McNabb, Cynthia J.

English

University of Denver

CommentViability of a Sustainable and Feasible NationalTransportation SystemCynthia J. McNabb*TABLE OF CONTENTSI. Introduction .................. I ............................ 133II. National Transportation Systems At Work ................. 134III. The Proposal For A National Transportation System ...... 135A. Expanded Government Bureaucracy .................. 136B. Wide-Spread Information/Data Collection ............. 136C. Consolidation of Constituent Bodies and Legislation .. 137D. Lack of Viable Models ................................ 138IV . C onclusion ................................................ 138I. INTRODUCTIONThe United States requires a feasible and sustainable national trans-portation system (NTS). Every year, the citizens of the United Statesspend billions of dollars on transportation costs which a more efficiently* Cynthia J. McNabb has a Bachelor or Arts in Political Science from Bryn Mawr College,and a Masters in Public Policy from American University. She would like to thank the staffmembers of the Transportation Law Journal for their assistance with her comment.1McNabb: Viability of a Sustainable and Feasible National Transportation SPublished by Digital Commons @ DU, 1998Transportation Law Journalorganized transportation system could prevent.1  While this countrysorely needs efficient and effective transportation systems, the formwhich such systems should take presents a difficult determination. F.Kaid Benfield, Senior Attorney and Director of the Transportation Pro-ject at the National Resources Defense Council, presents one view of asustainable and feasible NTS in his article, "Running on Empty: TheCase for a Sustainable National Transportation System."'2This comment addresses the issues presented in the above article.Part II presents examples of current Department of Transportation(DOT) projects. Specifically, Part II addresses efforts at implementingthe Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA).Part III comments on the author's framework for a NTS, and will alsocritique its feasibility and sustainability as a vision for a NTS. Part IVconcludes with a look at the most effective approach for implementingsociety's transportation goals.II. NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS AT WORKUnder ISTEA, several current and recently completed projects seekto alleviate some of the transportation burdens facing the United Stateseconomy. Cities across the United States have sought to find innovativeand creative methods to utilize ISTEA funding to implement regionalizedtransportation systems. For example, the St. Louis city government hassearched for alternatives to motorized transportation by investing in pe-destrian-friendly projects.3 Moreover, the Chicago city government re-cently engaged in a very similar project.4 Delray Beach, Florida investedin restoring an unused rail station as a means of coordinating a "transpor-tation hub" that would enable train, bus, and AmTrak passengers greater1. Governor Paul E. Patton & Governor Edward T. Schafer, Hitting Snooze Bar on Infra-structure, TRFCW, July 17, 1997, at 39.The consequences of not investing in our nation's transportation system are real, andthey are already being felt by American business workers and citizens every day on ourroads, at our airports and on our public transportation systems: $43 billion per year indelays and excess fuel consumption caused by congested roadways; $24 billion per yearin additional vehicle repair costs caused by poor road conditions. That's $67 billiontotal per year paid by American families and businesses.Id.2. F. Kaid Benfield, Running on Empty: The Case for a Sustainable National Transporta-tion System, 25 ENVT'L. L. 651 (1995).3. Theodore C. Taub ET AL., ISTEA: Too Soon to Evaluate Its Impact, CA34 ALI-ABA143, 147. "In St. Louis, approximately $4 million is designated for development of 100 miles ofpathways to accommodate pedestrians, equestrians, handicapped, roller-bladers, and mountainbikers." Id.4. Id. "Among many ISTEA projects in the Chicago area, bicycle paths are being laid outlike never before: 201 proposed bicycle-pedestrian projects totaling 693 miles have been fundedwith $106 million from ISTEA from 1992 through 1995."Id.[Vol. 26:1332Transportation Law Journal, Vol. 26 [1998], Iss. 1, Art. 6https://digitalcommons.du.edu/tlj/vol26/iss1/6National Transportation Systemaccess to transportation. 5 Also, New Jersey sought to resurrect dead railroutes to provide alternatives to daily commutes into Philadelphia.6 Mostof these programs focus on the belief that traditional transportationprojects do not provide viable means of securing success at meeting U.S.transportation goals. The DOT, in implementing ISTEA, recognizes thatnot all transportation projects are feasible or sustainable.7 The DOT at-tempts, when allocating ISTEA resources, to locate programs it feels willmeet society's goals of safety, security, efficiency, and environment-friendly transportation systems.Since its inception, ISTEA has achieved critical success. 8 For in-stance, enactment of the ISTEA legislation illustrates that U.S. citizens"will abandon their cars - if a well-planned, convenient and comfortabletransit option is available." 9 Additionally, supporters of ISTEA attributereduced crime rates in such states as New York to the legislation.10Given the achievements of ISTEA, the question of whether the UnitedStates government should implement an entirely new NTS programarises.III. THE PROPOSAL FOR A NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMAgain, the creation of some form of NTS would greatly fulfill thetransportation needs of many U.S. citizens. Benfield advocates a rede-fined NTS which expands on a DOT transportation proposition dating tolate 1993. Benfield's article raises serious issues regarding the feasibilityand sustainability of such a NTS. While creating a NTS seems a useful5. Id. "Delray Beach, Florida hopes to restore the historic Seaboard Coastline Railwaystation with $1.83 million in enhancement dollars. The funds would be used to restore the build-ing, develop new parking areas, and create a transportation hub that would serve AmTrak pas-sengers, the Tri-Rail commuter train, bus service and more." Id.6. Id.New Jersey transportation planners hope to use about $10 million in transportationenhancement funds during 1995. Proposals for pedestrian pathways, bike trails andhistoric preservation projects have been reviewed. Citizens in Glassboro, New Jersey,outside Philadelphia, hope to restore the decrepid [sic] train station which once rantrains to Philadelphia every half hour.Id.7. Cynthia Burbank & S. Lawrence Paulson, Congress Battles Over Successor to ISTEA,61 PUBROADS 41, July 17. 1997. "We can continue to focus on building new roads and largerairports where land is available, with the realization that this cannot possibly meet demand." Id.8. Jimmy D. Morrison, ISTEA's here (almost). Now What, 64 MASSTRNST, May 15, 1998,available in 1998 WL 12061529. "There's no question that the original ISTEA legislation was ahuge success." Id.9. Id.10. Ellen Yan, ISTEA Refill Uncertain as States Seek More Funds, NWSDAY, Mar. 22, 1998,at A28. "ISTEA fans credit the act with boosting LIRR and subway ridership by loweringcrime." Id.199813McNabb: Viability of a Sustainable and Feasible National Transportation SPublished by Digital Commons @ DU, 1998Transportation Law Journalendeavor conceptually, Benfield's proposal provides an untenableframework.A. EXPANDED GOVERNMENT BUREAUCRACYFirst, Benfield advocates the expansion of a new government entitywhich would constitute the focal point for an expanded transportationsystem. 1 This agency or entity would consolidate many existing adminis-trative agencies into a "new Intermodal Transportation Administration"under the auspices of the DOT.12 The problems inherent in the coordina-tion of this massive enterprise highlight the infeasibility and lack of sus-tainability of creating a NTS in such a manner. A new IntermodalTransportation Administration would require that each of the existingagencies and "subagencies" accept the consolidation effort.13 Such an as-sumption ignores the competing interests prevalent among members ofthe transportation industry.'4Furthermore, in order to create a sustainable Intermodal Transporta-tion Administration, the budgets of each of the subagencies would re-quire formality for the new agency to possess sufficient resources for there-organization. Typically, budgetary stability rarely exists. Recent yearshave marked drastic reductions in agency budgets, particularly in light ofthe continued emphasis on balanced budget initiatives.B. WIDE-SPREAD INFORMATION/DATA COLLECTIONBenfield also indicates that in order for a NTS to fully comply withthe goals of a "strategic planning process," large amounts of informationwould need gathering in order to evaluate program performance.' 5 Suchdata collection would, in all likelihood, cost an immense amount in bothdollars and resources. In many instances, wide-scale data consolidation isnot considered feasible, as information/data collection places a large bur-den on the private sector to provide the information.1611. Benfield, supra note 2,at 652. "The Department also intends to adopt a new administra-tive structure that integrates the functions historically performed by the federal Highway Ad-ministration, federal Railroad Administration, federal Transit Administration, and certain othersubagencies into a new 'Intermodal Transportation Administration."' Id.12. Id.13. Id.14. Joni Casey, Harmonizing a Diverse Industry, TRFcw, May 4, 1998, at 70 (recognizing theexistence of competing interests in the intermodal transportation industry).15. Benfield, supra note 2, at 665.16. For instance, Mr. Benfield calls for the collection of data on "energy intensity and usage,equity and access, performance efficiency, safety and security, economic costs, air and waterpollution, land use, and infrastructure conditions." Id. at 665. In many cases, the burden ofproviding such quantitative data will fall on not only government agencies, but on the privatesector.[Vol. 26:1334Transportation Law Journal, Vol. 26 [1998], Iss. 1, Art. 6https://digitalcommons.du.edu/tlj/vol26/iss1/6National Transportation SystemSecond, the number of existing administrative agencies which wouldbear the responsibility for the providing and processing data rangeswould be quite high. The Environmental Protection Agency, Depart-ment of Energy, Department of Housing and Urban Development, De-partment of Agriculture, and the Department of Labor provide just asample of the agencies required to provide the quantitative data thatBenfield suggests are key to a successful NTS.17 This places a large bur-den on the already overloaded administrative system. Moreover, a con-solidated transportation department would need to account for annualdata collection and processing. Lack of resources to provide for such aneffort would render a NTS ineffective.C. CONSOLIDATION OF CONSTITUENT BODIES AND LEGISLATIONThere also exists the difficulty in organizing the countless constituentgroups into one unified decision-making body, yet Benfield calls preciselyfor this effort.18 Such an attempt is not feasible since constituent groupswill probably change every five years. 19 In the meantime, the election ofa new city government could occur or new relevant constituent groupscreated. Disjointed and confused policy decisions would result. Further-more, among the various constituent groups, full agreement on a manage-ment style or new piece of legislation would not be forthcoming. It is notlikely that the new NTS would accomplish much by requiring full consul-tation on the set of issues presented. Any policy directive and assessmentof where to invest public resources becomes moot with the passage oftime. Additionally, sustainable efforts at consolidated decision-makingwould become nearly impossible.The NTS as envisioned in Benfield's article would require the con-solidation of many federal regulations now in existence. First, ISTEAprovides the framework for establishing an NTS. Beyond this frame-work, Benfield suggests that a sustainable and feasible DOT/NTS pro-gram should also turn to the National Environmental Policy Act,20 theEnergy Policy Act, the Clean Water Act, the Civil Rights Act, and theAmericans with Disabilities Act for guidance. 21 Coordinating the intent17. One need only examine the type of data being requested to determine the large numberof administrative agencies required for this form of massive data collection.18. Id.19. Id. "[T]he Department should articulate, after full consultation with its state and localgovernment partners and citizen constituents, its assessments of where to invest public resourcesalong with appropriate management, policy direction, and proposals for new legislation, if ap-propriate. DOT should repeat this undertaking periodically, perhaps at five-year intervals." Id.20. Id. at 660. "The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) provides further directionto the federal DOT, both in administering its program generally and in undertaking significantexercises such as establishing the NTS." Id.21. Id. at 662.1998]5McNabb: Viability of a Sustainable and Feasible National Transportation SPublished by Digital Commons @ DU, 1998Transportation Law Journaland structure of each massive regulatory regimes into a national transpor-tation legislative act seems an insurmountable feat.D. LACK OF VIABLE MODELSBenfield cites three models of successful strategic planning efforts toargue for performance assessments in conjunction with a NTS: The U.S.Forest Service's Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources PlanningAct (RPA),22 the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Soil and Water Re-sources Conservation Act (RCA),23 and the United Kingdom's RoyalCommission on Environmental Protection.24 None of these three modelsprovides a feasible or sustainable model on which to base the strategicplanning aspect of a NTS. First, a NTS proposes a larger program thaneither the RPA or the RCA. In fact, Benfield conceives of a NTS requir-ing the consolidation of agencies and federal regulatory programs.Neither the RPA or the RCA were created with such an extensive visionin mind. Second, the Royal Commission on Environmental Protectionshould also be discounted. While broad in scope, the environmental con-cerns in a nation the size of the United Kingdom hardly compare in sizeand scope to the consolidation of a United States NTS.For the reasons listed above, Benfield does not provide a feasible orsustainable framework for the creation of a NTS. First, such a nationalsystem conceives of both a time intensive and resource exhaustivemethod of forming an entirely unique government entity. Second, themaintenance of a state agency to measure the performance of a new sys-tem is costly. Nevertheless, Benfield completely ignores this cost factor.Finally, the models provided as a basis for the planning state of the NTSdo not provide sufficient examples on which to compare a new NTS.Therefore, the United States government should consider other alterna-tives to the one which Benfield advocates.IV. CONCLUSIONOne such alternative presents itself in the reauthorization of ISTEA:TEA-21 (Transportation Equity Act for the 21St Century). PresidentClinton signed this six-year transportation reauthorization on June 9,1998.25 TEA-21 guarantees a record $198 billion investment within thelimits of a balanced budget,2 6 and seeks to meet the majority of society's22. 16 U.S.C. §§ 1600-1614 (1994 & Supp. II 1996).23. 16 U.S.C. §§ 2001-2009 (1994 & Supp. 11 1996).24. Royal Comm'n on Envtl. Protection, Pub. No. CM 2674, Eighteenth Report: Transportand the Environment (1994).25. President Clinton Signs Transportation Bill for the Twenty-first Century, D.O.T. NewsRelease, June 9, 1998, available in 1998 WL 301926.26. Id.[Vol. 26:1336Transportation Law Journal, Vol. 26 [1998], Iss. 1, Art. 6https://digitalcommons.du.edu/tlj/vol26/iss1/6National Transportation Systemtransportation goals. For instance, the Secretary of Transportation, Rod-ney E. Slater, stated that TEA-21 "focuses on improving safety, rebuild-ing America, protecting the environment, creating opportunity andensuring global competitiveness. ' '27 In fact, TEA-21 expands ISTEAfunding in many of the above areas such as the environment, which willreceive 35% more funding under TEA-21 then it did under ISTEA.28Because TEA-21 is an expansion of ISTEA, the United States govern-ment already has years of experience on which to reflect when determin-ing whether this type of federal legislation meets the country's needs for aNTS.Most of the evidence suggests the success of ISTEA. In fact,reauthorization of ISTEA received high levels of bi-partisan support.29Furthermore, both the House and Senate have approved measures thatguarantee continued funding for federal and state transportation projectsthrough the application of gas tax revenue.30 With such a pool of contin-ued revenue, national transportation projects as financed through TEA-21 should continue to flourish and expand.In conclusion, that which is not broken should not be fixed. TEA-21already provides the kind of NTS which Benfield endorses in his article.Instead of wasting taxpayer dollars on a new NTS, the DOT should focuson the continuation of the already successful NTS programs in place.While billions of dollars each year are spent inefficiently on transporta-tion costs, the Department is moving in the right direction. With the as-surance of continued funding through TEA-21, the DOT now has thecapability and flexibility to strategically plan for the future. Through in-novation and creativity, as witnessed by the NTS programs under ISTEA,we begin to see the formation of a sustainable and feasible NTS. Withboth time and continued public support, the DOT will likely meet Ben-field's challenge of creating a NTS which will meet society's transporta-tion goals.27. Id.28. ISTEA Reauthorization Policy Statement and Principles, 61 Fed. Reg. 30,276 (June 9,1998).29. Frank N. Wilner, Strange Bedfellows, TRFCW, Apr. 27, 1998, at 13.30. ISTEA Negotiators to Work Through Weekend For Deal, CONGDAM, May 15, 1998,available in 1998 WL 9512663.199817McNabb: Viability of a Sustainable and Feasible National Transportation SPublished by Digital Commons @ DU, 19988Transportation Law Journal, Vol. 26 [1998], Iss. 1, Art. 6https://digitalcommons.du.edu/tlj/vol26/iss1/6

Viability of a Sustainable and Feasible National Transportation System

https://digitalcommons.du.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1314&context=tlj

Viability of a Sustainable and Feasible National Transportation System

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Denver