The single most important event occurred in the beginning of the year with Congress and the President signing the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA). This bill was revolutionary in at least three ways. First, it recognized the importance of the role that transportation infrastructure plays in our economy. Second, it expanded national investment in port, freight rail, intercity rail, and high speed rail systems. Finally, it came at a time when funding for transportation projects that were under way around the country were in jeopardy of shut down due to the overall downturn in transportation fund revenues at the state, local and national level. There is no doubt that ARRA was not only badly needed to create jobs and jumpstart the economy, but that also it was necessary to keep vital transportation projects from closing, which would have had a disastrous impact on our slow climb out of the economic hole we are in.

In California, we have used our ARRA funds to respond to conditions at all levels. A significant portion of our funds are being invested by the State and local governments to respond to system maintenance, rehabilitation and repair backlogs as well as for projects that will have long term economic benefits. We were able to either advance or continue projects responding to congestion, as on Interstate 405 in Los Angeles County; goods movement and international trade, as on Interstate 905, which runs parallel to the U.S. and Mexico Border in San Diego County; and replacement of outdated and seismically deficient structures such as Doyle Drive on US 101 in San Francisco. In addition, we believe that we are well placed to make the most of any High Speed and Intercity Rail funds that are granted through the ARRA discretionary programs. Most important, as we are awarding more and more contracts, we are seeing a rise in construction sector employment.

The second most important story is the one that did not happen, which is the reauthorization of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA – LU). At the beginning of the year, it appeared that we would see a major breakthrough in the next authorization, with an increase in funding, more clearly defined national transportation priorities, and greater investment in freight infrastructure. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee draft authorization proposal also made it clear that consideration of climate change will have strong influence over how states plan for, and select transportation projects in the future. The proposal echoed planning and project selection language that appeared in the Waxman/Markey and Boxer Kerry climate change bills. If it had been enacted, there would have been an emphasis on lowering vehicle miles traveled, which would elevate intelligent transportation strategies, transit, and rail as alternatives to business as usual.

Finally, the third story is one that is continuing to unfold. It is the reason for the first two stories and is affected by it, and that is the delicate state of the national economy and its impact on transportation habits and revenues. For the most part of 2009, federal, state, and local transportation revenues remained well below that of previous years. However, as conditions seem to be improving, we are beginning to see a minor uptick in vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Normally, we would expect that a rise in VMT would be accompanied by a proportional rise in revenues. However, it appears that people are resorting to more fuel-efficient vehicles for travel, and businesses have learned how to maximize the efficiency of their fleets, which is depressing fuel consumption and consequently, fuel tax revenues. In other words, it is starting to look like there has been a fundamental shift in the national psyche towards frugality and efficiency’ which is going to affect how we finance and fund transportation needs.

At this point, it is looking like we will see a general improvement in the economy in 2010. However, it appears that we will not have an immediate return to the robust economy of a few years ago. This means that it is likely that we will be tempted to take a "ginger" approach to how we respond to transportation issues, because of concerns over modest revenues and fears that implementing any new funding sources might slow growth. Nevertheless, because transportation system efficiency and the quality of our infrastructure have such a high level of economic effect, we are going to need to address some form of legislation, be it a full authorization, or a transitional hybrid/authorization bill that will need to address at least the following three policy issues in the next year:

1. Revenues:

The next bill will have to take a serious look at revenue streams both existing and proposed, and evaluate them for technical feasibility, impact to the economy, and potential fund levels. More importantly, we are going to have to take the bold steps of implementing those types of revenue streams that have the greatest overall benefit. The year 2009 taught us at least two lessons; one, the fuel tax is not going to be an effective resource forever; and two, our ability to borrow against future revenues is becoming more limited. This means that we are going to have to adopt alternatives that will be stable in a backdrop of increased fuel efficiency and use of alternative fuels, and reduced vehicle miles traveled. It also means that government alone is not going to solve the problem and as part of this policy shift, we are going to have to work on improving our ability to collaborate with the private sector. Finally, we need to return to a pay as you go environment to prevent these new revenue streams from being consumed by debt payment.

The last decade had many watershed moments. September 11, 2001 forever changed how we consider the security of our transportation system. 2008 made us realize that our economy is more fragile than we had thought and that growth in VMT is not going to continue forever. 2009 showed us that investment in transportation can be a very effective tool for stimulating our economy. I believe that 2010 has great potential for being the next turning point for transportation and if we can be bold in the actions we take; it will be.

Important transportation developments of 2009:

Distracted Driving

In 2009 Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood brought the dangers of distracted driving into the national spotlight. Anything that takes a person’s eyes off the road, hands off the steering wheel, or mind off of driving poses a safety risk. Using a cell phone or other handheld electronic device to read or send text messages combines all three actions, posing the highest risk of driver distraction.

Over a year ago, trucking industry leaders called the nation’s attention to the dangers of text messaging and cell phone use on the road. The American Trucking Associations (ATA) and its member carriers support a ban on the use of electronic handheld devices to read, write or send a text message while operating a motor vehicle. Our Executive Committee also voted to support the ALERT Drivers Act of 2009 (S. 1536) that would require states to ban the practice of reading, writing or sending a text message on a handheld device while driving.

America needs strong laws that apply to all drivers, but legislation alone will not solve the problem. Unsafe behaviors like text messaging while driving have become socially acceptable, so we need to change the attitudes toward and perceptions of these actions. As Secretary LaHood said, if we don’t take action now the problem of texting while driving will only get worse, especially among our nation’s youngest drivers.

In the past, comprehensive highway safety campaigns have transformed the public’s perceptions and actions and have resulted in increased seatbelt use and reduced the incidence of driving while under the influence. Similar efforts are needed to make the use of handheld electronic devices while driving socially unacceptable.

We can accomplish this by:

• Supporting research, data collection and analysis that reveal the degree and extent of the problem;
• Communicating the need for change;
• Promoting public education and awareness efforts;
• Using technology to reduce distractions caused by technology;
• Developing policy or legislation to drive change;
• Supporting tough penalties and effective, highly visible enforcement; and
• Properly funding the above.

Highway Trust Fund

Twice the federal government had to inject money into the Highway Trust Fund to prevent insolvency. Currently, 18.3 cents from every dollar spent on gasoline and 24.3 cents from every dollar spent on diesel goes into the trust fund. This tax has remained unchanged since 1993, yet costs of highway projects continue to escalate with the costs of labor and materials. This is a very poor formula for maintaining a healthy, let alone robust trust fund. Current tax rates cannot support our current highway needs, let alone additional forms of transportation.

In Feb. 2009, the National Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing Commission concluded that the fuel tax is the best available option for funding highway infrastructure in the near term, but that it must be adjusted to meet today’s demands. ATA agrees with the Commission’s recommendation on the need for an adjustment in the federal fuel tax, provided those revenues are focused on the most important projects to improve highways and not diverted to other purposes as they have been in the past.

ARRA Stimulus Funds

The U.S. Government allocated $26.6 billion for highway, road and bridge projects as part of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. While these funds have prompted a short-term focus on infrastructure projects, the funding represents just 3.3 percent of the total $787 billion stimulus package enacted by the White House in February. This small amount will do little to address the dire need for expansion and repair of our National Highway System (NHS).

Our nation needs a much larger, long-term investment in highway infrastructure. By 2020, economists expect more than a 26 percent increase in overall freight tonnage. Our nation's ability to efficiently move this freight will have a tremendous effect on our economy. Inefficiencies currently plague our transportation system. Last year the Texas Transportation Institute estimated that Americans wasted $87 billion in the form of 2.8 billion gallons of fuel and 4.2 billion hours because of traffic congestion in all 437 urban areas across the country. This cost will only go up as the economy rebounds and freight traffic increases.

Meeting the transportation challenges of the 21st Century is critical to the long-term prosperity of the United States. As our population and economy grows, a national transportation policy that focuses on efficiency, safety, congestion reduction, and the improvement of freight movement around our nation's worst bottlenecks, as determined by the Federal Highway Administration, will facilitate economic growth and help our industries compete in the global economy.

Top transportation policy priorities of 2010:

Highway Reauthorization Bill

It’s absolutely essential that Congress focus on passing a new highway bill that will deliver projects that address national priorities, beginning with the expansion and repair of our aging National Highway System. To maximize the funds allocated in the reauthorization bill, the federal government should tie infrastructure investment to system performance by requiring recipients of federal funds to meet performance standards related to safety, infrastructure condition, congestion reduction and emissions. We must monitor how well we’re doing in delivering value. Moreover, infrastructure projects must recognize the critical role of freight transportation in meeting the nation's economic needs.

The next highway reauthorization bill must maintain a strong federal role and focus on delivering projects that create the most value for our economy and for the taxpayers’ money.

Truck Size and Weight Reform

For decades states have permitted trucks exceeding the 80,000-pound federal weight limit to operate on secondary roads. The final fiscal 2010 transportation spending bill includes language allowing Maine and Vermont to conduct one-year pilot programs granting heavier six-axle trucks access to interstate highways within their borders. The pilot program allows trucks in Vermont that weigh up to 90,000 pounds to travel on interstates. Vermont can also permit trucks hauling certain products such as unprocessed milk, forest products or quarry products to weigh up to 99,000 pounds. In Maine, the pilot allows trucks that weigh up to 100,000 pounds to use interstates. Any state can allow trucks over 80,000 to use state roads. Increasing allowable truck size and weight limits on our Interstate Highways will benefit our nation's economic productivity, reduce emissions, and improve safety.

At a recent conference hosted by the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute, transportation experts from around the world discussed a soon-to-be-released study that finds the U.S. is lagging in truck productivity, safety and sustainability when compared with Europe, Canada, Australia, and Mexico due to our overly restrictive size and weight limits.

ATA supports allowing more productive vehicles to operate on the Interstate Highway System, consistent with sound engineering standards and safety. At present, 6-axle trucks weighing up to, and in some cases exceeding, 97,000 pounds are used extensively throughout the industrialized world. Bringing our federal regulations more in-line with international competitors will reduce logistics costs for businesses and consumers, allowing them to better compete in the global economy.

In addition, a study sponsored by FHWA found that LCVs have a crash rate half that of the trucks they would replace.

Improving Highway Safety

While we’ve made great strides in highway safety, all motorists have a stake in making our nation’s highways safer. According to the most recent figures, released in 2008, the number of traffic fatalities reached its lowest level since 1961, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The number of people killed in motor vehicle crashes in the United States declined 9.7 percent, from 41,259 in 2007 to 37,261 in 2008. Further, truck-involved crash fatalities in 2008 declined 12 percent, dropping from 4,822 in 2007 to 4,229. This encouraging trend should act as a catalyst for highway users to focus on greater improvements.

Faced with high fuel prices and a faltering economy, Americans changed their driving habits, driving less and slowing down to conserve fuel. This helped improve safety conditions on our highways because speeding and traveling too fast for conditions top the list of unsafe driving behaviors. Along with changes in driving habits, improvements in highway safety also correlate with promoting best practices and increasing awareness.

In 2009, ATA introduced an 18-point highway safety agenda that focuses on three areas to further improve safety on our nation’s highways: improve the safety of commercial and passenger drivers, improve the safety of our vehicles, and improve motor carrier performance.

This progressive agenda supports speed governing all Class 7 and Class 8 trucks at 65 mph or below and setting a national maximum speed limit for all motor vehicles at 65 mph. Also, the agenda supports policies that reduce or eliminate driver distractions caused by electronics such as cell phones and GPS devices. Moreover, ATA’s safety agenda supports exploring incentives and penalties that will motivate states to pass primary safety belt laws. Data suggest the trucking industry’s focus on encouraging safety belt use is working; figures from the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance’s Roadcheck 2009 indicate that safety belt usage among commercial vehicle drivers rose 22 percent over last year. ATA commends the states of Arkansas, Florida, Minnesota and Wisconsin for passing primary enforcement laws this year.

In addition, ATA supports increased national standards for commercial driver’s licenses, making testing uniform across the nation; creating a national clearinghouse for positive alcohol and drug test results, providing trucking companies access to a driver’s history of failed tests and test refusals; and improved crash-worthiness standards for newly manufactured Class 7 and Class 8 trucks.

These policies and the accelerated deployment of advanced safety systems for commercial vehicles will help improve safety within the industry. Fleet owners cite high costs as the primary impediment to adoption of technologies such as brake wear monitoring systems, stability control and roll stability systems, lane departure warning systems with blind spot detection, and collision warning systems with adaptive cruise control. Providing tax incentives to make such systems more affordable will help increase their use and reduce crashes, injuries and deaths. Congress is considering legislation to provide these incentives, and ATA encourages Congress to increase the caps on these tax credits.

All highway users must continue promoting best practices and improve standards. Implementing ATA’s safety polices will go a long way toward accomplishing that goal.

The past year has certainly been full of important transportation developments. Among them, I would put the following at the top:

We saw a new focus on rail transit, both at the national and the state and local levels. There has been a lot of activity in this arena, including national stimulus funding support, new state initiatives and voter approval of a number of local referenda, several with proposed taxes.

Another very significant development was the specific funding allocated for high-speed rail projects, including $8 billion in stimulus funds for a program that aims to start to build an efficient, high-speed passenger rail network connecting major population centers 100 to 600 miles apart.

Finally, we saw federal collaboration to efficiently link transportation policy with housing and environmental policy, the benefits of which I outlined in a previous blog post.

In the coming year, I would like to see the following rise to the top of policy priorities:

We need a comprehensive, integrated rail transit system, particularly in major corridors such as Boston-to-Richmond as well as routes in Chicago-North East Indiana and Southern California.

I also support continued focus on a “fix it first” strategy, investing in the repair of existing transportation infrastructure before building new roads, adding lanes or new bridges.

Lastly, I encourage passage of the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Bill and continued effort to link transportation with other goals, such as those for housing, economic competitiveness as well as reducing carbon emissions, reducing VMT and promoting national security by reducing energy consumption.

I am optimistic that this year will hold many significant strides for better transportation in our future. It is exciting to see a President and the top leadership of the DOT understand the need for major rail transit expansion — including high-speed rail — and understand that sound transportation policy is essential for achieving other crucial national goals.

Best wishes to all for a happy, prosperous and green new year.

Earlier this week, I identified the three most important transportation developments in 2009: 1) Chairman Oberstar’s push for reform in the next transportation law, 2) the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act laying the foundation for merit-based project selection at the Department of Transportation, and 3) President Obama and Congressional leaders committing to high-speed rail. Now for our three priorities in 2010:

1) Congress passes – and President Obama signs – a long-term transportation law with real reform and greater investment

Chairman Oberstar is correct in his call to “redouble our efforts” at enacting a multi-year surface transportation authorization bill. We need to build off many of the excellent reform provisions included in the House Transportation Committee’s Surface Transportation Authorization Act (STAA). We also need to move transportation to the front burner in the U.S. Senate after health care is completed. All of us in the transportation reform community know this will be challenging to say the least, but we need to broaden our message, reframe and resell the rationale for national transportation investments, engage new and unlikely allies as T4America has been doing (we’re now at over 400 partners), and put some of our differences aside to get the job done.

2) Merit-based project selection is institutionalized at the U.S. Department of Transportation and state and local transportation agencies throughout the country

The inclusion of TIGER grants in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act lays a solid foundation for merit-based project selection. Until Congress takes up a full authorization bill, it is imperative that Congress includes additional performance measures in any forthcoming job-creation legislation. The US Department of Transportation, under the leadership of Secretary Ray LaHood, has indicated a willingness to move in this direction anyway, but explicit statutory authority from Congress that builds upon the TIGER program would be a significant step forward.

3) Make sure candidates running for all levels of government commit to a bold new vision for transportation reform

Getting a transformational transportation bill passed in Congress this year should be our first priority. But what happens in Washington is only the beginning. Because the most important decisions about transportation, growth and economic development take place at the local level, it matters who gets voted into council chambers, state capitols and county boards. Our economic recovery remains sluggish and millions of Americans need more transportation options and a smarter, cleaner safer system – and representatives who will fight for it – more than ever. Our colleagues at the Center for Transportation Excellence are a great resource for what is happening on the ground. (link to: http://www.cfte.org/)

The three most important developments in transportation in 2009 were all contained in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act.

First, the Act clearly shows that increased transportation infrastructure investment creates and sustains family-wage jobs, can help the country recover from the recession, and can lay the groundwork for long-term economic growth.

According to data collected by the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, work has begun on 7,886 highway and transit projects in all 50 states, three territories, and the District of Columbia. These projects have created or sustained more than 210,000 direct, on-project jobs, with payroll expenditures exceeding $1.1 billion. If you include direct, indirect, and induced jobs, the total reaches nearly 630,000.

Furthermore, these Recovery Act investments have made a small down payment on the critically important effort of bringing our infrastructure to a state of good repair.

Second, the Recovery Act includes unprecedented transparency and accountability measures. Our Committee has gathered data on a monthly basis to track how the recovery funds are being used. That data is posted on our website, at http://transportation.house.gov/singlepages/singlepages.aspx?NewsID=852.

The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure has also held 13 oversight hearings on the Recovery Act. These hearings included a total of 103 witnesses and spanned over 54 hours.

Third, the Recovery Act includes the first federal investment in high-speed rail outside the Northeast Corridor, and will be remembered as a launching point for an entirely new mode of travel in the United States.

In 2010, I would list enactment of the Jobs for Main Street Act, a long-term surface transportation bill, and an FAA authorization bill as my top three issues for Congress.

We have the opportunity to build on the foundation set by the Recovery Act in H.R. 2847, the Jobs for Main Street Act. This bill, which won approval in the House on December 16, 2009, would invest another $37.3 billion in our nation’s highways and transit systems, and create more than one million jobs.

The bill also includes provisions to stabilize the Highway Trust Fund and funds our national surface transportation programs through September 30, 2010.

However, the short-term gains for our economy and our infrastructure provided by the Recovery Act and the Jobs for Main Street Act are not enough. We must redouble our efforts to enact a multi-year surface transportation authorization bill to transform our federal transportation programs and provide funding stability for state and local governments and transit agencies.

A summary of the Committee’s proposal for this new Surface Transportation Authorization Act, entitled A Blueprint for Investment and Reform, can be found on the Committee’s website, at http://transportation.house.gov/Media/file/Highways/HPP/Surface%20Transportation%20Blueprint%20Program%20Consolidation.pdf

My third policy priority for Congress in 2010 has to be passage of H.R. 915, the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act. The bill provides $53.5 billion for the FAA’s capital programs from Fiscal Years 2010 through 2012. It includes funds to accelerate the implementation of the Next Generation Air Transportation System, also known as “NextGen”, enable the FAA to make needed repairs and replacement of existing facilities and equipment, and provide for the implementation of high-priority safety-related systems.

The previous FAA authorization act expired on 2007, and has been kept in force by a series of extensions, the latest of which expires at the end of March.

We are already more than two years behind schedule. Airport capital improvements and key NextGen programs need the funding and stability that this bill provides.

The year 2009 saw many momentous and some troubling developments in transportation. Among the most memorable and potentially far reaching is the commitment by this Adminisrtration to get serious about high speed rail. Europe, China and Japan recognized some time ago that HSR presents many advantages- energy independence, level of mobilty not xperienced with any other mode, reduction in greenhousre gas and perhaps most importantly for the US, the ability to divert shorter trips off the congested airways, thereby decongesting airports in critical corridors and adding significantly to the nations economic competitiveness.

Hopefully the DOT folks will show vision and invest primarily in true transformational projects with speeds well in excess of 150MPH that can demonstrate the advantages and excitement of real high speed rail or Maglev.

While there were several major transportation developments in 2009, three issues of importance to the Intelligent Transportation Systems sector were:

1) The economy. While the stimulus bill provided a much-needed shot in the arm, the economic downturn highlighted the critical need to optimize our existing transportation systems more effectively and invest in projects that will get the most bang for the buck. Because of the limited amount of funding that actually made its way to transportation, not enough of it was made available for smart transportation solutions;

2) The lack of stability in funding for surface transportation programs, including the depletion of the highway trust fund and the expiration of SAFETEA-LU; and

3) The explosion of new cell phone applications, vehicle telematics, and other smart technologies that are transforming the delivery of traveler information and other consumer services, mainstreaming vehicle collision avoidance systems, and providing better tools with which to manage our multimodal transportation network and improve system performance.

As for 2010, we face continued uncertainties with the reauthorization bill. We’ve previously learned that a series of short extensions over long periods of time are extremely detrimental to state and local agencies and their long-range planning. As part of the reauthorization bill, policymakers must be willing to make difficult decisions regarding how we will finance our transportation programs as the federal gas tax can no longer carry the load. We must also make the shift to a more performance-based system that will yield the greatest return on investment for transportation users.

1) To move to a performance-based system, we must establish the groundwork for effective performance measurement by improving the collection and availability of uniform real-time traffic and multimodal transportation system data. This can be done today using existing technologies, which will allow state and local officials to:

• Measure and monitor the performance of their existing multimodal transportation systems;
• Establish aggressive, yet achievable, near and long-term performance goals in areas such as accident, congestion and emissions reductions; and
• Optimize the performance of their transportation network through the use of real-time data, active traffic management, improved multimodal system integration, and other 21st century tools and strategies for improving safety, mobility and the environment.

2) We also need to make sure – especially in these difficult economic times – that we get the best possible return for every transportation dollar. While new capacity is needed in many areas, we can often improve system performance through the use of cost-effective technologies and operational strategies across our transportation network. For example, synchronized and adaptive traffic signals can offer a remarkable 40:1 return on investment by reducing wasted time and fuel at intersections. When combined with transit priority systems, smart traffic signals can reduce fuel use for transit buses by up to 19 percent and bus emissions by up to 30 percent.

These and many other ITS solutions are being deployed across the country, creating good jobs while modernizing our multimodal transportation network. However, we are behind the curve compared to many industrialized nations. If Congress is serious about addressing our nation’s congestion, safety, economic and environmental challenges, investing in greater ITS deployment and encouraging the creation of “smarter” cities and communities should be on the short list for the next authorization bill.

3) Safety is always our top priority, and should be a priority for policymakers and the private sector in 2010. Advances in vehicle technologies should provide significant safety improvements in the coming years. An estimated 31 percent of the nearly 40,000 fatal traffic crashes each year could be prevented or have their impact reduced through lane departure warnings, blind spot detection and other collision avoidance technologies.

We need to get these systems deployed as quickly as possible, while also continuing to advance the development of a viable IntelliDriveSM network that will provide a wireless connectivity platform between vehicles, the roadway and other transportation systems to help prevent crashes before they happen. In addition to dramatically improving transportation safety, this network will provide the next generation of advanced traffic management and innovative financing solutions

Needless to say, all of us in the transportation sector have another very interesting and important year ahead of us.

To some extent the most important transportation developments in 2009 were things that did not happen, rather than anything that did. Overwhelming everything else were the continued impacts of the Great Recession on the transportation sector. The effect of the economic and financial crises was to deprive state and local transportation agencies, and transportation authorities of the resources to undertake substantial investments in new or rehabilitated facilities and, in many cases, even to continue regular maintenance and operating activities.

The second significant transportation "deelopment" in 2009 was the failure to enact a multi-year surface transportation authorization act, prior to the expriation of SAFETEA-LU on September 30, 2009. As we were at the expiration of TEA-21, we are in a period of succeeding short-term extensions with many more such extensions likely over the course of this year. There is little prospect that a multi-year bill will be adopted by Congress or that Congress has the will or the capacity to deal with the revenue and reform issues so necessary in transportation. Thus, the Highway Trust Fund (HTF) was supported by transfers from the General Fund, and in 2009 the trend was established to move away from user-based funding of the surface transportation programs and toward General deficit funding, as an increasingly important source of public capital for transportation investments.

The third significant transportation development in e009 was the enactment of the stimulus bill, containing just under $50 billion for transportation. The purpose of this spending was short-term economic recovery and stimulating the preservation of construction and construction-related jobs. Again, the source of funding ws the General Fund and deficit spending.

It seems unlikely that 2010 will see enactment of a new multi-year transportation authorization bill or the commitment of sufficient user-based resources to transportation investment. Understandably, transportation spending will continue in 2010 to be viewed, as a generator of jobs and a stimulus to economic recovery. However, the challenge will be to use whatever transportation legislation is enacted this year to begin a longer-term movement toward performance-driven programs, directly linked to a set of clearly articulated goals, in which the state and local recipients of federal funds are held accountable for results.

Moreover, the results that we seek from federal transportation spending in 2010 should go beyond the number of short-term jobs preserved or created. We should look to make "wiser" investments , that is, those investments that demonstrate national benefits, in terms of improved national connectivity, increased metropolitan accessibility, and enhanced economic growth. We should begin to build a framework around which transportation investments will increase longer-term economic prosperity and sustainable job creation.

Many are skeptical that worthwhile reform can be incorporated into short-term economic recovery legislation or extensions of transportation programs. The challenge that we face is to use whatever legislation is considered and enacted in 2010 to begin laying the foundation of transportation policy reform. We should take the opportunity to improve data collection and to refine analytical tools and models, so that we can begin the process of moving toward a performance and outcome-based system of transportation funding.

2009 was a big year in transportation for ports and the goods movement industry. One of the biggest was the creation of TIGER through the ARRA, the first truly merit-based, intermodal, nationally competitive grant program, which explicitly called out port projects as eligible. This was a huge step in recognizing the importance of goods movement generally and ports specifically in our national transportation infrastructure. Along that same vein, Chairman Oberstar's introduction of a transformative surface transportation authorization was another major development for the entire transportation industry. For goods movement and ports again it was even more important, with a dedicated freight program and eligibility for freight projects in other programs.Finally, on the local side in 2009, and not to toot our own horn too much, but the Clean Trucks Program implemented by the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach was another major development, one not just for the ports, but for the industry that helped us make it possible, and for the communities around the ports that stand to benefit as well as the shipping industry that will be able to get the infrastructure projects they need approved. For the first time, the nation's #1 and #2 container ports, and by far the nation's #1 container trade gateway, have a way to monitor and improve the unmanageable fleet of nearly 20,000 dirty diesel trucks operating on and around our property. This has led to the unprecedented and successful turnover of the operating fleet from a mish-mash of old and older diesel trucks into a fleet that is nearly 100% 2007 U.S. EPA compliant or better in barely a year. Looking ahead to 2010: 1) Let's build on TIGER with both the NII program and a "TIGER II" through the second stimulus/jobs bill. 2) Let's get reauthorization done and done right, overcoming what is the biggest hurdle, which is how we are paying for the increased investment that is needed. 3) Extrapolating out the importance of the Clean Trucks Program, the U.S. needs many more success like this across all modes of transportation. If we are going to make substantial progress in reducing emissions from transportationand the long-term creation of livable, sustainable communities with efficient and competitive goods and people movement systems, we have to do more along these lines.

I’ll address the prospects for this year in a subsequent post, but for now here is what we see as the three key developments in transportation last year:

1) Momentum builds for reform in the next transportation law

Chairman James Oberstar and Ranking Member John Mica of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee did a great service to the nation by launching the discussion on a transportation policy for the 21st century. Chairman Oberstar has been relentless in his push to get transportation on the front burner and I echo John Horsley from AASHTO on the critical need to get a long-term transformational bill passed in 2010.

The T&I Committee's draft Surface Transportation Authorization Act would be a significant step forward. Specifically, the proposed Critical Asset Investment Program would, for the first time, maintain a dedicated funding stream for maintenance and good repair. The Oberstar draft also eliminates barriers to new transit projects, moves toward performance-based investments, streamlines existing programs and expands regional control over decisionmaking - all significant steps toward real reform in transportation policy.

2) American Recovery and Reinvestment Act lays the foundation for merit-based project selection at the Department of Transportation

Deron Lovass is correct to point out that the infrastructure funding contained in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act could have been better targeted. However, the Act played a crucial role in laying the foundation for performance-based project selection through its inclusion of the TIGER grants.

These grants are discretionary funds that will be awarded to state and local governments on how well a project performs on improving living and travel options, sustainability and general maintenance. The DOT will also consider the potential for job creation, innovation and partnerships in deciding on grants.

This is an enormous step forward for transportation reform and can easily be expanded in the future. We would strongly urge Senate leaders to include additional performance measures in any job-creation measures taken up this year.

3) President Obama and Congressional leaders commit to high-speed rail

“There’s no reason why we can’t do this,” President Obama said in calling for an ambitious network of high-speed rail in 10 regions. The President is right, and Congress backed up this rhetoric with an $8 billion down payment in the stimulus package, followed by an additional $2.5 billion in the most recent spending bill, due in large part to the efforts of Congressman John Olver.

The $10.5 billion allocated thus far is, of course, just a down payment. But with China and much of Europe jumping ahead of us on innovative and efficient transportation, the time for experimentation is over. We need to act to make high-speed rail a reality and we’re gratified to have a President who gets it.

Happy New Year to my colleagues and our readers.

The three most important policy developments of 2009 were:

1. The passage and implementation of ARRA. Transportation projects were generally praised and were seen as effective tools to stimulate the economy and provide jobs. Hopefully this perspective will continue to trump the notion that transportation allocation decisions are necessarily parochial and wasteful. If so, this will pay real long-term dividends.
2. The New National Commitment to Rail: For too long, we have ignored the great benefits to passengers and shippers, as well as the nation, offered by an upgraded rail system. Through its policy leadership, funding support, Preliminary National Rail Plan, and work with Congress the Obama Administration has begun to redress this deficiency. Hooray.
3. The broad recognition that transportation reform is imperative: Whether it is with air, sea, or land or with passenger and freight transportation, analysts, commissions, and increasingly policymakers understand that today's transportation challenges are not being met by yesterday's policy architectures. There is a long way to go to build consensus, but the first step is always recognizing there is a problem. We do.

Three priorities for 2010:

1. Continuing putting America back to work: Transportation provides an effective way to stimulate the economy and create high-quality jobs. With unemployment around 10% in the nation (far higher in many states and localities), and with millions of out-of-work Americans who want to work, Congress should prioritize a second jobs bill so we do not get a 1937-style double dip for our economy later this year.
2. Obtain aviation industry consensus for reform of the FAA and its programs: It is time for the squabbling among aviation's stakeholders to end. Secretary LaHood and Administrator Babbitt have made it clear that they are prepared to do what it takes to get agreement on the myriad number of aviation challenges before us. These include NextGen, system funding, the economic state of air carriers, and the decline in small community air service. Time to shelve the press releases and do the difficult work of consensus building.
3. Identify a sustainable way to fund transportation infrastructure: Well, we know we do not like taxes, user fees and tolling, or borrowing from the Chinese. That means we either (1) cut programs drastically across our system, or (2) we act like grownups and find economic and political formulas that will pay for the infrastructure we need (as we reform it).

The common element among 2010 priorities is the need for leadership both inside and outside of governnment.

Steve Van Beek

What were the three most important transportation developments of 2009?

Stimulus funds allocated using the FAA’s Airport Improvement Program process to finance shovel-ready projects at airports. Many local communities have seen the positive effects of the $1.1 billion in AIP funding included in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA), and even more communities will realize the benefits through the inclusion of an additional $500 million for the AIP if the House-approved Jobs for Main Street Act of 2010 is enacted into law. The funding will not only put more Americans to work, but it will make needed safety, security and congestion relief improvements at airports across the country

AMT relief really has been the quiet success of the ARRA. This time last year, the credit markets were frozen. Since the AMT holiday, airports have gone to market for $8 billion worth of bonds. We would estimate that this has created and saved tens of thousands of jobs. ACI-NA would like to see the two-year waiver in the ARRA for the sale of new private activity bonds made permanent and the look-back period for refinancing extended.

However, it is critical to recognize that the ARRA funding does not address long term needs at airports, and further investment in airport infrastructure is necessary to allow the industry to meet the needs of passengers and move forward in funding the modernization of the air traffic control system, for NextGen begins and ends at the airport.

New protections for airline passengers. DOT made the right decision when it issued a new rule last month to protect passengers experiencing extended delay on the runway. Airports have long advocated that the airline industry develop standards so passengers would know how long they would be kept on the plane because of a tarmac delay. Since the airlines could not agree, it was appropriate for the government to step in to help protect passengers by requiring that domestic airlines deplane passengers after a three-hour delay and that food and drinking water be provided within two hours.

But there is more work to be done. We also advocate for passengers to have access to better information on delayed flights. Currently, aircraft with less than 30 passenger seats represent about 25 percent of all domestic flights, but those smaller carriers are exempt from reporting their performance data. ACI-NA believes that all commercial airlines, regardless of size, should be required to report their on-time data so consumers have access to comprehensive on-time performance statistics to assist them in making their travel decisions.

The Administration’s order to review security policies in the wake of the Dec. 25 attempted terrorist attack. ACI-NA strongly supports the President’s order to review security policies and procedures and to focus on moving toward a more technology intensive security regime. Better coordination of intelligence information for enhanced “watch lists” is key. Advanced technology is also critical for a more secure and efficient system. Whole Body Imaging is an important component of an effective system, and airports look forward to working with DHS, TSA, airlines and Congress as security and privacy issues are considered.

What should be the top three transportation policy priorities of 2010?

Enhance aviation security while minimizing the “hassle-factor.” Improving aviation security is a major priority in 2010, and we urge the Department of Homeland Security and TSA to work with airports and airlines in integrating technology without discouraging travel. Security measures that result in significant passenger inconvenience and long delays will not enhance the system or increase security.

Passage of multi-year FAA reauthorization bill. We strongly urge Congress to enact a multi-year FAA reauthorization bill this year (and we hope December’s passage of a three-month extension will be the last. This is the eighth extension and eight is enough!). A multi-year FAA reauthorization bill should include an increase in the Passenger Facility Charge (PFC) to $7.50 and indexed to inflation, as well as no changes to the Aircraft Rescue and Firefighting standards. The PFC is the single most effective and efficient user fee mechanism in transportation today – and current limits mean we are utilizing it at a fraction of its potential.

Create jobs while continuing the necessary investments in transportation infrastructure. Job creation estimates range from 28,000 to 35,000 for every $1 billion invested in transportation infrastructure. Airports are proven economic drivers so airport infrastructure projects are not only a smart investment in the future of our national transportation system, but they are a creator of jobs today for construction and they help promote future job growth.

Happy new year to all. Here are the three important developments from last year:

Remarkable Projections that Gasoline Demand has Peaked

Due to trends in the marketplace and changes in the policy context pursuant to 2005 and 2007 energy legislation, an increasing number of analysts project that we reached a peak in energy, although not the much-debated peak in global oil production. Gasoline use may well have hit its zenith in the U.S. in 2007, with more efficient vehicle tech, biofuels and leveling-off of traffic putting us on a down-slope for the next couple of decades. I heard it first from Jim Burkhardt from Cambridge Energy Research Associates at a conference in June at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The Wall Street Journal covered the story in August, citing ExxonMobil’s energy outlook as a source (their new outlook echoes the previous one regarding this matter). And the Energy Information Administration concurs in its 2009 and 2010 outlooks.

The Recovery Act Helps Pull the Economy Back from the Brink

As John Horsley says, the infrastructure investments contained in the bill were a shot in the arm. They’re also durable investments and will pay off in years to come. However, as Brookings reported at a conference last October based on House T & I data available then, these investments were not as well targeted as they could have been. For example, the 100 largest metro areas – home to most of the nation’s GDP – received about half of the FHWA funding despite accounting for 64% of the nation’s VMT and 87% of FTA funding despite accounting for 95% of public transit passenger miles.

More recent data from December, courtesy of T & I, has just been analyzed by three other groups (Center for Neighborhood Technology, Smart Growth America and U.S. PIRG) with results that show that targeting should favor public transportation if jobs are the goal. Their number-crunching can be found here, and it finds that every billion dollars invested in public transportation yielded 16,419 job-months, which contrasts with highways at 8,781 job-months.

A larger proportion of tax dollars in any new jobs bill, and/or in the new transportation bill, should be invested so that they leverage bigger bang-per-buck: In our metro areas and public transportation systems.

Support for Transportation Policy Reform Grows

While the renewal law remains in the doldrums while political winds drive other measures such as health care, economic recovery and wartime spending, stars continued to fall in line such that when a bill does pass it is increasingly likely to rebuild the outdated, creaky policy architecture currently in place. First, President Obama came into office and launched a high-speed rail agenda. His Transportation Secretary set up a livability initiative with HUD and EPA and has recruited a top-notch, talented team of policy wonks who are working away. These activities are part of our positive assessment of this Administration’s environmental record in 2009.

T & I Chairman Oberstar unveiled his bid for transportation law reauthorization, which would boost investment in public transportation and intercity rail, focus on metro area needs and integrate energy and environmental considerations into planning. And two new reports underscored the potential to save energy by adopting better policy – the Bipartisan Policy Center’s National Transportation Policy Project and the Moving Cooler report – joining other clarion calls for reform already on the shelf (two government commission and former Secretary Mary Peters’ bid for reauthorization).

All in all, business as usual has lost its appeal in the transportation policy world.

So what’s up in 2010?

Driving Oil Demand Down

The wind is at our backs for the first time in decades, and now is the time to push down demand further. There are good economic reasons to do this (oil price increases and volatility taught us that hard lesson in 2008), and of course environmental ones such as decreasing carbon dioxide emissions. But national security is also at stake here, which is why I have joined an unusual, conservative group pushing for greater choice for consumers vis-à-vis mobility. I’ve worked with some of these allies to push for more vehicle choices, and fuel choices, and now we’re advocating for more viable, attractive mobility options.

Click on Mobility Choice for more info, and please become a fan on Facebook.

Beating the Drum: Renewal, Renewal, Renewal

Now that there’s a committed team in place at DOT, now that there’s a good foundation for legislating thanks to Chairman Oberstar, and now that there’s a growing need to make the U.S. economy more competitive and productive, it’s time for all of us who write for this blog as well as readers of it to build a parade that the President can lead. We need a big-tent, growing constituency for new transportation investments, and we need to keep hammering away that the status quo is unacceptable.

This should all be aimed at either passing a new bill this year, or at making this an issue that can’t be ignored in the upcoming election cycle. I would love to see a large number of legislators taking the oath of office in 2011 having committed to addressing the nation’s crumbling infrastructure crisis.

Positioning the U.S. to Lead the World to a Clean Energy Economy

I heard recently that GE CEO Jeff Immelt was lamenting the loss of U.S. economic competitiveness, citing just one stark contrast: While exports account for 40% of Germany’s GDP, they account for a depressing 7% of our own. I also heard my friend Bracken Hendricks this morning on NPR, talking about the growing Chinese auto market which is likely to hunger for pluggable cars and wondering whether our struggling auto industry would capture any of that.

These aren’t unique observations, of course. Many are taking a good, hard look at the U.S. economy and wondering about our competitive footing moving forward. Thankfully, policymakers and businesses can help improve our position.

This can be done by passing solid transportation legislation, yes, and the effectiveness of this legislation would be enhanced if comprehensive clean energy legislation were passed this year as well.

While the health care battle has been bruising, when it is complete policymakers must pivot to the economy. That work must focus on more than just the short-term, and I think the smart long-term path is in part about generating jobs and exports in the clean energy sector. Yes, I take assessments of resulting job gains or losses from such a transition (especially from advocacy groups) with a grain of salt. But I have yet to hear anyone articulate a more compelling alternative than rapid growth in clean energy business and job creation as a means to secure a more prosperous economic future not just for myself but for kids like my two-year-old daughter.

A Jobs Bill that Builds More Jobs, Not More Highways

Also posted today on the Huffington Post

As everyone knows, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result. Yet the transportation spending in Congress' latest "jobs bill" looks insanely identical to the spending that went out the door almost a year ago in the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA).

Repeating earlier spending patterns wouldn't be such a serious problem if America's transportation system functioned well. But there is widespread consensus among citizen organizations around the country that our current approach to funding transportation is broken and in need of reform.

And, while 2/3 of our oil consumption and 1/3 of our global warming pollution comes directly from the amount we have to drive in this country, we continue to spend most of our transportation funds on highways.

This insanity comes partly from the misconception, firmly pushed last year by White House Economic Advisor Larry Summers, that stimulus money for highways would spend faster and create more jobs than public transportation projects.

But a look at the official data (PDF) tells a completely different story.

According to a new report released on Tuesday by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Smart Growth America and the Center for Neighborhood Technology, the public transportation money in last year's stimulus bill was spent faster and created twice as many jobs as the money spent on highway projects. Why? Public transportation projects are more complex and labor-intensive than highways, and fewer funds go to overhead costs that don't create any jobs, like purchasing land, just to cite two reasons.

According to the report, What We Learned from the Stimulus (PDF available here) public transportation spending from ARRA has created 16,000 "job-months" per billion dollars invested, while highway spending has created just over 8,500 "job-months" per billion.

The data also shows that funding for public transportation moves quicker into the economy, creating jobs faster. In other words, the most "shovel-ready" projects are bus and rail lines, not highway lanes and overpasses.

In fact, if the latest "Jobs for Main Street" package, which passed the House in December and will be taken up by the Senate this month, were changed to include equal amounts of funding for highways and public transportation, then an additional 71,415 additional job-months would be generated.

That's the equivalent of year-round employment for 5,951 additional workers.

The direct jobs are just one public interest benefit of investing in smarter transportation.

Among other benefits, new and expanded public transit and intercity rail projects would reduce traffic congestion, improve air quality, and revitalize struggling urban economies. And jump-starting demand for buses and rail cars can also provide a new employment base to offset massive losses in the auto industry over the last decade. (Click here for a full report by U.S. PIRG.)

Finally, there should be little doubt about whether transit agencies can spend job-creation funds. While transit-riding has increased and driving has decreased over the last few years, state and local budget deficits have led to massive public transportation cuts around the country. It hardly makes sense to spend billions on new roads we don't need while cutting service on a transit network that millions rely on every day, especially when you can hire more people by doing the opposite.

If the goals of the jobs bill are to put the most people to work and to jump-start progress towards a more environmentally and economically sustainable future, then Congress needs to stop the insanity and pass a jobs bill that creates more jobs, not more highways.

Three major transportation achievements in 2009 were the enactment of economic recovery legislation which provided $48 billion in funding for transportation; the fast action taken by states, cities, counties, airports and transit authorities to put these stimulus dollars and people to work; and the reduction in highway fatalities to their lowest levels in 50 years.

Today, as we enter a new decade America must continue building on these successes through three key policy initiatives that can lead the way.

The first is job creation and preservation. States have identified more than 9,500 ready-to-go projects that if funded will quickly address the depression-level unemployment rate in the construction sector of more than 19%. When Congress reconvenes we are confident that the Senate will join the House in crafting a jobs bill that includes significant resources for transportation infrastructure and extends funding for core highway and transit programs. The Jobs for Main Street Act, enacted by the House in December provided $27.5 billion for highways, $8.4 billion for transit, and a million more for Amtrak, airports, and shipyards. In addition, the House bill provides $19.5 billion that will enable both the regular highway and transit programs to be extended through 2010 and beyond. By passing a jobs bill and an extension of current spending authority, states will be empowered to plan both short and longer-term projects that will put hundreds of thousands of people to work.

The next priority is to improve America’s high speed and inter-city passenger rail system. In the coming weeks, President Obama is expected to usher in a new era by awarding $8 billion in passenger rail stimulus grants to the states. Thirty-four states have submitted applications totaling $57 billion. The Administration will determine which states and which rail corridors--will be awarded funds to begin the work that will enable the U.S. to provide faster, more reliable and frequent passenger rail service that will someday be comparable to the world-class systems in Europe and Japan. In the short term these projects will create thousands of jobs and over time they will help to reduce highway congestion and greenhouse gas emissions in metropolitan regions, and create an alternative to air travel through congested airports. Congress has also provided an additional $2.5 billion for inter-city passenger rail in its appropriations act. States and Amtrak stand ready to put these resources to work as well.

Rounding out the top three policy priorities is the critical need to pass Highway, Transit and Aviation Authorization legislation before the end of 2010. Reforms are needed in both programs, and just as importantly, Congress will need to agree on ways to generate the revenues required to sustain these vital transportation priorities.

Making the right transportation choices today will serve the nation well through-out this decade and beyond. States, cities and counties, the construction industry and, literally, hundreds of thousands of construction workers are counting on Congress and the Obama Administration to get this right.

The three most important transportation developments in 2009 were:

1. The announcement by the Government of the Netherlands that it wants to introduce in 2012 a new method of road–use charges based on distance traveled. Vehicles would be equipped with GPS devices that record distances travelled and enable the costs to be debited to road users, and credited to road providers, without revealing information about individual trips. GPS-based location systems could offer road users important benefits, such as PAYD insurance, rightly supported by Michael.

2. The discovery of over 1,000 “CRUTape letters” in the files of a major climate research unit, suggesting that the “Global Warming” scene being promoted by cash-hungry governments relies on the kind of junk science that candidate Obama undertook to avoid.

3. The adoption by the US Department of Transportation of policies aimed at reducing vehicle travel in the USA.

The first and second developments can help free-market followers to oppose the third. Market-based charges and investments, which most of us rely on for the provision of food, water, telecommunications and other necessities, would help to enable Lisa and other travelers to travel as far as they want to, and how they want to, so long as they pay the costs arising from their choices.

What were the three most important transportation developments of 2009?

1. China replaced the US as the largest domestic market for new motor vehicle sales.

The majority of growth in greenhouse gas emissions from transportation now comes from fast-developing nations like China and India. Such countries may lock-in towards US-style high carbon path development policies, or they may evolve towards lower carbon pathways with better public transportation, walking, cycling, and smart land use and transportation pricing and management (econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/EXTDEC/
EXTRESEARCH/EXTPROGRAMS/EXTKNOWLEDGEOFCHANGE/0,,
contentMDK:21597525~menuPK:4557095~pagePK:64168182~
piPK:64168060~theSitePK:491543~isCURL:Y,00.html).

2. US motor fuel sales and vehicle-km of travel continued to trend lower than in past years, even as the economy began to recover.

This reflects the increasing decoupling of vehicle travel and economic activity. US receipts from cents-per-gallon excise taxes continued to fall, forcing borrowing and budget gimmicks to sustain transportation spending in the face of continued political challenges to raising fuel taxes. In response, several states and regions advanced initiatives that could lay a foundation for national action in coming years that combine smart traffic management, road user charging, and pay-as-you-drive insurance.

3. Pay-as-you-drive (PAYD) insurance policies became available to consumers in more than a dozen new states.

A new rating system was established by Ceres and various environmental, transportation, and consumer groups to help spur more effective innovation in PAYD insurance (http://www.ceres.org/Page.aspx?pid=1157). California adopted regulations that will help it move towards wider adoption of PAYD insurance (http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/west/2009/09/10/103600.htm ). A Brookings Institution study found PAYD policies could cut traffic and related greenhouse gas emissions by 8% while saving 2/3’s of households money, with the average of those households saving $278 per vehicle per year (www.brookings.edu/papers/2008/07_payd_california_bordoffnoel.aspx ). The number of states with PAYD insurance in their Climate Action plans rose to 18, including California.

What should the top three transportation policy priorities of 2010 be?

1. Steps should be taken to advance transportation financing reforms, replacing fuel and driving subsidies and fixed costs of motor vehicle ownership with pricing incentives that support sustainable, low carbon transportation.

This is essential to align system management goals with user incentives, getting the price signals right so that users pay based on when, where, and how much they drive. International institutions, like the UN Commission on Sustainable Development and UN Framework Convention for Climate Change, should takes steps to press for elimination of motor fuel subsidies, which spur rapid transportation greenhouse gas growth. These today amount to over $300 billion a year (www.unep.org/climateneutral/Topics/Transport/tabid/154/Default.aspx) , more than triple that $100 billion a year in climate financing that has been pledged by Obama and other developed country leaders as a goal for 2020. In the US, Congress should adopt the policy road map laid out by Rep. Earl Blumenauer of the House Ways and Means Committee, in spring 2009, which would boost transportation funding now, with new accountability for greenhouse emissions and an eye for economic stimulus, followed by phased, but temporary, gas tax increases starting after the economy has entered full recovery, with a tax floor under oil prices, transitioning to a national system of road user charges by 2020 (transportation.nationaljournal.com/2009/02/
should-a-mileage-tax-eventuall.php#1299805).

2. Nations should adopt binding global greenhouse gas limits and expanded carbon financing and accountability mechanisms at the next climate change conference of the parties in Mexico City.

This should include special provisions to ensure that national and regional transportation plans contribute to climate goals and to enhance institutional capacity in developing countries for sustainable transportation planning (www.transport2012.org/bridging/ressources/documents/1/
446,Transport_Suggestions_COP15.pdf). To help reach that agreement, the US Congress should send to the President strong climate legislation, including new requirements for climate-sensitive transportation planning (http://www.aceee.org/transportation/dmndmgt.htm). The Administration and Congress should advance a new federal transportation bill in 2010 to strengthen accountability to ensure that transportation plans and programs contribute to meeting state and federal climate action goals.

3. Local, regional, and national leaders should look closely at how shifts in transportation infrastructure investments, operations strategies, services, and policies can reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a large net negative cost per ton while supporting healthy economic development.

Recent studies such as Moving Cooler (www.movingcooler.org) and Growing Cooler (http://www.smartgrowthamerica.org/gcindex.html ) provide details on these opportunities in the US. Their findings are echoed by such international forums as the Partnership for Sustainable Low-Carbon Transport (http://www.sutp.org/slocat/), which was launched in 2009 by various UN agencies, regional development banks, and organizations representing transportation, environmental, and civil society interests. A key will be redirecting large existing transportation financial flows away from high-carbon investment pathways and into strategies that improve accessibility and support economic development while reducing greenhouse emissions and the need to travel.