Stepping it up for America

Government

by David Alpert • October 16, 2008 12:42 pm

Over in the other Washington, DC, the one that's a curse on the lips of every politician running on a platform of change, advocacy groups on both sides of the transportation issue are gearing up for a fight that will determine the future shape of our settlement patterns, our future impact on the environment, and the success of our cities and towns: the mega transportation spending bill.

From T4America.

Streetsblog covered the launch yesterday of Build for America, a plan to revitalize our economy through investment in the transportation infrastructure we need now and will need in the future. And that doesn't mean new ~~roads~~ ~~highways~~ ~~freeways~~ expensive high-speed sprawl-inducing auto-only infrastructure, but greener transit that saves Americans from dependence on foreign oil and spending most of their income on gas.

At yesterday's press conference in New York, Representative Jerrrold Nadler, who represents most of the West Side of Manhattan and sits on the Transportation Committee, said, "If we do it right, it will help us get out of the very deep recession we're going into. If we don't do it right, it will make the recession deeper and reduce our competitiveness."

Right now, the nation's attention is riveted on McCain-Obama and Congressional races. Those will have an enormous impact on transportation—Obama supports transit while John McCain just wants to drill and voted against Amtrak funding. Down the ballot, races like Kay Hagan's in North Carolina also feature stark differences in transportation spending priorities between candidates.

Still, once the election is over, the hard work will begin for the Transportation for America coalition, which according to Roll Call will spend $4 million on the campaign. Five-point plans, press conferences and a Web site are a good start, but we'll need more to beat the power of the highway lobby.

We'll need a broad-based movement comprising citizens, bloggers, celebrities, economists, columnists, community organizers, unions, businesses, local governments, and more. Once Americans' and our elected officials' attention turns from the election to the harder work of governing, we'll need that movement to break through the clutter of bad proposals that throw money at bailing out unsustainable development patterns. T4America has the money and the right ideas. Hopefully they can mobilize the nation to pull off a real change in our transportation spending priorities.

9 comments — Share	— tags: Barack Obama, Congress, Jerry Nadler, Kay Hagan, TEA

Nadler transit amendment passes on voice vote (Jan 28, 2009)
DeFazio calls out Summers, introduces transit stimulus amendment (Jan 26, 2009)
"Everyone benefits if we can leave our cars" (Nov 20, 2008)
GO VOTE (Nov 4, 2008)
Presidential candidates on transit, cycling and walking (Jan 31, 2008)

Comments

RailROADS, bike paths, etc are all ROADS.

I believe they mean no new highways.

Comming from and referring to Washington DC and New York, that of course has no credibility.

Some very powerful people must hate the highways, particularly Jesuit run Georgetown and of course Catholic University of America.

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/search/label/highway%20routing%20mysteries

http://wwwtripwithinthebeltway.blogspot.com/2007/02/sampling-of-attitudes-towards-dc-i-95.html

On the flip side, I am favorably impressed with the California hi speed rail initiative.

http://goodspeedupdate.com/2008/2262

I would love to see that along the eastern coast, contrary to what REASON magazine (which I often agree with) writes.

by Douglas Willinger on Oct 16, 2008 12:55 pm

Douglas: Good point that I should have said no new highways instead of no new roads. I don't agree that railroads and bike paths are roads — linguistically they may be, but now "roads" means automobile roads. Still, highways is more precise; I don't think the T4 campaign opposes small local roads as part of new developments, especially if they create a good connected street grid.

by David Alpert on Oct 16, 2008 12:58 pm

I think the Build for America platform is clear: Expand rail and transit networks. Before building new roads, restore existing highways, bridges, and transit systems.

Since this is a campaign about a federal bill, "roads" in this case refers to federally supported thoroughfares.

Slightly OT: Apparently the legal definition of "highway" includes all thoroughfares, and most parking lots too. Researchers use "highway" to mean all thoroughfares. Meanwhile the popular term for all vehicular thoroughfares is "road." Gotta love lawyers and traffic engineers.

by Laurence Aurbach on Oct 16, 2008 1:37 pm

Correct. I recall during the 1970s the government was claiming that the 55 mph speed limit was saving a great number of lives on the "highways" without noting that the term includes city surface streets (which of course never had speed limits greater then 55 mph), and that the number of fatalities reductions on the vehicular roads that did have higher speed limits was far far lower.

Interesting the Feds were making these claims at the same time they introduced the use of the terms "highway" and "city" with regard to fuel economy figures.

Instead of "highways" I should have said "freeways" (as defied as free of at grade crossings).

by Douglas Willinger on Oct 16, 2008 1:46 pm

It's unfortunate that somebody like Nancy Pelosi is already promising to build a lot of roads as part of some neo-works progress effort. If you can't get somebody like her to talk about transit infrastructure improvements, how do we expect to make much progress?

I think the Congress is fatally flawed on these issues. One needs only to see the acres of parking lots around the House and Senate (despite the close proximity of many transit modes) to see how our lawmakers think you ought to get from point A to point B.

Frankly it makes me ill to think of all the do-as-I-say-not-as-I-do laws they propose, while doing nothing to discourage the bad practices of their own employees.

by Reid on Oct 16, 2008 2:12 pm

What roads (freeway?) are Nancy Pelosi promising to build?

I-66 tunnel beneath K Street?

I-395 tunnel extension along Catholic University of America?

NYC Westway?

NYC Canal Street Bypass Tunnel?

Midtown Manhattan Express Tunnel?

New Haven Route 34 Freeway Tunnel to Derby Street?

What is her list of such projects?

by Douglas Willinger on Oct 16, 2008 2:23 pm

And of course the Cross Harbor-Brooklyn Multi Model Express Tunnel and the I-287 (preferably multi-model) Cross Sound Tunnel, both as potential Long Island evacuation routes.

http://cos-mobile.blogspot.com/2007/11/build-cross-brooklyn-tunnel_02.html

http://cos-mobile.blogspot.com/2007/12/build-cross-sound-tunnel.html

Where is Nancy Pelosi on any of these, and for that matter the hi speed rail proposal for California (and for the east coast)?

by Douglas Willinger on Oct 16, 2008 2:27 pm

I don't get the connection/difference between Build for America and Transportation for America. Can someone fill me in?

by Lou DC on Oct 20, 2008 10:16 pm

Lou: I think B4A is the specific plan and T4A is the coalition.

by David Alpert on Oct 21, 2008 8:50 am