skip to main content

Natural Resources Defense Council

Switchboard

Deron Lovaas's Blog

Un-stimulating Debate on Transportation in the Senate

Un-stimulating Debate on Transportation in the Senate

Watching the Senate debate on the economic recovery bill, I am reminded of a remarkable event in 2001. The Surface Transportation Policy Project held an awards dinner to celebrate the tenth anniversary of ISTEA, the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991.

One of the award recipients was former Senator Patrick Moynihan of New York, who chaired the Environment and Public Works Committee when ISTEA was hammered out. His most memorable comment in his acceptance speech was about what transportation departments planned to do after the Interstate Highway System launched in 1956 was completed: They would simply build another one. When a big project is launched, especially if it involves federal policy, it develops a momentum of its own. And at some point, it may well get into a rut. That's where federal transportation policy was in 1991, and despite ISTEA's remarkable reforms, it is arguably still in a rut.

While in its debate about the recovery bill the House easily adopted an amendment adding public transportation investment and rejected an amendment that would strip intercity rail investment out, the Senate is instead faced with amendments that would tilt federal assistance into the same old rut. And there are some surprising supporters. Thankfully, Grist's Muckraker is on the case.

I urge you to contact your Senators to let them know that now is the time to put Americans to work on our next big transportation project: Building the second-half of the system, the low-carbon, oil-efficient public transportation and rail network the nation needs and deserves.

Tags:
globalwarming, highways, infrastructure, lightrail, oildependence, publictransit, rail, stimulus, transportation policy

(bookmark or email this entry)

Comments

Mike LewynFeb 5 2009 01:56 AM

It seems to me that this is pretty hopeless as long as transportation is not a litmus test for environmentalists.

If I am a typical Democratic senator (let's call her Senator B) I have two options:

a) vote with environmentalists on transportation, thus ticking off the highway lobby and real estate developers; or

b) vote with environmentalists on protecting caribou in Alaska and wilderness in Montana, and vote with the highway lobby on transportation, thus making the highway lobby happy and the environmentalists willing to support you as well because you are a Democrat who votes with them most of the time.

Obviously, (b) is the rational choice for Senator B.

And that will always be true until the environmental movement shifts its priorities.

Comments are closed for this post.

We close comments on a blog post when it's clear the conversation has moved on -- click on the tags (above) or on our homepage to see if we've got fresh news and views on this post's topic.

Clean Energy Common Sense

OnEarth: NRDC's award-winning magazine

Citizen journalism from the OnEarth magazine website

Manhattan's First Green Library Opens in Battery Park City
by Shanti Menon
E-Mail Leak Puts Climate Scientist Under Pressure
by Emily Gertz
Our Rapidly Emerging Solar Future
by Osha Gray Davidson

Read more

Fresh Conversation

Feeds: Stay Plugged In