-- Lisa Caruso, NationalJournal.com

Contribution to the National Journal Transportation Panel 

-        by Eric Britton, 12 Jan. 2009, New Mobility Partnerships, Paris and Los Angeles

Summary:

The greatest single challenge before our new Secretary of Transportation faces will be to tear down the walls of the past that have worked to hold back the development of a more effective and more sustainable transportation system for the United States. The challenge facing his team is nothing less than that of reinventing transportation, which is exactly what we need  to do now. And in the process seizing this probably once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do just that.

But we understand of course that this is not going to be an easy challenge -- because the day Secretary LaHood walks through the door of his new office there will be an incredible number of people, problems, projects, details and interests clamoring for his attention. Many with projects "ready to go" -- but many of which must not be simply approved before making them pass through the critical tests which are outlined here. The real issue here and now, is whether urgently funding more-of-the-same will continue making things better . . . or worse.  

However this process of tearing down the right walls is likely to be the most important single initial decision that the new Secretary can make as he assembles his new team and prepares for the critical four years ahead. This, breaking with the past and redefining the future, is the one decision that will shape all the rest. With this in view I propose that we now put our heads together to gather our ideas and recommendations on the following eight-part action proposal for the leaders of the new team. I offer this to the panel as a starting point.

1.     Modify the Mission:

This has to be the starting place.

The traditional focus of DOT and all its many agencies and branches has in a phrase been “to be good at transportation”, which de facto boils down to being historically seen as good at highways, good at aviation, good at transit, good at railroads, etc. etc. And while that has yielded extensive, sometimes sensational results on the supply side, it is not at all the kind of approach which is appropriate to the very different conditions and constraints of the 21st century.

So what should be the appropriate target for the new Secretary and his department? Let me at this point just step aside and address this challenge to the panel, and indeed to anybody else who is interested, including colleagues in the halls of the Department of Transportation, to help us work out some real guidelines for this extremely important step in what I very much hope will be the new policy of the Department.

My own preferred single candidate capable of guiding all the rest will be to focus policy on investments and measures that serve specifically to achieve major reductions of carbon-driven vehicle miles travelled (VMT) across the whole transportation spectrum. As it turns out this is a near perfect surrogate for all the key objectives associated with issues of climate, sustainability, economics, energy and systemic efficiency, among others. You figure out how to drive the VMT down and the rest moves along in the right direction with it. Or will at least if we are careful about it.

This is a very doable strategy, one which if we get it right will not only support but even enhance the economy of the nation, while at the same time providing more choice for citizens and more affordable and equitable transportation for all.

2.         The external walls:

Eliminate walls between transportation and all the rest.

Our point of departure has to be to understand that transportation is a means and not an end. This is so well-known that it almost seems unnecessary to state it, however we have all too often failed to recognize this in the past. Fortunately the means to rectify this are at hand. A critical look at our past failures to be sufficiently inclusive to create really effective policies and practices is a good place to start.

If we can self-criticize the performance and results of our transportation policy, thinking and performance over the last decades, the crux would have to be that our investment and other key choices have been made without sufficient reference to the broader context and issues that shape and are in turn shaped by decisions made in the transportation sector. This long list includes such critical under-pinnings as climate, environment, land use, value capture, energy, city and community development, public health, quality of life, job creation (but the right kinds of jobs for our new century), community relations, aging populations, 21st century economic realities, the special problems of the rural and urban poor, entrepreneurship, the need for bold experimentation, the untapped potential of IT, the beauty of America, and the list goes on. Our sector and the investments that are now going to go into it can succeed only if we bring all of these factors to the table in the decision process in a way that has rarely been done in the past.  All of the time!

The point needs to be made that in the past most to these issues and interests have been treated as “soft” and as such relegated to the outer edges of the decision process. That is a big mistake. They are hard and central, and it is going to take ea reorganization from the top to bring this about.

I propose we recommend that future Secretary LaHood and his team convene and support a high-level, high-profile cross-agency, cross-platform review and brainstorming process  which will assemble around one table the best placed strategic thinkers from the following key agencies – to give them a chance to look together at what the challenges, responses and priorities really are from the necessary broader perspective.  Obvious candidates for such a fundamental outreach and redefinition effort include:

·         Department of Health and Human Services

·         Department of Housing and Urban Development

·         Department of Commerce

·         Department of Education

·         Department of Labor

·         Department of Energy

·         Department of the Treasury

·         Environmental Protection Agency

·         Federal Communications Commission

·         VISTA, USAID and Peace Corps

·         DARPA

It goes without saying that my listing here is personal and incomplete.  And while I'm sure there are other players who should be brought into such a rethinking process, I would hope that the core group would remain relatively compact so that the key factors and players are going to really get their message through.

Let's look at one example briefly, health: The health impacts of transportation are many, notorious and for the most part strongly negative. And while these factors are at times brought into the planning and decision process, it is my contention that, along with the critical concerns of climate and sustainability, they now need to be brought right into the strong center of transportation policy and practice. Starting at the federal level, and hopefully by its strong example flowing out and influencing the sector’s practices at state, city and other key levels.

At the other extreme of the above lists you will see DARPA – the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. By adding this agency to the group, my intention is to point up one simple truth of the future of our transportation systems, and this is the update are going to find much of the content of their success by becoming ever more aggressive users of the kinds of technology that DARPA has assisted and championed in the past. In the old days transportation was about metal boxes moving about on rails or roads, in the air or on water. Today while we still have the boxes and their supporting media, however the full versatility of performance depends on the extent to which they take full advantage of the kinds of information, communications, and logistics technologies that groups like DARPA and several other government organizations have helped jumpstart. There is plenty of room for that in the four years ahead.

This would be an important thing to do now because here we are not only in a new century but in the opening phase of a period of new government ideas and initiatives. So now's the time to start to think far more broadly and far more strategically about the issues and choices now before us.

(Incidentally, if these meetings and exchanges are carried out in a way such that they are fully open to the public, through public broadcasting and the Internet, it can be argued that this form of citizen oversight can be one of the guarantors of the effectiveness of this important initiative. Inclusiveness of the public is part of the solution, no doubt about it)

3.         The internal  walls:

Eliminate walls within the DOT family.

By creating specialized agencies with specific modal and sectoral mandates, we have laid the base for a policy which at best is going to sub-optimize within each of those areas of competence. This chronic tendency to sub- optimization is endemic within the thick-wall structures (silos) that the most part today permeate and handicap the various agencies and programs.

I would also respectfully suggest that the continued existence of pretty rigid bureaucratic structures and routines within the department serves to stifle good ideas and new sources of energy that I and others have encountered at junior administrative levels within the various agencies. More facilitation of bottom-up flow of ideas and cross-agency collaboration strike me as appropriate for a 21st-century operation.

It is my guess that as the new LaHood team presses ahead with the challenge of redefining the mission of the Department in the far broader ways suggested here, it will begin to be clear how it will be possible to go to work on the task of thinning those walls. (It goes without saying of course that this is hardly the sort of job that can be handled from the bottom up.)

4.         Learning from others:

Eliminate walls between the rest of the world.

 As much as it may hurt to say it, America is not among the world leaders when it comes to many aspects of transportation, and in particular when it comes to sustainable transportation.

There are many ideas and concepts which are doing heavy duty everyday on the roads, rails, and waterways in Europe and in fact in other parts of the world, which the US should be looking more closely at and when they pass the acid test adopted and adapted for effective application here. Our programs for international exchanges and joint work should be strongly ratcheted up as part of the new Department’s revised walls-down mandate. 

5.         Tighten timeframe:

Mr. Secretary, it is my respectful recommendation that at least 50% of all investments and programs be geared to getting visible results within the first four years of this administration -- whether measured in terms of where and how dollars are spent, or in VMT changes or in trip pattern changes, etc and there are many more. All these and more appear to be appropriate measures to see where we are heading and to measure changes.. And just because it concentrates attention on the four years directly ahead, this need not be a policy that throws away the longer-term future. 

To the contrary by focusing attention on projects and investments which are expected to be sustainable (i.e. geared to the long-term) and achieve concrete results within this very short timeframe, it is reasonable to expect that once we have lived this very different experience and actually achieved these goals, we will have rather different thoughts about the longer-term future and strategies that we do today.

The target and results period is 2009-2012. Let's focus and meet the priority challenges before us first.  And then rich from this experience and our successes in really making a difference where it counts, we will be better equipped to tackle the most important long-term investments and challenges.

6.         Full cost pricing:

Eliminate the walls that keep out appropriate evaluation of externalities.

Let's get rid of the free riders all the way down the line?  Any person or mode consuming  scarce resources without paying a fair price for them needs to be reassessed and brought in a coherent manner into the Department’s new transportation and pricing strategy. Those of us who use our cars regularly and fly at the drop of a hat are famously not paying our way. Likewise the cost of goods transport is often heavily subsidized, and though this is very comfortable for us as consumers is definitely not part of a sustainability strategy for the sector. The key of course in all cases it is a matter of externalities which need to be brought into the pricing equation. This can and should be done.

The means for getting this important job done will be to mandate a cost-benefit analysis of any publicly backed infrastructure spending so as to recapture all “external economies” (such as windfall real estate price gains) as the first line of financing such investment.

In some cases the assessments needed to assure accurate pricing are both easy to do, where as in others, especially where there are many different types and levels of benefits, the calculations are more tricky. Still we know enough about how to carry out these exercises that there is no reason not to do so.

As we here all know, these readjustments are going to make big differences in people's choices of when, how, and where they travel. And that is exactly what is needed to create a more rational and effective mobility system.

7.         Innovation from outside:

Eliminate the walls hindering innovation from new sources.

When it comes to transportation in and around cities, for a variety of reasons and contrary to what one might think we are "innovation-lite”. This is a trap which has come about through a long sequence of historical events which now require immediate attention and prudent rectification. There are a large number of barriers to innovation in the transportation sector, and these need to be re-examined and reduced so that new ideas and practices can start to transform the sector.

There is enormous scope, indeed urgency, for sorting out and prioritizing these potential innovations, and because we have not done as well in the past thus far we have been wasting a lot of real opportunities. Much but not all of the push to do ideas, services, and policies will come from beyond the traditional actors in the sector.  We can expect when we begin to remove the barriers, that substantial part of this of this innovation will push will come from the private sector. But the private sector is not the only source of innovative ideas and successful implementations for the transportation sector, so we also need to bear in mind and support good initiatives coming from more transformational public agencies, NGOs, local groups and players, and others.

8.         Civil Society

Eliminate the civil society wall.

Based on my experience both in the United States and abroad, one of the things that strikes me as a major shortcoming of present practices, is the challenge of finding a way to integrate the enormous knowledge, competences and energies of civil society into the transportation decision and action process. This is not an easy thing to achieve, in part because it is unfamiliar and as such very different from past practices; and in part because it involves working with a very large number of very diverse groups, interest, and working styles. It is a real challenge to efficiency and diplomacy to find ways to factor them positively into the processes that now need to be engaged.

But we sit today close to the end of the first decade of the century, and we have an enormous array of tools and procedures that will allow us to bring these groups into the knowledge building and implementation process. Indeed when it comes to actually implementing many of the new measures which are more consistent with the objectives of sustainability and social justice, these same external players will be extremely important part of this process.

To my mind there are many parallels here with the successful campaign that was waged by incoming President Obama as he moved away from the old models of working with narrow corridors of interest and power to a far more inclusive style. It is my recommendation that in redrawing the structures and routines of the new Department, the Secretary and his team will do well to look hard at these lessons from the very recent past.

9.         The gender imbalance:

Eliminate the gender wall.

This particular transformative issue been pointed to elsewhere in these conversations: the quality of our transportation choices and arrangements has suffered greatly from the historic practice of putting decision-making into the hands of a too narrow class of American citizens, for the most part male, middle-class, and almost all car owner/driver's. 

This is not a matter of being politically correct or of compulsive feminism. It is all about for writing, equity, and choices so that all in the community benefit and impacts, negative or positive, are felt across the whole population equitably and not forgetting the young and the elderly and those of all ages with mobility disadvantages who tend to have similar needs.

This forced, high-priority network expansion can open up another priority need that also requires rectification. Specifically it can help us to increase greatly the range of backgrounds and skills we bring into the various decision fora. This therefore gives us a golden opportunity to rectify some of the debilitating historical inadequacies in the sector that have led to its underperformance in so many areas.

So as we look to bring in more women, we need of course to bring in more expertise in the entrenched professional skills such as transport planning, traffic management, engineering, financial planning, technical modeling and the usual array of “hard skills” which have the front stage in the sector. But that is not enough. 

But to get the job done right we also need greatly enhanced competence in such areas as environment, climate, land use, public health, cities, rural areas, community relations, demographics, local government, social services , behavioral psychology, education, childcare, job creation, poverty reduction, communications and all those other key areas of our daily lives which thus far have not received the necessary attention in the transport discussions and decision-making process. And in these, we need both women and men to enhance our understanding of these mission-critical issues and to inform policy and practice in the sector.

However to give this full scope we need to go beyond the usual token representation. We need their strength. And we need their numbers. A scattered handful of females does not appear to suffice to force the change. Put enough women into a forum and they will keep us on our toes. I promise. (The key being the ”enough”.)

One of my diligent Australian colleagues, Michael Yeates, offers interesting way of putting this with a question that I pass on to you with half a grin: "Dracula again in charge of the blood bank?" A bit violent I admit but the image is striking enough to remind us of the kinds of changes that are needed not only in terms of ideas and policies, but also in terms of the players.

More down to earth, here is what Swedish policy and law have to say on this subject:

“The transport system shall be equitable so that it covers both women’s’ and men’s’ transport needs and gives both genders equal influence over the transport system’s creation, shape and function. (To facilitate this goal, by 2010 no traffic/transport policy group will have less than 40% of its members from either gender.)”

I do think we can learn something from the Swedes (and the Norwegians, and the Finns) on this. It’s a bit about how many Americans have over the last couple of decades (and often to their great surprise) become something like color blind. The lesson of history is that once the whole thing is in place nobody even thinks about it any more (unless they walk into a conference or workshop  of all (wo)men). That’s just the normal way to do things if you want great and equitable results in a great and equitable country.

*           *           *

Get this right and it could well signal the beginning of a major revolution in the transportation sector which just might turn out to be every bit as fundamental as President Eisenhower's Intrastate Highway Program that reshaped America (and by example so many other parts of the planet ) in so very many significant ways. Not all of them positive, as we now realize.

Beyond this, the fact is that attitudes and practices in the United States are observed very closely and often blindly copied by institutions and others working in other countries around the world. The American transportation example is an important one and we have every reason to make it one which is not only going to show the way to new thinking and better practices in the United States, but also to instruct and inspire the many other places in the world are looking to us for examples.

So rather than holding our heads and worrying about what India, China, and other nations are going to do in their transportation choices and practices to undermine life quality in their own backyards and destroy the planet at the same time, what about our stepping back and providing them with an example that they can understand, come to admire, and go about adapting and improving it for their own special conditions? 

Leading by example, I believe it is called.

Eric Britton

PS. I would like to thank a number of my international colleagues from the New Mobility Partnerships forum for their critical reading of an earlier draft of this contribution, and their excellent suggestions and counsel.

Second, Mr. LaHood needs to find ways to encourage the direction and implementation of the next federal transportation bill that not only takes care of some of our immediate transportation infrastructure needs, but also keeps in mind some of the most cost-effective programming for allowing people to get to work.  Vanpool, carpool, telework, and commuter assistance programs, while not infrastructure in the traditional sense, are invaluable in helping people continue to get to work using more cost-effective transportation modes.  When every dollar saved in transportation can help keep people in their homes in the current economy, and where fixed-route transit options are not available to many of the families in the outer fringes of our metropolitan regions most stressed by foreclosures, the investment in commuter assistance programming is one that can help keep money available for consumer use.

Third, the Secretary-designate will face the task of reviewing current regulations to find ways to encourage additional buy-in from other stakeholders, including the private sector and employers.  This review should include those rules and interpretations made by the department that prevents the nationwide application of the qualified transportation fringe benefit by federal employees, bars the purchase of vehicles for vanpooling manufactured by American auto companies, and thwarts the acknowledgement of private investment in public transportation, among other pressing issues.

Ray LaHood is an excellent choice to lead the Department of Transportation.  He will, however, hit the ground with an overflowing plate of challenges.  Broadly speaking, this question about “administrative challenges” invites comment on how the Secretary should organize for success in these earliest days.  Here are eight kernels of mostly time-tested advice respectfully offered for the new Secretary. 

The presidential transition introduces an elevated risk of attack by terrorists.  First, and prior to inauguration, you and your new team should intensively study and actively game the considerable responsibilities of DOT and other relevant federal agencies during and after a terrorist attack or a catastrophic natural disaster.  Particular focus should be reserved soonest for scenarios where an attack is directed at transportation infrastructure. Unpack the tool kit and plan for the worst from the get-go.

Second, I wholly concur with my fellow bloggers who urge you to focus relentlessly and immediately on the top 15-20 DOT appointees, and work aggressively to get the whole team confirmed and working.  In any Administration, this process entails a delicate negotiation and collaboration with senior staff at the White House. It is always fair game to say “no” to a suggestion you don’t think is terrific.  Select a diverse, experienced, self-effacing and respectfully opinionated collection of senior leaders. 

If, by the way, you ever conclude you’ve made a significant error regarding a personnel appointment, cut your losses, make the change.  This will also have the secondary benefit of reinforcing for your team that lone rangers, mediocrity, mendacity and megalomania are not tolerated.

Third, as they say, the White House is a building not a person.  It is amazing how often the Secretary will be told that “the White House” wants you to do something – or not do something.  Make someone tell you who.  You work for the President.  Never hesitate to “bother” him with advice you think he needs to hear or to be the only guy in a room of advisors gracefully to offer the President a contrarian view. He just may agree.

Ask for a commitment to meet with the President at least twice a year to give him an unhurried, candid and systematic status report on how things are going.  Establish a close relationship with the OMB team – they have a thankless and almost impossible job.  But don’t be reluctant to take the budget and policy issues of greatest importance to the President himself. You’d be surprised how few Cabinet members exercise that essential prerogative.

Fourth, decide up front to ignore as much as possible the distinction between career and political appointees.  Each has responsibilities and a culture that is naturally different. Drink deeply from the wisdom of your phenomenal career team at DOT.  Invite them to participate fully in sensitive policy discussions.  They will repay you with candor, loyalty and hard work. 

Fifth, starting as soon as you are confirmed, get out of your office as often as you can.  Meet regularly with Congressional and Cabinet colleagues. Drop in unannounced by phone and in person around the Department and ask “what’s up?”  Hit the road to see and study the transportation world as it operates.  Invite smart people, successful operators and other transportation stakeholders to meet routinely with you and your team to tell you what DOT can do better.  This will be the most enjoyable part of the job.

Sixth, make sure you are at the center of Administration and Congressional decisions about how to spend the stimulus funding and, of course, other core transportation funding.  The stimulus plan is the first big test: will DOT be at the table?  Spend significant money on aviation and surface transportation – yes, absolutely needed.  I’d argue for seizing the day to get Administration and Congressional agreement to buy your way out of a few policy logjams and industry conflicts that have stymied, for example, regarding FAA reauthorization and NextGen funding. 

But make sure that the torrent of stimulus funding hits the mark.  Use this opportunity to do business differently. Introduce systemic change in how you generate and spend those funds.  Both big reauthorization bills hit home early in your tenure, so be audacious and act quickly.  Where wholesale change is too much to sell, ask Congress for meaningful flexibility to pilot new ways of doing business.  This is a topic worth much greater detail, and is also the subject of earlier blogs at this site. 

Seventh, spend early time on the budget and regulations. In the first seven months you will be juggling three budgets.  It is essential that you and your team together sweat these details. Also in the early months, find time to review the Department’s long-term regulatory agenda (it is a mind-numbing list).  Give the Department’s leadership your views about significant regulations up front in the process, before they hit your desk for approval months or years later.  Dollars and regulations are the engines of real change.

Finally, prioritize ruthlessly your personal agenda and time, giving structure to how you will deal with the operational, policy, legislative and regulatory problems you will face.  Delegate regarding most all else, and demand accountability for results.  Transportation insiders recognize the perilous state of affairs we face in modernizing our transportation infrastructure.  But the nub of the problem is this: there is yet no true public consensus that these issues really matter.  Without that, we will continue to drift and make only piecemeal change. 

Systemic change is needed, yet we are not yet at a tipping point that will provoke then sustain it.  The country thus needs galvanizing leadership for transportation reform, and a clear roadmap.  Laying ambitious plans in the earliest days to generate broader public understanding and support is perhaps the largest opportunity and challenge awaiting our new Secretary of Transportation.  Call it DOT’s preeminent “administrative challenge” to figure out how to set all that in motion.  Or better yet, call it a vital challenge for the new Administration. 

National Journal asks “is Rep. LaHood up to the task?”  You bet he is, for a host of reasons.  But he and his Administration colleagues will need a sense of disciplined impatience to get everything launched – and then a lot of support from inside Congress and across America.

Two suggestions for Secretary LaHood:

1. Get new perspectives. Patrick Jones was correct to advise that it is vital to “get the right people on the bus”. Who are those people? I would follow the Obama transition team blueprint at the surface transportation level. Make sure you have the best expertise in every area. Smart future transportation investment is going to consider values and outcomes that have been ignored in the past. This has contributed to our current economic and environmental crisis. Find cutting-edge expert resources in each of these areas:

• Job equity
• Energy
• Air quality
• Health
• Climate cap and trade
• Complete streets
• Safety through crash prevention
• Smart growth
• Parking policy
• Walking and bicycling
• Big city transit
• Suburban, small town and rural transit
• Pricing

2. Listen to the mayors.   The mayors get it. They were the first U.S. officials to take real action on climate. They understand the complexity, realities and needs of comprehensive multi-modal systems. Don’t repeat the failure of drawing artificial lines between federal and local interests in transportation. Champion moving as much decision-making as is practical to the local level. Enlist and rally the mayors in your earliest efforts with Congress.

In the current climate, USDOT should see themselves as an enabler; not just a guardian of public money, but an agency that invests in transportation infrastructure to both stimulate the economy in the short-term and make the kinds of long-term investments that align with the President-elect’s long-term environmental and economic goals.  With this in mind, there are a number of strategies I recommend Congressman Lahood consider for the future of USDOT:

• Maintaining USDOT oversight at a high level to assure that grantees have the structure and processes in place to effectively manage projects BUT pulling back some of the onerous federal oversight that hinders the timely execution projects.

• Reexamining federal process execution by looking at case studies of agencies that have a reputation for quality processes that produce good and timely results.

• For instance, it is my belief that older, larger transit agencies like NJ TRANSIT should not be subject to many of the reviews USDOT requires.  These reviews and levels of oversight add little to the real work that needs to get done.  I recommend examining the concept of allowing States to self-certify on certain environmental reviews across modes (FHWA allows agencies to self certify.)

• USDOT has proven its ability, when disasters have occurred, to work with State DOT's to move projects very quickly.  What the country now faces is the economic equivalent of an earthquake in California or a collapse in Minnesota. 

• Consider allowing some projects to move through State level environmental reviews, particularly if the State environmental agency's or other state processes are consistent with NEPA.  Many States have the ability to move projects through the in-state environmental process in about 1/2 the time it takes to go through a full Federal process.  With a few minor adjustments the States could mirror the Federal process and complete the environmental reviews in significantly less time.

President-elect Obama has shouldered Transportation Secretary Designee Ray Lahood with the immense responsibility of implementing the transportation infrastructure component of the pending economic recovery package. As Ken Mead points out, the stimulus package could include at least a $300 billion investment in infrastructure. With passage of the stimulus package expected in late January or early February of 2009, Congressman Lahood will need to ensure the USDOT regulatory structure is prepared to efficiently allocate the enormous amount of money expected to be provided by Congress and the President-elect. Chairman Oberstar’s proposal to apportion funding with a strict 90-day “use it, or lose it” threshold will further require that the DOT regulatory structure move beyond that of a pure “regulator.”

Beyond the regulatory structure, I would urge Transportation Secretary Designee Lahood to focus on multimodalism, particularly in the more urban areas. Many transportation leaders have concentrated on managing congestion – I would argue focusing on multimodalism is a much richer strategy to address green house gas and energy issues.  The relieving congestion mentality has also placed the auto and its movement, regardless of its impacts, at the top of the planning and implementation pyramid.  I am hopeful Congressman Lahood will reassess this way of thinking in the immediate future with the implementation of the economic recovery package and use those funds, to the greatest extent possible, to focus on multimodalism.

 2.      Get the right people on the bus. This is one of the first rules of good management. A lot of people will worry first about where the bus is going. Forget about it. If you have the right people on the bus, you can take it wherever you want to go. Surround yourself with smart people who have experience and a sense of urgency. Then start driving the bus. You’ll be amazed at where you can go.

 3.      Make friends. Ray LaHood is a Republican in a Democratic administration. Your cabinet colleagues won’t say anything impolitic to your face. But because you and Gates are the two Rs in a D administration, don’t hold your breath waiting to be invited to the secret after-hours rump session where the important decisions are made. Use your impressive bipartisan coalition building skills to make yourself invaluable to the new administration.

 4.      Stay new. If there’s one thing about Barack Obama and his leadership that stands out, it’s that his thinking is fresh and new. He is open to a seemingly endless supply of information and advice from a remarkably diverse set of sources. He doesn’t worship many sacred cows and neither should you. Many of the responses to this question from my fellow experts sound as if they came from policy statements that are at least two years old. The world has changed. We are in the midst of the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The thinking that got us into this mess is not going to get us out of it. Be new; think new; stay new.

 5.      Find and develop net new revenues. In response to this question, almost all of the other experts talk about the need for funding but few of them mention where it’s going to come from. Maybe it’s just manna from heaven. Old thinking (see #4 above). Only one expert responder seriously mentions the word revenue. Frank Busalacchi says, “All modes and all transportation networks need sustainable revenue sources.” Amen, Frank. The current system we use to pay for transportation system investments and operations is broke, broken, and unsustainable. In fairness to the other experts, many of them mention revenues when they discuss “How to Write the Next Transportation Bill.” Deron Lovaas, Ken Orski, Bob Poole, and Pete Ruane all say tolling and congestion pricing should play a role. Bob Poole and Michael Replogle say Congress should remove the remaining federal obstacles to tolling of Interstate highways. Ken Orski, Bob Poole, and Steve Van Beek all endorse the transition to vehicle miles traveled (VMT)-based user fees. Rob Puentes sums it all up when he says we need a new beginning. Yes. We need a new beginning that focuses on net new revenues that are sustainable over the long-term.

 6.      Be the first person to have lunch with Rob Atkinson. Rob is President of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (and a contributor to this blog) and chair of the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission created by SAFETEA-LU.  Ask Rob about the Commission’s report (it’s due to be released very soon). Just as importantly, ask Rob about transportation’s role in the future economy.

It is my hope that the new Secretary of Transportation, drawing upon his considerable experience, will chart a course early that yields critical results over a four year period.  We need a strategic vision to guide the approach to regulations, financing and legislation.  It has been my sense that groups involved in aviation policy find far more upon on which to agree than disagree.  And, I truly believe all groups are eager to work with the new Secretary of Transportation to chart of productive course.

Several important regulatory areas have been addressed by others in comments made below concerning the air traffic controllers and modernization of our air traffic control system moving further with satellite based systems to name just a couple of specific concerns.

I suggest there are two addition areas that are important for the new Secretary of Transportation.

The first relates to Homeland Security initiatives and aviation.  I know of no community any more security conscious than the general aviation community…..indeed, all of the aviation community has a tremendous commitment to protection of the homeland.  For this reason, it is important for the new Secretary and his team to bring balance to the interagency process for evaluating security measures.  Regulation imposing high costs without clear benefits is not what any segment of aviation needs now.  A strong advocate for the aviation community is important as security concerns are constantly reviewed.

The second area where leadership will be welcomed concerns international aviation considerations.  The United States has been remarkably successful in capturing the growing international markets for aircraft.  Along with this has been a larger role in training pilots from around the world.  The quality of US aircraft and our US based training programs is important, but regulatory initiatives around the world threaten our substantial advantages and could reduce the utility of private aviation around the world.

The new Secretary of Transportation has an international leadership position that can be used to positively impact the global rules setting entities, especially in Europe.  Enhancing DOT’s international leadership and improving the global regulatory environment would be in our national interest.

Unfortunately, without a multi-year Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill, many airports have received only 35 percent of their anticipated funds from the Airport Improvement Program (AIP). This has forced a number of airports to delay critical infrastructure projects which have important safety and security benefits. In addition to AIP program funding, airports also depend on the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) user fee to also help fund local airport infrastructure projects. Currently, the PFC cap is set at $4.50.  Construction cost inflation has eroded the value of the PFC so it is worth only half what it was worth when the $4.50 cap was set. This again, puts airports at a disadvantage as they are unable to make the investments necessary to improve safety and security at their facilities as well as relieve passenger delays and congestion. 

The new Transportation Secretary will also need to implement air traffic modernization, which will help to relieve congestion in our nation’s busy airspace. The FAA predicts more than 1 billion airline passengers by 2016, and more than 1.2 billion by 2020. Airport infrastructure improvements are not only necessary, but vital for the modernized air traffic control system to work.  

While these are complex problems, I believe Congressman Ray LaHood will bring bipartisan action and leadership to help find solutions. Along with the rest of the airport community, upon his confirmation I look forward to working with Congressman Ray LaHood in his new role as Secretary of the Department of Transportation.

As I have said before, Congressman LaHood has a well-deserved reputation for his even-handed, thoughtful and deliberative approach to complex issues. I certainly have every reason to believe that he will be confirmed. At that time, we will support the Secretary in his efforts to address transportation issues that are critical to the revitalization of the nation’s economy and the millions of people who fly and ship on our nation’s airlines. I believe that his most pressing challenge will be the expeditious modernization of our aviation infrastructure. The inefficient operation of our outdated air traffic control system results in unnecessary flight delays, fuel burn, emissions output and costs. DOT needs to implement workable solutions to airspace congestion and break away from the ideological, nonproductive experiments introduced by the current administration. In addition, the funding for reauthorization of the Airport and Airway Trust Fund must be fair and consistent -- to ensure the airlines’ potential to generate economic growth and to best serve our customers. Last, but not least, we can do nothing that would compromise the safest air transportation system in the world. Secretary LaHood’s challenges will be many but he will have staunch support from our industry.

The President-elect has chosen wisely in his appointment of Representative Ray LaHood as the next US DOT Secretary.  The transportation community is anxious to have a strong partner in the agency, and we are all anxious to work with the new Secretary to create and execute a transportation system that will serve us in the 21st century.  To that end, members of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, of which I am one, would welcome the opportunity to meet with the Secretary-designee to review the findings and recommendations in the Commission’s report, released last January.  

Representative LaHood comes to the position with a wide breadth of experience.  He understands transportation and understands the challenges that lie ahead. I would recommend specific focus on three issues that I see as key among the challenges that he and US DOT will face.

Address the need for transportation revenue.  All modes and all transportation networks need sustainable revenue sources.  In the realm of highways and transit, we face the need to reconstruct our national network and development new transit systems to address increased demand.  In the short term, we need a leader and partner in US DOT to assess how we can re-fund the Highway Trust Fund.  We also need visionary thinking about the long term system, whether it be a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) approach or something else.  We need to assure that there are regional pilots in the next bill to test any new system, and we cannot do this well without strong national leadership.

Deliver on the vision of a passenger rail network.Create an institutional framework within US DOT to work with states and other organizations on funding their passenger rail systems.  When Congress authorized funding for states to implement their passenger rail projects in the Amtrak reauthorization legislation, they took a big step forward in making passenger rail a real option to Americans.  However, states need a partner on rail similar to the successful partnership they have had with the federal government for building highways and transit systems.  The new Secretary will need to quickly assess how the agency is equipped to become a partner on rail project delivery.  I would recommend a new office linked closely to the office of the Secretary.  I hope the Secretary will consult with states very soon on this important issue.

Work with states and other organizations to create a well coordinated intermodal transportation network.  Engage the best and brightest transportation experts from the states on how to think through the institutional and funding issues.  We need to do a better job working with other organizations - both public and private sectors -- and we need to deliver projects more quickly. We also need a new institutional framework to construct a fully intermodal national freight network -- and this includes regional freight rail lines that in some areas are quickly becoming the responsibility of states.  The other challenge is to create better tools to evaluate intermodal projects and to assure that federal funding policy doesn't favor one transportation solution over another.

We have an opportunity for a fresh look at transportation funding and policy issues.  By reviewing the issues in the Commission report and working with transportation experts, I have no doubt that our new transportation Secretary will have great success ushering in the bold policy changes that we need to build a transportation system that will sustain us for the next half century. 

There are two major challenges facing incoming DOT Secretary Ray LaHood: jump-starting the revamp of the nation’s obsolescent air traffic control (ATC) system and re-inventing the federal surface transportation program. And since both the Federal Aviation Administration and the surface transportation program face reauthorization in 2009, LaHood has his work cut out for him. Due to space limitations, I will only address the first of these in this post.

In aviation, there is broad consensus that the current radar-based ATC system is no longer scalable to handle the forecast doubling and then tripling of air traffic over the next several decades. There is also a consensus among aviation experts and practitioners worldwide that a satellite-navigation-based system should replace it. The U.S. version is called NextGen; it involves large amounts of automation and digital communications, in addition to redesign of the airspace and consolidation of facilities. The estimated costs are about $20 billion in FAA facilities and equipment and another $20 billion in on-board equipment for US-based aircraft, from airliners to business jets to small private planes.

Unfortunately, the FAA has a poor track record on implementing new technologies, with most projects going significantly over budget and being delivered years late—and NextGen is far more complex than previous component replacements. FAA has great difficulty consolidating facilities, since every such change affects jobs in congressional districts. And it cannot do long-term financing of capital investments (e.g., by issuing revenue bonds), but must meet capital needs out of annual appropriations from an always unpredictable federal budget process.

Making this even more complex is the interaction of safety regulation with capacity increases. Unlike nearly all the ATC providers in Europe, Canada, and Australia, the FAA along combines safety regulation and ATC provision in a single agency—i.e., it self-regulates. Everywhere else, ATC service provision has been put at arm’s length from air safety regulation, eliminating this conflict of interest and ensuring that trade-offs (e.g., on using new technology to reduce separation between planes on parallel-runway approaches) are made transparently.

As a first step toward serious ATC reform, LaHood and his new FAA Administrator should remove the FAA’s Air Traffic Organization from that agency and set it up as a separate modal agency within DOT, regulated at arm’s length by the FAA. Next, he and the new Administrator should review the work of the 1997 National Civil Aviation Review Commission, chaired by Norm Mineta, and former Vice President Al Gore’s 1995 proposal for a U.S. Air Traffic Services Corporation. Both called for an ATC provider with significant financial and managerial autonomy (somewhat like the US Postal Service and the Tennessee Valley Authority), able to issue revenue bonds to fund large-scale modernization such as NextGen. We can learn a lot from the experiences of other countries in implementing ATC reform over the past decade, as documented in Managing the Skies, a 2008 book by Clinton V. Oster and John S. Strong. 

A business-as-usual FAA reauthorization is the last thing we need. But without strong leadership from the new Administration, that’s what we are likely to get. And that means the promise of NextGen will be a long time being realized.

The next Secretary of Transportation must be at the forefront of the economic recovery, the key linchpin in the effort to create jobs while ensuring that we finally stop digging ourselves deeper and deeper into a hole of oil addiction.  He must have the President’s support to call the nay sayer’s bluff when they says that a comprehensive recovery plan that includes investment in transit and new transportation innovations would come at the expense of jobs.

At this very moment, Capitol Hill is attempting to put together an economic recovery package to move our economy out of the worst crisis since the Great Depression. A major portion of this infusion of federal dollars is expected to be what Obama has called “the single largest new investment in our national infrastructure since the creation of the federal highway system in the 1950s.” Coupled with this overhaul is Obama’s desire to utilize a green recovery to create well-paying jobs that cannot be exported, reduce our dependence on oil, and set ourselves on the path to compete and thrive in the 21st Century.

Yet to move from rhetoric to change, it is critical that President-elect Obama fully empower Secretary LaHood to bring about the new energy and economic future that Candidate Obama called his number one priority.

Fortunately, Secretary LaHood — along with the new President and Congress — have real options before them that will create good jobs, make us oil independent, and reduce our climate-damaging emissions. There are currently billions of dollars worth of job-creating, green infrastructure projects that are ready to go once they receive adequate funding. These projects not only stimulate immediate economic activity and work, the first and most critical goal of any stimulus investments, but they will set local communities on a path towards energy independence and begin to modernize our national transportation system.

The choice for Secretary of Transportation is a manifestation of President-elect Obama’s promises for change on the campaign trail.  If Obama is serious about enacting broad reforms that will revitalize our economy and show long term vision for our nation’s infrastructure, then the new Secretary of Transportation must help put America on a high speed train towards the future.

The second is the need for interdepartmental solutions to transportation problems.  Whether the issue is the project delivery process, the interrelated issues of energy use and greenhouse gas emissions, or better coordinating science and technology strategies (and others), the federal government needs to work better in pulling the work of different agencies together.  For an issue such as climate change, if Carol Browner is given the clear authority to coordinate and integrate policy approaches, this can work.  It also means that Congress's committee systems need to be responsive as well.  For transportation, this would be quite significant as it means our policies will be developed in conjunction with priorities of other agencies and other subcommitees and committees.  It is hard to overemphasize how challenging this will be for the current way policies are developed and legislated.

Regarding the project delivery process, concurrent agency and national/state/local reviews will help, but much of the delay is due to (1) political issues (which really requires leadership and sometimes compromise on the part of project proponents) and (2) real consideration of alternatives earlier in the process.  From my experience a great deal of delay is caused by project management teams that have to back up and re-do parts of the process again after failing to drive their preferred (and only) alternative through the process.  This suggests one of the best ways to improve project delivery is to understand what has worked well and what hasn't.  My own view is that these approaches are likely to be more effective than attempting to modify the current clean air, clean water, and other base statutes.

For more see enotrans.com.  

“President-elect Obama’s choice of Ray LaHood to head the Department of Transportation highlights the need for bipartisan efforts to fix our broken transportation system. Congressman LaHood will face some of the greatest transportation and infrastructure challenges in our nation’s history, but also some of the greatest opportunities. His first priority, a green economic recovery package, will require a strong commitment to repairing our broken bridges, roads, and tunnels, and investing in new and existing public transit. All of this will help to create green jobs and re-charge our economy. Congressman LaHood has always worked across the aisle and with environmental groups, and, at this pivotal moment for our nation, we look forward to working with him to chart a course toward a clean, energy-efficient transportation system.”

I believe he is up to the task, so long as he presses for real reforms to a program that has lost the faith of the public and that has become decoupled from national energy and environmental objectives. In our report "Transition to Green," the team of experts that I co-chaired laid out a three-part plan for the incoming Administration, as I explain in my blog:

We recommend the following actions (see the bigger document for legislative and budget ideas too):

1) Clean transportation technologies and fuels:

• Boost CAFE standards above the floor set by Congress in last year's energy bill, as is within the authority of DOT, to 42 miles per gallon by 2020, helping to achieve the President-Elect's goal of saving as much oil as we import from Middle East and Venezuela.
• Maximize heavy truck fuel economy standards, as authorized by last year's energy bill, so they apply beginning in model year 2015, also saving a lot of oil.
• Remove language from the Bush Administration rulemaking that mentions preemption of greenhouse gas standards, and instead make DOT collaborate with EPA in improving vehicle performance.
• Form a low-carbon aviation initiative in lieu of the Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative, the focus of which is too broad in some respects (studying high-carbon fuels) and too narrow in others (efficiency is not covered).

2) Reformed surface transportation policy:

• Establish environmental and health performance standards, to take us away from the decades-old policy model of relaying billions of dollars of taxpayer money based on outdated formulas, digging us deeper and deeper into oil addiction and the pollution spewed by our fleet of vehicles.
• Establish goals for scaling up use of alternatives to cars, which will require dramatically increased investments in commuter rail, buses as well as bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure. There's increasing interest in diversifying our electricity portfolio so that consumers have low-carbon options like wind power; similarly we need to diversity our transportation portfolio to provide low-carbon travel choices like public transportation.
• Revise planning guidelines for state and metro areas, so that projects address the needs of all users, not just drivers.
• Require "complete streets," or streets that provide safe and easy access for pedestrians and bicyclists (how about more sidewalks, for example?).

3) Transportation as means for solving, not exacerbating, the climate challenge:

• Create an "infrastructure czar" in the White House to align the use our taxpayer dollars so that we invest in low-carbon choices.
• Reorganize DOT so that "intermodalism" -- connections between ways of traveling -- is a priority.
• Create an Assistant Secretary for Climate Change, with real funding, responsibility and accountability.
• Develop targets for cutting global warming pollution, and the tools to accurately measure emission reductions.
• Create a national freight planning board, so that the we can handle growing goods movement without digging us deeper into oil dependence.

The U.S. economy is faltering and the economic stimulus package that President-Elect Obama is putting together is sorely needed. But President-Elect Obama and Congressman LaHood should focus the bulk of the stimulus package, as well as the reauthorization bill, toward legitimate highway infrastructure needs.

As mentioned in a previous post, every $1 billion of federal highway investment supports 34,799 jobs in our nation. Focusing on highway construction projects that alleviate critical choke points in major freight corridors will put people back to work, spur production within supporting industries, help our environment and create long-term transportation benefits for commuters and businesses.

Secretary- designate LaHood should resist any diversion of transportation funds into non-highway or non-infrastructure items. If correctly targeted, economic stimulus funds and the highway reauthorization bill have the opportunity to reshape the economy. With freight tonnage projected to increase 25 percent in next 10 years our nation must realize the need to increase our ability to move freight efficiently.

A long-term strategy to reduce congestion around transportation choke points will be necessary for U.S. industry to stay competitive in the world market. The nation cannot afford to divert funds from the economic stimulus bill and highway reauthorization to nonessential projects.

I believe incoming Secretary LaHood understands the essentiality of transportation infrastructure, and ATA looks forward to working with him to meet these challenges.

The biggest challenge facing Secretary-designate LaHood is that Americans have lost confidence in the value of investing in transportation infrastructure. It wasn’t always that way. Americans – proud that we had built the world’s most efficient and effective transportation network - were once happy to pay for transportation projects.  But over time, thanks to earmarks, wasteful spending, and growing traffic, that pride has been replaced with amusement, frustration and even anger. Today many Americans are reluctant to invest in transportation because they have no confidence that money will be spent on the kind of projects that matter.

This lack of confidence has made increasing gas taxes taboo, private public partnerships red herrings and tolls anathema. In short, Americans’ lack of investor confidence is undermining our ability as a nation to pay for vital transportation projects. So the first and most pressing challenge facing the next Secretary will be to earn back investor confidence in our transportation system. That opportunity will come very soon, assuming Congress is successful in passing a stimulus package that includes infrastructure investments. The next Secretary will have to show Americans that their money is being spent wisely, on projects that will make commuting easier and shipping more efficient and the air cleaner. 

Secretary-designate LaHood also will have to show Americans that their transportation dollars won’t sit idle while vital projects are stymied by endless red tape and protracted environmental reviews. He will have to find ways to cut years off the 13-year average time span it now takes to get a new road, runway or airport built in this country. He will have to show Americans their money is paying for concrete and steel, instead of consultants’ reports and lawyers’ bills. And he will have to show them that we can build projects where and when they are needed, instead of where and when they are convenient.

The next Secretary will have to get Americans to once again believe in our ability to build highways that work, airports that flow and transit systems that matter. If they believe in it, they’ll pay for it. If they don’t, we will be stuck with the same debates and dilemmas for years to come.

What we have experienced the past few years is the very worst labor relations we've seen since the period leading up to the PATCO strike of 1981. It is the disastrous state of labor relations and declining margin of safety that has defined the outgoing FAA leadership's legacy as a total failure.

The FAA's attempts at modernizing the air traffic control system over the past six years have come in behind schedule and over budget as Americans wait longer and longer through agonizing flight delays. The FAA has foolishly and recklessly relegated the employees most responsible for the safety of the system -- the controllers-- to the sidelines while making bad decision after bad decision when it comes to technology, airspace and air traffic control procedures.

NATCA was kicked off of every modernization project a few years ago. This was a radical departure from the period of the late 1990s and early 2000s when we worked collaboratively with the FAA and actually had controllers assigned to over five dozen modernization projects, new pieces of equipment and various procedure modifications. The result was the greatest period of modernization than the previous three decades combined. We need to get back to that type of collaboration and we have a lot of hope that the incoming administration will usher in a new era of safety professionals working together for the good of the system, instead of management treating its employees as the enemy.

We were very happy to hear Secretary-designee LaHood say, during his remarks on Friday, "(President-elect Obama's) agenda for the Department of Transportation is my agenda for the Department of Transportation." This was important for NATCA members to hear, because during his tenure in the U.S. Senate, President-elect Obama's commitment to aviation safety was steadfast and his commitment to the fair treatment of safety professionals at the FAA was unyielding. The rapidly diminishing morale within the FAA workforce is undermining our nation's ability to retain the safest aviation system in the world and the professionals keeping it that way. Labor peace at the FAA is the first order of business to set a course for increased aviation safety, efficiency, and modernization.

Additionally, in other developing news last week that is relevant to this discussion, federal managers urged President-elect Obama to consider alternatives to a reform proposal that would reduce the number of mid-level managers in government. They claim that previous Administration cuts in management positions in the past were an overreaction to criticism over a bloated federal workforce.

Obama announced his government reform plan at a campaign appearance last September, pledging to fire managers of poor-performing programs and to appoint a White House team made up of government professionals to review programs for waste and efficiency. The coalition believes that reducing management positions would be problematic, given that most of the coalition's members are facing heavier workloads and more responsibility, not only for federal employees, but also contractors. They claim the effects of the cutbacks during the Clinton Administration were problematic and that those effects are still being felt today.

It seems that the FAA has a strong belief in the coalition's philosophy, seeing that the Agency continues to increase the number of management positions while depleting the critically staffed controller ranks. If you remember back in 2003 when the FAA rolled out the ATO, the basic premise was to create a more efficient structure and reduce redundancy in the administration of the FAA. Instead, they've created a bloated management structure, in which management positions have increased, efficiencies have decreased, and the cost savings that was promised has never materialized. The Obama proposal for government reform is right on. Special analysis should be completed on the inefficient, overloaded management structure at the FAA. This is a subject we've been talking about for some time, not only with Congress and the media, but also with the Obama Transition team and all of the candidates for Administrator. It will certainly be a subject of discussion with Secretary-designee LaHood when we meet with him.

First, the USDOT leadership team must be assembled and this, of course, involves vetting, background checks, and the nomination and confirmation of more than 15 PAS appointees. Rest assured, this can be a grueling and intense process even with a Democratic majority in the Senate. Second, the tone must be set at the outset that these senior leadership appointees must work as a team and not just as a set of individual modal stovepipes. Intermodal working relationships are most difficult to establish a year or two down the road. Third, the transportation component of an unprecedented economic stimulus package may well be north of $350 billion-an amount potentially five times greater than the Department's annual budget, and by most accounts the stimulus will become law shortly after President-elect Obama is sworn in. Now, you might expect a comment like this from a former Inspector General, but the fact is that Secretary-designate LaHood must see to it that oversight processes are put in place immediately to assure that the money is approved and spent in accordance with law, free of waste, fraud, and abuse, and that projects the money is approved for and expended on achieve both a transportation and job creation objective. Of course, the Inspector General has a large role here, but so too do the DOT operating administrations-FAA, FHWA, FTA, FRA, MARAD. And fourth, there are a set of high profile and controversial regulatory matters that will be waiting on the Secretary's desk and all of them received attention either during the campaign or the transition. Ones that come immediately to mind are the continuation of the NAFTA cross-border demonstration program, various rules concerning public-private partnerships in the surface transportation arena, aviation matters such as the slot auction rule for the New York area airports and the NPRM for ADS-B and avionics equipage, pending alliance applications of at least two major air carriers.

Finally, the foregoing is not intended to be and is not an exhaustive list of the major regulatory and administrative priorities, but they are among the very heavy hitter items that require careful navigation to avoid minefields. Also, Secretary-designate LaHood will take the helm at DOT with the benefit of the hard and diligent work of President-elect Obama's Transportation Transition Team as well as the insights of outgoing Secretary Peters. I would also strongly recommend a cover to cover reading of the Inspector General's recently issued report on the Top Management Challenges facing the new Secretary.