of leadership that state leaders and President Bush provide.

When the Department’s proposed FY 2004 budget was released early in February, Secretary Mineta said we are “creating a safer, simpler and smarter national transportation system for all Americans:

• safer, because we are placing a greater emphasis on saving lives and reducing crashes;
• simpler, because we want to consolidate and streamline programs and improve project delivery; and,
• smarter, because we are improving system performance and enhancing program accountability.”

The Department’s surface reauthorization proposal will build upon the legacy of ISTEA and its successor, TEA-21. For example, we are committed as part of this reauthorization to continuing the principle established in TEA-21 that all revenues coming into the Highway Trust Fund be walled off and dedicated -- guaranteed -- to transportation improvements. In fact, our Fiscal Year 2004 budget sent to Congress last month calls for total highway and transit funding over the next six years of nearly $250 billion, a figure that is 19% higher than the guaranteed levels under TEA-21. We are also proposing to spend down a portion of the Highway Trust Fund in order to dedicate $1 billion per year specifically to infrastructure performance and maintenance.

The top priority in the Department’s surface reauthorization bill will be safety. Secretary Mineta has challenged us to be Safety Advocates, to focus on a simple but profoundly important goal: improving safety and saving lives. We think constantly about how we can improve the safety transportation in all modes. Forty-two thousand people perish annually in traffic crashes. Roadway crashes occur every five seconds, and there is a fatality every 13 minutes. Almost one out of four -- more than 9,000 lives -- could be saved, if America would only buckle up.
In order to advance our core safety goals of reducing the number of fatalities on our roads, alleviating injuries and curtailing alcohol-impaired driving, we will propose to consolidate and expand federal safety programs, increase funding, and tie available resources more directly to performance. In an effort to improve intermodal connections, we will also focus a great deal of attention in our proposal on facilitating freight and goods movement. Imagine what would happen if we suddenly shut down our entire freight rail system and moved all that cargo to the highways. Well, some predict that as early as the year 2010, you won’t have to imagine it. The increase in freight moving on our nation’s highways will be equal to twice the amount of freight that was being carried on our entire rail network in 1998. That’s why, if we don’t improve our intermodal connections at ports and freight terminals around the country, we will see even more congestion on our highways and -- more important -- a net deterioration in our quality of life.

One related option we will also be exploring is “short sea shipping,” a concept that some feel could do a great deal to ease congestion on our nation’s highways and rail lines by taking advantage of underused capacity in the coastal maritime sector.
Finally, we will continue our efforts to be good stewards of the environment while improving the review process for major projects of national and regional significance. We are well underway in implementing the President’s streamlining executive order, and are already starting to see results.

I want to emphasize a few other key provisions of the Administration’s proposed budget:

Guaranteed funding -- it is one of the biggest success stories from TEA-21. These guarantees will be retained and refined in the new surface transportation legislation. People shouldn’t forget how unique this funding structure is. Almost no other discretionary program in the budget is as fortunate as transportation in this respect.

Our proposal calls for increased funding flexibility for state and local authorities so that specific areas of concern can be addressed. This will help deliver needed transportation improvements promptly, relieve congestion, and save lives.
I want to note that this flexibility extends to other DOT agencies. At the Federal Transit Administration, for example, the President’s budget promotes common sense transit solutions by giving states and localities the resources and the flexibility to make informed decisions about transportation investments.

We will continue to encourage innovative financing tools so that states and municipalities can leverage the power of federal funding. We will also work to encourage more private sector investment in infrastructure projects.

An example of a “smarter” investment we will continue to support as a way to relieve congestion is the Intelligent Transportation Systems program (ITS) . . . and the important themes of research and deployment. It remains vital to promote investment in traffic monitoring and information sharing technologies to help system operators make decisions on how to best manage and operate the transportation system. We can help travelers make informed choices on when, where, and how to travel, and improve the reliability and predictability of the transportation system.

The budget ensures the highest possible funding for investment in our nation’s transportation infrastructure, but does not propose new user fees. While this is the Administration’s proposal, it is important to note that there remains a substantial review process and work with Congress, particularly the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, before a bill is finalized.

Together, we must continue to protect the investment of American taxpayers in our transportation systems. It is, after all, the public’s money we are entrusted with. Congress and the public rightfully hold us accountable for ensuring that federal highway funds are used in the most efficient and effective manner possible. These are indeed challenging times for us all. The strength of America is in our resilience and optimism. I am optimistic about the future of our transportation system. I am confident in the resilience of our nation. I look forward to working with you to meet America’s transportation needs.

Author and Copyright Information

Mary Peters
Federal Highway Administration
Washington, DC
Mary.Peters@fhwa.dot.gov