It's sort of a joke that the federal government is overly-fond of its acronyms. Some are better than others, but there's one for just about every program in each of the federal agencies (which also each have acronyms). In Congress, staff can spend days mulling the perfect acronym for new legislation, hoping that a catchy name will help make their bill stand out among the thousands filed each session.

If popularity is the judge, though, one of the best acronyms of the Obama administration has been "TIGER." Part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, TIGER stands for Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery. Through TIGER, the Department of Transportation offered states, regions, and cities a total of $1.5 billion dollars worth of grants for transportation projects. But these grants are much different from the usual transportation spending that Congress doles out each year.

First, TIGER takes a bold new approach to awarding grants - they are being awarded competitively. Most of our current transportation programs give each state and city a piece of the pie regardless of the merit of their projects or responsible use of funds (think bridges to nowhere). However, those who want a TIGER grant must justify the need for their request with data.

Second, the program is mode-neutral, meaning that any transportation project could be submitted. While typical federal transportation spending has some flexibility to it, most dollars are designated ahead of time for one type of project or another. This includes the infamous 80/20 compromise, a Reagan-era deal that awarded 80 percent of federal transportation funds to roads and highways, and 20 percent to transit projects (though in reality, only about 18 percent actually make it to transit projects in any given year).

Finally, the criteria on which proposals are judged put energy and environmental considerations on par with other important goals, such as job creation, safety, state of good repair, economic development, and congestion relief.

At the end of September, DOT released some information about the TIGER applications it had received, and the results are fascinating...

Applications poured in from all 50 states and 3 territories - 1380 projects totaling $56.6 billion dollars. Only a little more than half of the applications - 56 percent by value or 57 percent by volume - were for highway projects.  Transit and rail projects made up 25 percent of the volume of applications, and nearly 30 percent of the value.

Additionally, among the 10 percent or so of project requests that weren't for roads, rail, transit, or ports were scores of bicycle and pedestrian projects. Though these weren't reported in the DOT stats, we have plenty of evidence from our colleagues that these projects were submitted.

So what does this tell us? First, it tells us that there is a tremendous appetite out there for transportation projects. This shouldn't be news, but the fact that $1.5 billion in grants resulted in $56.6 in requests - nearly 38 times as much - demonstrates the acute need for new transportation investment.

Second, it tells us that in a mode-neutral program, we'd see more spending on public transit and rail than we currently get in federal policy. This is the market of infrastructure consumers - states, regions, and cities - telling us that our formula is wrong.

Third, it shows that states, regions, and cities can develop projects that satisfy transportation, economic, and environmental goals. It also shows that they are willing to compete to win funding, as well as to show performance over time to justify the worth of their investments.

These are three major lessons that should inform Congress' thinking when if finally takes up a new federal Transportation Bill. I just hope that members of Congress are watching...