Transportation: Flight Glitch Puts Pressure Back On FAA
• "The failure of a single piece of computer gear in Utah disrupted travel for thousands Thursday, exposing the risks of the long-running patchwork upgrade of the nation's air-traffic-control system," the Wall Street Journal reports. "It is the second time in 15 months that a tech glitch threw air travel into disarray across large swaths of the country."
• "The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee on Thursday approved a bill aimed at improving the security of hazardous materials being transported by truck and aircraft, after defeating a Republican effort to strip a provision governing the shipping of lithium cells and batteries aboard cargo airplanes," CongressDailyAM (subscription) reports.
• "The Federal Election Commission approved new rules on Thursday that limit how Congressional campaigns use private and corporate jets," Roll Call (subscription) reports. "The new regulations restrict and in some situations prohibit federal candidates from spending campaign funds for noncommercial air travel. The new rules were designed to remove the influence that some special interests have on lawmakers, and they coincide with the provisions of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007."
What are the costs and benefits of policies meant to increase the accessibility of transportation options, expand travel choices and reduce vehicle miles traveled? Such "travel efficiency" policies include smart growth land-use strategies; expanding transit, bike and pedestrian networks; congestion pricing and VMT-based fees; pay-as-you-drive insurance; dedicated bus lanes; converting existing roadway lanes to carpool lanes; and implementing intelligent transportation systems and other measures to improve the efficiency of the existing surface transportation system.
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
22 responses: Deron Lovaas, Gabriel Roth, Richard Mudge, Deron Lovaas, Steve Van Beek, Emil H. Frankel, Lisa Caruso, Greg Cohen, James Corless, Michael A. Replogle, Greg Cohen, Deron Lovaas, Keith Laughlin, Steve Winkelman, Bill Graves, Steve Winkelman, Richard Mudge, Gabriel Roth, Parris N. Glendening, Jon Martz, Gabriel Roth, Steve Winkelman
In what is being portrayed as a billion-dollar bet on the U.S economy and the future of freight rail, billionaire investor Warren Buffett bought out the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp. last week, paying $100 a share for the 77 percent of the company he didn't already own. Buffett, who is known for making investments for their long-term value, made this bold move despite the economic downturn and the resulting decline in freight traffic.
What does this development mean for the rail industry? Buffett presumably expects the demand for freight transportation to rebound, but any number of variables could thwart rail's resurgence (such as losing its antitrust exemption, not getting the investment tax credit it wants, lack of a national intermodal freight program -- not to mention the repercussions if Congress enacts climate change legislation or if the recession deepens). What other variables are in play and what questions did the Buffett deal raise in your mind?
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
8 responses: Lisa Caruso, Lisa Caruso, Bill Graves, Mortimer L. Downey, Matt Rose, Jack Kinstlinger, Bob Szabo, Ed Hamberger
Last week, both the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee and the Senate Commerce Committee held hearings on the increasingly deadly problem of distracted driving, which Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood calls a "serious and ongoing threat to safety." LaHood told the House panel that nearly 6,000 people died on the roads and more than half a million were injured last year in crashes involving distracted driving. And on Oct. 21, a Northwest Airlines flight bound for Minneapolis overshot its destination because the pilots were paying more attention to working out crew schedules on their laptops than they were to flying the plane. LaHood has pledged to address the issue of cockpit distractions, which he also denounced last week.
Have Americans, multitasking behind the wheel or even in the cockpit, become complacent about transportation safety? And what can lawmakers and the transportation community do to promote greater safety awareness, both on the part of average Americans and among the transportation professionals who are responsible for ensuring the safety of millions of passengers?
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
22 responses: Robert L. Darbelnet, Patrick J. Natale, P.E., Steve Cassano, Gabriel Roth, Robin Chase, James Corless, Lisa Caruso, Jack Schenendorf, Lisa Caruso, Pete Ruane, Lisa Caruso, Lisa Caruso, Lisa Caruso, Robert L. Crandall, Steve Van Beek, Bill Graves, Greg Cohen, Dennis Christiansen, Lisa Caruso, Gabriel Roth, Jacqueline Gillan, Carol J. Carmody
Some transportation infrastructure, such as highways, airports and ports, is mainly owned and operated by governments, while other elements, such as rail lines and pipelines, are mainly owned and run by the private sector. What lessons can the public sector learn from privately held infrastructure about how best to manage, maintain and finance its network of holdings? Are there any lessons that government can impart to the private sector?
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
8 responses: Robin Chase, Patrick J. Natale, P.E., Gabriel Roth, Parris N. Glendening, Gabriel Roth, Robin Chase, Jack Kinstlinger, Jeff Rosen
Supporters of public-private partnerships, from conservative former Transportation Secretary Mary Peters to Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Edward Rendell, insist that the next surface transportation bill make it significantly easier for the private sector to invest in infrastructure projects. At the other end of the spectrum, House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar, D-Minn., wants to create an Office of Public Benefit and tough new requirements for tolling and public-private partnerships involving federal roads to make sure that the public interest is protected in deals with private investors.
How can policymakers strike the best balance between ensuring that the public gets a fair deal and making investment in infrastructure projects attractive to private capital? And how much funding for transportation projects is it realistic to expect from the private sector?
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
18 responses: Jon Martz, D.J. Gribbin, Gabriel Roth, Patrick D. Jones, Lisa Caruso, Patrick J. Natale, P.E., Ed Hamberger, Patrick D. Jones, Patrick D. Jones, Geoffrey S. Yarema, Gabriel Roth, Bill Graves, Lisa Mullings, Steve Sandherr, Phineas Baxandall, Bob Poole, Greg Cohen, Mary Peters
In an interview last week with NationalJournal.com, former Transportation Secretary Mary Peters suggested that rather than increasing the fuels tax to pay for a larger surface transportation program, policymakers should keep gas tax revenues constant, allow states and localities greater freedom to pursue private financing for infrastructure projects, and shrink the program to focus on core national priorities. Transportation experts are nearly unanimous in agreeing that federal surface transportation policy should make national (and regional) needs its top priority -- but many also support a substantially more expensive program of roughly $500 billion over six years (compared to the $286 billion provided in the last six-year authorization).
Has the time come to limit the scope and spending of the federal program, or does the next surface transportation bill require more money and a wider, if still nationally focused, approach?
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
14 responses: Deron Lovaas, Mortimer L. Downey, Patrick J. Natale, P.E., Bill Graves, Gabriel Roth, James Corless, David A. Raymond, Parris N. Glendening, Jack Kinstlinger, Steve Van Beek, John Horsley, Bob Poole, Steve Heminger, Ken Orski
The Obama administration and leading congressional Democrats appear to be making the creation of "livable communities" -- where residents have better access to affordable housing, public transportation and employment options -- a central transportation policy goal.
In June, the administration launched a Partnership for Sustainable Communities and six "livability principles" for coordinating policy across the Department of Transportation, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Chairman Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., whose panel has jurisdiction over mass transit programs, in August introduced his own Livable Communities Act, while House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar, D-Minn., made livability one of the key objectives of the surface transportation reauthorization bill he unveiled in June.
Given this increasing focus on promoting livability, what can transportation and urban planners and others in the transportation sector do to promote greater interconnection of affordable housing and transportation options? What role, if any, is appropriate for the federal government to play?
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
17 responses: Jon Martz, Jeff Rosen, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., Lisa Caruso, Ed Hamberger, Lisa Caruso, Deron Lovaas, Ken Orski, Gabriel Roth, James Corless, Patrick J. Natale, P.E., Lisa Caruso, Steve Heminger, Rich Sarles, Greg Cohen, Nancy LeaMond, Parris N. Glendening
President Obama, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, and House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar have all rejected the idea of raising the gas tax during a recession. Last week during debate on a bill to extend the surface transportation law through the end of the year, House Republican Whip Eric Cantor of Virginia tried to use a parliamentary procedure to put the House on record with "a public rejection of increasing the gas tax" (the gambit failed and the chamber voted 335-85 for the three-month extension of SAFETEA-LU, which expires October 1).
Last week also saw the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, the American Trucking Associations and the AAA together endorse raising the gas tax to increase investment in a larger but significantly reformed surface transportation program. They urged Congress to reject the 18-month extension proposed by the Obama administration and the Senate and instead to move quickly on reauthorization.
Transportation groups from across the political spectrum agree on the need for a new, reformed law soon and they are willing to support higher fuels taxes to get it. Yet there is significant resistance at the White House and in Congress to doing just that. How can transportation advocates battle these political headwinds to speed up and ease passage of the kind of surface transportation program they want? If raising the gas tax now is a non-starter, what other options are available to pay for the bill, and can they supply the necessary funds?
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
14 responses: Jack Kinstlinger, Deron Lovaas, Gabriel Roth, Steve Van Beek, Jim Burnley, Lisa Mullings, John Horsley, Bill Graves, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., Patrick J. Natale, P.E., Ken Orski, Mortimer L. Downey, Robert L. Darbelnet, Jon Martz
Last week the Center for Public Integrity reported that almost 1,800 "special interest groups" have already hired 2,100 lobbyists and spent an estimated $45 million to lobby Congress on transportation in the first half of this year. The center, which tracks money in politics, says its investigation of transportation lobbying shows that "Congress's funding of transportation has become a broken process influenced by special interests." According to the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, the number of earmarks exploded from just 10 in 1982 to more than 6,300 in the 2005 SAFETEA-LU law.
Along with organizations like the Brookings Institution and the Bipartisan Policy Center and a host of respected experts, the commission has called for the next surface transportation bill to focus on meeting national priorities and to use performance-based, outcome-driven criteria rather than parochial interests and political influence to determine how and where to spend federal dollars. With so much lobbying already under way, will it be possible to write the kind of transformational bill that transportation policy experts recommend? Can Congress and K Street control their appetite for earmarks, and at what point do earmarks go from simply greasing the political skids to undermining good policy?
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
10 responses: John M. Krieger, Bill Graves, Steve Van Beek, Jon Martz, Gabriel Roth, Jack Kinstlinger, Greg Cohen, Jack Schenendorf, Emil H. Frankel, Robert Puentes
Last week the country marked the eighth anniversary of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, when terrorists hijacked commercial airliners and flew them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and, in the only thwarted attempt, a field in western Pennsylvania. The attacks exposed glaring vulnerabilities in our transportation security system and made addressing security threats to all modes of transportation a top priority for government and the private sector alike. Eight years later, where do we stand on that effort? Where has transportation security been enhanced and where do gaps still exist? What do we need to do next?
-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com
13 responses: Patrick J. Natale, P.E., Rep. John L. Mica, R-Fla., Steve Van Beek, Ed Hamberger, James P. Hoffa, Mortimer L. Downey, Bill Graves, Lisa Caruso, Ron Kuhlmann, James C. May, Bob Poole, Michael P. Jackson, Norman Mineta
