Why Thinking Small Is Smart Transportation Policy

Mary Peters, who was Secretary of Transportation under President Bush posted an interesting item on the National Review Online site last week. Writing about the importance of what she considers a strong transportation plank in VA Governor-elect Bob McDonnell's campaign plan, she said:

"...McDonnell's plan avoided focusing exclusively on big-ticket, photo op-generating transportation projects. High-efficiency, lower-dollar ventures - such as smart intersections that adjust light times based on traffic flows, and opening spare shoulder capacity or reversing lanes during peak periods - arguably do more to alleviate traffic in urban areas than does new capacity."

This statement is a reaction to a problematic trend in infrastructure policy. The tendency in federal policy is to focus on large, multi-year projects; the whole concept of contract authority budgeting is geared toward this. It's true that many transportation projects are necessarily large in scope.

However, oftentimes these projects - and the accompanying photo-ops that Peters refers to - are prioritized at the expense of the smaller projects, which are potentially more valuable in terms of improving the efficiency and performance of the overall transportation system.

Optimizing (not to mention maintaining) what we already have should take some precedence over the addition of new capacity. In fact, considering our maintenance deficit, there is a strong case to be made that adding capacity should be a last resort a.k.a Fix-it First.

There might be exceptions to this argument, such as when a particular mode is underdeveloped or lacking altogether. However, our federal transportation policymakers might do well to think smaller when drafting our nation's new transportation program.