Tuesday evening, I rode home from work in shorts. It was the last day of January, well after dark, and the temperature was still over 60 degrees. To be honest, though, the weather is the least crazy thing that’s been happening here in Washington this week.
We had less than two days to read an 864-page highway bill – the American Infrastructure and Energy Jobs Act – before a Committee mark-up on Thursday at 9:00am. Not only did the proposed bill strip all funding for bicycling and walking programs, but it tore at the very heart of existing provisions ensuring bicyclists and pedestrians at least have a seat at the table when transportation decisions are made at the state and local level.
Together with our colleagues in the America Bikes coalition, we had anticipated the funding attacks and had been working with Republican allies on the committee to prepare an amendment to restore funding. We had not anticipated the fury with which this initiative was greeted by Committee Chairman John Mica, Speaker of the House John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor – they evidently worked hard to dissuade their colleagues from supporting the bi-partisan amendment.
Chairman Mica and the House leadership succeeded in blocking a pro-bike amendment to the House transportation bill, but we made them work for it.
Representatives Petri (WI) and Johnson (IL) were rock stars. Despite the incredible pressure, they held firm and even added a third Republican when the final vote came, Frank LoBiondo (NJ). Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-IL) joined the amendment and helped ensure every Democrat voted for it; fiery support coming from Reps Rahall (WV) and DeFazio (OR). Although we lost by just two votes, I think we left a big impression.
That was in large part due to the thousands of you (18,000 e-mails sent out through our on-line advocacy system alone, tens of thousands more through our allies) who called or e-mailed your Members of Congress on the Committee. This fantastic support made a difference. Several Republican members were truly on the fence right up to the last minute, because they had heard so loudly from their constituents. Thank you for taking the time to do this.
So what happens now? Well, the bill was finally approved in Committee and is currently scheduled to be debated on the floor of the House during the week of February 13 – it is still a very partisan bill and trying to pass an amendment is going to be extremely tough, should we go that route.
Meanwhile, the Senate MAP-21 bill threatens to spring back into life next week – which means we have to switch gears and ensure a strong “local control” provision is included to enable agencies to access funds for bicycling and walking projects. Senator Ben Cardin is our champion here, and if things do start to move as we expect we will need your help again.
(We honestly don’t control the timing of these things and really appreciate your patience and support as we send out bursts of e-mails asking for your help!)
If – and it’s a big if – both House and Senate complete their bills, including provisions to pay for them, they’ll try to combine them and get them to the President before March 31. Failing that, we will once again be looking at an extension of the current programs, but we won’t be able to let our guard down for a second: we have been warned to expect more attacks on dedicated funding for bicycling and walking programs.
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
Representative Tom Petri (R-WI) and his colleagues Timothy Johnson (R-IL), and Frank LoBiondo (R-NJ) showed themselves today to be strong and brave defenders of biking and walking, a balanced transportation system, and livable communities. Thanks also to Daniel Lipinski (D-IL) for co-sponsoring the pro-biking amendment and all of the democrats who votes for it.
The amendment lost by just two votes. This was a strong showing in a very difficult political environment. The House leadership strongly opposed the amendment, so our thanks goes to Reps. Petri, Johnson, and LoBiondo for standing with their constituents and people everywhere who value walking and biking. If these Congressmen represent you, please let them know you recognize their efforts.
Watch this inspired performance from Representative Peter DeFazio (D-OR) in which he says we’re going back to the pre-1980s in this country:
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
UPDATE II: Petri-Johnson-Lipinsky Amendment failed by two votes, 27 yea, 29 no. Thank you to everyone who contacted their members to support this amendment. We came very close. This is a major set-back for bicycling and walking and a balance transportation system, but we will keep up the fight.
Here’s League President Andy Clarke on an important vote taking place Thursday, Feb. 2, 2012, that may well determine the fate of cycling in the proposed House transportation bill:
Tomorrow, on the day of the House vote on the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act, Representatives Tom Petri (R-WI), Timothy Johnson (R-IL), and Daniel Lipinsky (R-IL) will submit an amendment to preserve bicycling and walking. The outcome is likely to come down to one or two key votes.
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
By popular demand, you can now read the top ten list of reasons the proposed House transportation bill, the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act, is terrible for bicycling and livable communities.
And you can still watch Andy Clarke spell it out here:
Top 10 Reasons the House’s Proposed Transportation Bill is
Bad for Biking and Walking
10. No traffic calming.
Under current law, traffic calming and bicycle/pedestrian safety are eligible for funding from the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). The House’s proposed bill would make traffic calming and bike/ped safety ineligible for funding, encouraging faster, more dangerous streets.
Current law requires that rumble strips on roads “do no adversely affect the safety and mobility of bicyclists, pedestrians or the disabled.” The proposed House bill eliminates this language, allowing for unsafe placement of rumble strips that create deadly safety hazards for people riding bicycles.
Currently, when a state or local community is interested in making their streets safer for bicyclists and pedestrians, they can turn to clearinghouses for information about funding sources, best practices, and other technical assistance. The House’s transportation bill would eliminate bicycle/pedestrian and Safe Routes to School clearinghouses, making it harder for states and local communities to find technical assistance.
Today’s federal transportation laws require states to keep Bicycle/Pedestrian specialists and Safe Routes to School Coordinators on staff. As huge agencies with thousands of employees, state Departments of Transportation benefit from having one or two people familiar with biking and walking issues. The House bill would eliminate these positions, effectively making state DOTs less familiar with bicycling and walking safety.
Under current law, transit funds can be used for projects that make it safer and easier to ride a bike to and from bus stops, subway stations, and train stations. Even though bicycle parking at transit stations, bike access to transit, and bike-sharing are cost-effective fixes that improve safety, the proposed House bill would eliminate federal support for these projects.
Current transportation laws allows for the use of federal funding in converting abandoned railroad corridors into walking and biking trails. The House’s proposed transportation bill makes rail trails ineligible for federal funding.
Under current law, when states do work on a bridge that has bicycle or pedestrian access on either side, they are required to build safe bicycle or pedestrian access across the bridge itself. Even though it’s only logical that people on traveling by bicycle or by foot should be able to cross bridges safely, the proposed House bill eliminates the requirement that states provide bridge access for walkers and bicyclists when it makes the most sense.
Under current law, states can receive Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding to support projects that reduce transportation-related pollution. Currently, states use CMAQ dollars to support bicycling and walking infrastructure, which are proven to help reduce air pollutants by encouraging people to walk or bike instead of drive.
No longer. The House bill would change CMAQ by making congestion reduction, not air quality, the operative measure for eligibility. In other words, in order to qualify for CMAQ funding, a project doesn’t need to reduce air pollution; it just needs to be “likely” to reduce congestion. Under this new definition, the construction of new highway lanes qualifies for CMAQ funding. If the House bill were to become law, states would likely allocate CMAQ funds for highway construction at the expense of bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly projects.
In the House bill’s own words, the Safe Routes to School Program is “repealed.” This wildly successful program helped communities fund transportation infrastructure and education to keep kids safe on their bike rides and walks to school and encourage healthy activity.
Despite the program’s success and very low cost, the House bill would completely eliminate the program, reversing years of progress in making streets safer for kids.
…And the number one problem with the House transportation bill is…
1. Transportation Enhancements is gone.
For the past twenty years, Transportation Enhancements has helped communities build the sidewalks, crosswalks, and bikeways that keep people safe on the streets. As less than 1% of all federal transportation spending, this tiny yet effective program financed projects that made it easier, more convenient, and much safer to walk or ride a bike.
The proposed House transportation bill eliminates bicycling’s most significant funding source by making Transportation Enhancements optional. Rather than finding new ways for towns and cities to keep bicycle riders and pedestrians safe on the streets, states will be encouraged to use these dollars to build wider, faster, more dangerous arterials and highways.
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
The 50 happiest people in America this morning are waking up from a 20-year nightmare. You probably don’t know their names and you certainly wouldn’t recognize them in the street – they are the heads of the 50 state Departments of Transportation and they’ve just been promised a check for more than $200 billion over the next four years, no strings attached, to do what they love best: build highways.
For the last 20 years, they’ve had to pretend that they care about other things than highways, cars and trucks. But if the proposed highway bill introduced into Congress yesterday actually makes it into law, they can do away with that pretense. They won’t have to pretend to do anything for people who don’t drive cars; they’ll be able to skip through the public involvement process and environmental reviews; they can override local officials and plant an interstate in your back yard in double quick time – oh, and there will be heavier and longer trucks than ever thundering past your bedroom window, not only on those interstates but on many other roads besides.
Even better, the huge check comes with a variety of complex and intricate financial measures allowing them to leverage those funds and borrow a whole lot more, effectively mortgaging the future of these programs for years to come. Too bad that these agencies are among the least accountable and transparent of any at arguably the least accountable and transparent level of government – really, who knows their state legislators and if they have any effective control over their state DOT?
The House transportation bill hands the states unlimited authority to build highways like this...
...Don't expect anything but more of this...
...and say goodbye to events like this ribbon cutting for a new bike lane.
Surely all this money comes with a big vision and plan, right? Wrong. The bill has no vision or discernible direction short of just handing the keys of the car over to the State DOTs. Of course, it is purportedly about the safety of the traveling public – yet prohibits the funding of red light or speed cameras; eliminates the Safe Routes to School program, and allocates ten times more funding to increasing and speeding up traffic than it does to safety projects. Of course, it is supposedly about relieving congestion – yet eliminates most of the funding for any alternatives to driving alone and promises more and bigger highways for more and bigger vehicles which results in, if the last 60 years of evidence is anything to go by, more people getting stuck in traffic for longer than ever.
Perhaps the bill is about jobs and infrastructure? For sure, it’s about building a lot of highways. Unfortunately, it’s not so much about rebuilding and repairing the highways we’ve already got, which is an admirable goal we can all share AND sustains more jobs than building new highways we then can’t afford to maintain. And sadly there is NO place in the bill for cost-effective programs to create a more walk-able and bike-able transportation system for people that also creates more jobs per dollar spent than new highways.
Of course, we’re biased. The bill would be a disaster for bicycling and walking programs, because they are all gone. That should matter to you whether you ride a bike or not (we’re going to assume that you do walk and need to get across the street every now and then) because the principles of local control, providing transportation choices, and improving the quality of life in communities are important way beyond the bicycling community. That’s what investing in bicycling and walking is all about.
The tiny sliver of funding – just 1.5 percent – currently carved out to serve the needs of people making 12% of trips and comprising 14% of fatal crash victims, clearly is a major irritant to these agencies and their political allies. No doubt they will celebrate the return of this money and each of the 50 agencies can build another few hundred feet of Interstate instead…But it all adds up, right. Because they are also getting back all the money from discretionary programs and a 5% bonus from those high priority projects that won’t be foisted on them this time around.
No wonder this group of 50 people is smiling so broadly this morning; they are getting the closest thing to a blank check that the Federal government is writing these days.
To be fair, there are a few of this group that genuinely does care about local priorities, promoting alternatives, creating more livable communities, and the safety of people other than speeding drivers. We need them to stand up and speak up for the things they care about, because they aren’t going to be able to do them if this bill passes.
Andy Clarke League President
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
Moments ago, Congressman John Mica (R-FL) announced the introduction of the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act. The proposed bill eliminates dedicated funding for bicycling and walking as we feared, and it goes much further and systematically removes bicycling from the Federal transportation program. It basically eliminates our status and standing in the planning and design of our transportation system—a massive step backwards for individuals, communities and our nation. It’s a step back to a 1950s highway- and auto-only program that makes no sense in the 21st century.
• destroying Transportation Enhancements by making it optional;
• repealing the Safe Routes to School program, reversing years of progress in creating safe ways for kids to walk and ride bicycles to school;
• allowing states to build bridges without safe access for pedestrians and bicycles;
• eliminating bicycle and pedestrian coordinators in state DOTs; and
• eliminating language that insures that rumble strips “do not adversely affect the safety or mobility of bicyclists, pedestrians or the disabled.”
On Thursday, the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee will mark-up the bill and Representatives Petri (R-WI) and Johnson (R-IL) will sponsor an amendment that restores dedicated funding for Transportation Enhancements and Safe Routes to School. Representatives Petri and Johnson can only be successful if everyone with a stake in safe sidewalks, crosswalks, and bikeways contacts their representative today.
Because of these urgent new developments, and the vital importance of a HUGE turnout on Capitol Hill in March, the National Bike Summit early bird registration deadline has been extended to Feb 20. We need every single cyclist in Washington, D.C. that the city can hold (and that’s thousands …). Register today!
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
By Mary Lauran Hall, Communications Coordinator, America Bikes
For the past 20 years, the federal Transportation program has included dedicated funding for biking and walking. Over the course of twenty years and three federal transportation laws, federal support for bicycle- and pedestrian-friendly infrastructure projects has slowly ticked upwards. As a result, more and more communities feature safe roads for people who travel on foot or by bicycle and more people are bicycling — there has been a 40% increase in bicycling from 2000 to 2009 and a surge in Bicycle Friendly Communities.
In 1992, Congress passed ISTEA, the first federal transportation bill to include funding for transit, biking, and walking. As each consecutive transportation bill passed and continued dedicated funding for biking and walking, funding increased from $23 million for 50 new projects in 1992 to $297 million dollars and 971 projects in 2000, to a record $1.2 billion dollars and 3010 projects in 2009.
However, recently there has been a drop in funding and projects — since 2009 — as a result of the decline in stimulus spending that was available for a limited period and uncertainty over the future of the programs. A similar phenomenon occurred between 1997 and 2005. Now, however, a new transportation bill threatens to eliminate federal support for biking and walking infrastructure all together.
Next Thursday, the House Transportation Committee will vote (see timeline) on the American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act, a bill that eliminates crucial funds for biking and walking. Representatives on the Transportation Committee are key positions to save dedicated funding for biking and walking.
The American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act, the long awaited multi-year Transportation bill, eliminates the two largest programs that fund biking and walking infrastructure — Transportation Enhancements and Safe Routes to School. Without these programs, communities all over the country will lose resources to build the sidewalks, crosswalks, and bikeways that make biking and walking safe and accessible in communities across the country.
We can’t let that happen – take action now and ask your elected officials to preserve biking and walking.
Biking and walking are essential parts of everyday transportation in the U.S., and turning off federal funding for projects that keep Americans safe would represent a significant step backwards.
Federal funding for biking and walking keeps people safe. Two out of three pedestrian deaths take place on roads built with federal funding, and new sidewalks, crosswalks, and bikeways help end preventable deaths and make roads safer for everyone. Moreover, biking and walking make up 12 percent of all trips, but only 1.5 percent of all federal transportation funding.
America Bikes is working in conjunction with their partners to introduce an amendment that will preserve funding for biking and walking. During Thursday’s Transportation and Infrastructure Committee vote in the House, Representatives will have the opportunity to pass this amendment to save biking and walking.
To learn more about this issue and keep up-to-date as the bill moves forward, visit americabikes.org. And please, don’t forget to take action and share the action alert to your fellow bicyclists.
Busy day today in the world of bicycling advocacy.
Complete Streets
Last night, we told you about the Complete Streets-inspired amendment that the Senate Commerce Committee is considering tomorrow. You can still contact your Senator, if she or he is a member of the Commerce Committee, to voice your support for Senator Begich’s amendment.
Blue Ridge Parkway Management Plan
This morning, we sent out an action alert to bicyclists in Virginia, Tennessee, and North Carolina to ask them tosend in comments to the Blue Ridge Parkway Supervisor on the park’s 20-year Draft Management Plan. Cyclists in other states are also welcome to comment. In it’s current form, the plan could limit the Parkway’s ability to sufficiently plan for biking in the future.
We have been working closely with the Virginia Bicycling Federation, the Adventure Cycling Association, and the International Mountain Bicycling Association on the Blue Ridge Parkway campaign. We are asking the park planners to: 1) Halt the National Historic Landmark application process. The designation would make it harder to make future improvements for bicycling access, such as wider shoulders and trails. 2) Recognize and promote cycling in the Draft Management Plan as a viable and important aspect of Parkway visitation. 3) Work with cyclists, the surrounding communities, and the general public to meet the needs of today’s changing world.
It is a pleasure to work with such committed bicycling advocates across the country. I look forward to seeing many of you at the National Bike Summit in March.
Darren Flusche League Policy Analyst
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Last week, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) released traffic fatality and injury numbers for 2010. Overall, the trend in headed in the right direction. The number of motor vehicle traffic fatalities – 32,885 – was the lowest since 1949. Thankfully, there were ten fewer bicyclist fatalities in 2010 than in 2009; but 618 cyclist deaths is still 618 too many.
There was one stunning exception to the downward trend: injuries to pedestrians spiked. The number of pedestrians injured in traffic crashes increased 19 percent, going from 59,000 in 2009 to 70,000 in 2010, according to NHTSA’s data. Meanwhile, pedestrian fatalities increased 4.2 percent. Safer cars and drivers wearing seatbelts may be helping drivers’ safety, but they are little help to a person on foot.
Photo of an “incomplete street” in Charlotte, NC from the National Complete Streets Coalition website.
With a one year increase of 11,000 pedestrian injuries, it is a good time to consider what can be done to improve road safety for all road users. Senator Begich (D-AK) has introduced an amendment (to S.1950) that would require the Federal Department of Transportation to set safety standards for motorized and non-motorized modes. (A state could write its own safety policy or law to be exempted from the federal standard.) This law would give the US DOT the authority enact a Complete Streets policy and encourage states to implement their own.
The law says the Secretary of Transportation “shall establish standards to ensure that the design of Federal surface transportation projects provides for the safe and adequate accommodation, in all phases of project planning, development, and operation, of all users of the transportation network, including motorized and non-motorized users.” [Emphasis mine.] As stated above, states are granted a waiver if they pass a law of their own that accomplishes the same. The Secretary “shall determine whether the applicable State has achieved compliance with this section,” according to the amendment language.
The Commerce Committee will hear the bill on Wednesday, Dec. 14th at 10:00am. These Senators are on the Committee. You can use our Advocacy Center to send a message to your Senator to urge them to support the Begich amendment to S. 1950 for the SAFETY FOR MOTORIZED AND NONMOTORIZEDUSERS.
Majority Members
Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV
West Virginia
Senator Daniel K. Inouye
Hawaii
Senator John F. Kerry
Massachusetts
Senator Barbara Boxer
California
Senator Bill Nelson
Florida
Senator Maria Cantwell
Washington
Senator Frank R. Lautenberg
New Jersey
Senator Mark Pryor
Arkansas
Senator Claire McCaskill
Missouri
Senator Amy Klobuchar
Minnesota
Senator Tom Udall
New Mexico
Senator Mark Warner
Virginia
Senator Mark Begich
Alaska
Minority Members
Ranking Member Kay Bailey Hutchison
Texas
Senator Olympia Snowe
Maine
Senator Jim DeMint
South Carolina
Senator John Thune
South Dakota
Senator Roger Wicker
Mississippi
Senator Johnny Isakson
Georgia
Senator Roy Blunt
Missouri
Senator John Boozman
Arkansas
Senator Patrick J. Toomey
Pennsylvania
Senator Marco Rubio
Florida
Senator Kelly Ayotte
New Hampshire
Senator Dean Heller
Nevada
Darren Flusche League Policy Analyst
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Three of America’s largest cycling organizations — Adventure Cycling Association, Alliance for Biking & Walking, and the League of American Bicyclists – wish to thank the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for the significant improvements the agency made last week in an important technical advisory (TA) regarding the application of rumble strips on U.S. roadways.
The FHWA issued a revised TA on rumble strips in May 2011, the first such revision in ten years. The TA is important because it provides official national guidance on the use of rumbles and influences state and local agency action in their use of rumbles on roadways of all types. FHWA had indicated that this new advisory would substantially improve the TA’s guidance on the application of rumble strips and how they affected bicyclists. As we previously noted the May 2011 TA went backwards from the 2001 TA in its lack of inclusion of cyclists’ safety issues.
The newly revised TA, released on November 16, 2011, is a substantial improvement. It includes a new section about the accommodation of all roadway users (Section 9), with a special emphasis on the needs of cyclists, and lays out “a number of measures that should be considered to accommodate bicyclists,” including wide shoulders, bicycle gaps (intervals without rumble strips that allow cyclists to safety cross back or forth), and customized rumble treatments to allow more space for cyclists. The new TA also includes a significantly improved section on public outreach and involvement.
There are still sections of the new TA that raise concerns for cyclists, including Section 7b, which identifies the optimal “length” (or width) of rumble strips as 16 inches, a dimension which can make it more likely that these strips will cut into useable road shoulder space for cyclists.
It will be important for local citizens and organizations to pay close attention to the proposed addition of rumble strips on existing roadways and when roads are being built, reconstructed or repaved.
In addition to FHWA’s new advisory, further background and guidance can be found in the League’s Bicycling and Rumble Strips report and information on state-by-state use of of rumbles prepared by Adventure Cycling Association. Adventure Cycling has also developed a Flickr page where people can share photos of well-designed and poorly-designed rumble strips.
For more on this, please see the joint press release.
Matt Wempe League State and Local Advocacy Coordinator
Mr. Wempe joined the League in September 2011. For the three years prior, he worked as a transportation planner and Safe Routes to School Coordinator in Fort Collins, Colo. He holds a BA in Economics from the University of Illinois at Chicago and a Masters of Urban and Regional Planning from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.
2. The outline of the House transportation re-authorization bill would entirely eliminate Transportation Enhancements, along with the Safe Routes to School and Recreational Trails programs. Even the vague language about eligibility seems to imply that states would have to jump through additional hoops to use federal funds on bicycling and walking projects.
But what would it look like if we didn’t have Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to Schools (and the non-motorized transportation pilot program) and the Recreational Trails program?
Here’s the amount of federal money states have spent on bicycling and walking projects each year since 1992:
Click to enlarge.
We’ve seen tremendous growth over the past twenty or so years, with a notable spike during the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, the stimulus. Active transportation projects are popular and local and regional agencies are increasingly calling for these types of projects, but they need support from federal funds.
Here is where the funds came from, by funding program:
What if we didn’t have Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to School & the Pilot Program, and Recreational Trails?
Just imagine all for trails, bridges, and road facilities that would not exist without the blacked out funds.
Now, here’s the picture for FY2011, using newly released numbers from the Federal Highway Administration:
And without dedicated funds?
Pretty bleak. As these charts illustrate, it is going to be a critical year for the National Bike Summit to maintain dedicated funding for bicycling and walking projects and fight for bicyclists’ rights. Register now.
Darren Flusche League Policy Analyst
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Kory Northrop created these graphics to show the relationship between bicycle commuting, safety, and government spending. His aim, he writes, was to present bicycling-related data ‘in a manner that is more easily digestible [which] is important to informing policymakers and the public about these issues.”
Kory presents, graphically, data from our tables of American Community Survey bicycle commuting data to show bicycle commuter rates by state, with boxes that illustrate the gender mode split (the larger the yellow box, the more female cyclists). The graph is interactive: you can scroll through the years from 2005 to 2010.
Using the list of US cities with populations over 60,000, Kory graphed commuter data, sort-able by the number of bike commuters, the percentage of bicycle commuters, and the number of female and male bicyclists.
Next, Kory presents the number of bicyclist fatalities in the 50 states for each year since 2000. For the years 2005 through 2010 he calculated a fatality rate using the number of bicycle commuters as the denominator.
Then Kory shows the amount of FHWA Federal-Aid transportation funds states spent on bicycle and pedestrian projects since 1992. The size of the circle represents per capita spending. This is a topic close to our hearts. For more information on accessing federal funds for bicycling and walking projects, please visit our Advocacy Advance website.
Finally, there is an overview that shows commuter levels and fatalities over the years.
Vote now. We’d love to see Kory’s graphic win the challenge.
But if you’re not sold, you have another bicycling graphic option to choose. This one shows roadway bicycle “accidents” on several roads in Chicago. (Ed. note, we know the preferred term is crash.)
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
We are watching this legislation carefully and are raising this issue with Congress. Right now, we want to show the Senate how important the right to the road is to cyclists – and voters. As part of our “I Bike. I Vote.” campaign, please sign our petition opposing the mandatory sidepath provision.
We will keep you updated on our progress on the mandatory sidepath clause and other critical issues in the proposed legislation. An action alert may be needed at some point. In the meantime, you can register for the National Bike Summit, where together we will make the very strong case for bicycling to Congress.
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Section § 203 (d) (p. 226), the part dealing with the “Federal lands transportation program”, states:
(d) BICYCLE SAFETY.—The Secretary of the appropriate Federal land management agency shall prohibit the use of bicycles on each federally owned road that has a speed limit of 30 miles per hour or greater and an adjacent paved path for use by bicycles within 100 yards of the road.
No, your eyes are not deceiving you. This paragraph would introduce a mandatory sidepath law on roads in our National Parks and other Federal lands.
For those unfamiliar with this term, it’s a provision that used to be found in a lot of state vehicle codes that says that when a sidepath (bike path, trail) is provided for cyclists, they have to use it and can’t ride on the parallel roadway. Over the past 20 years, the number of states with this law still on their books has dwindled to just a handful. The problem with the provision is that the restriction applies regardless of the quality, safety, and utility of the path provided; it disregards the needs of cyclists to be on the roadway to access shops, services etc.; and ignores our fundamental right to the road.
The law is rooted in a couple of mistaken philosophies. One such idea is that it’s just not safe for cyclists to sharing the road with cars going more than 30 mph and thus, for our own safety, we should have to use a path that is provided. This paternalistic (at best) approach is guilty of not only blaming the victim but simply doesn’t make sense unless every higher-speed roadway has a path alongside it.
The second principle at play is the idea that “we provided this path for you, you’d darned well better use it”. To which our response should be…if the path is any good, you shouldn’t have to force anyone to use it; they will use it voluntarily because it works. Our communities are replete with examples of poorly designed, built and maintained paths that are little more than glorified sidewalks. Many of these are throwbacks to the 1970s and 1980s; we are generally getting better about this. Anyway, cyclists routinely ignore these shoddy paths because they are dangerous, slow, and out of the way – but anyone that rides any amount knows that’s kind of hard to explain succinctly as you respond to the inevitable “get off the road” epithets yelled by passing motorists.
The inclusion of this provision in the Senate bill is really troubling on many levels.
Given the Park Service’s general track record on accommodating bicyclists of late – i.e. we really don’t want you in our Parks – it’s hard to assume any positive motives behind this proposal. Is there data or any factual basis for this move?
What precedent does this set? Two pretty awful ones come quickly to mind: why stop at Federal land highways; and if roads with higher than 30mph speed limits are so unsafe for bicyclists to share with motorists, bicyclists shouldn’t be using them, period.
This throwback to a paternalistic 1950s approach to cyclists safety is bad news; flies in the face of a 30-year trend of removing these bad laws from state vehicle codes; and threatens our long-cherished and very basic right to the road. We will do all we can to stop it from becoming law – but that won’t happen overnight.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee just voted the bill out of Committee with minimal changes (the authors had such hard-fought and finely-negotiated language that they really didn’t want to change anything at this stage). There are quite a few things that have to fall into place before the bill comes to the Senate floor for a vote (like the entire transit section, finances to pay for the bill, and floor time on the Senate schedule).
Because there isn’t a specific opportunity to strip the language from the bill right now, you won’t likely see an action alert or all-out campaign – but that doesn’t mean we aren’t working to get the job done. All our colleagues in the America Bikes coalition are on the same page, and can’t believe this language has reared its ugly head again after so many years.
We are ready with proposed changes – in this case, simply striking the provision altogether – and we’ll need to have support lined up to make it happen. For the meantime, you can write your Senators an e-mail or letter saying that you REALLY don’t like this provision. Tell them that it’s the wrong thing to do today and sets an awful precedent for tomorrow. This will help get the issue on their radar and will help with a specific push later.
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
Transportation for America has put together a helpful visual (above) on their blog showing the consolidation of the various funding programs, as proposed by the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works. As you can see, the main funding sources for bicycling — Transportation Enhancements, Safe Routes to Schools, and Recreational Trails — would get grouped into the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program category. This category has two parts: traditional CMAQ activities and additional activities. Bicycling projects fall under additional activities. Unfortunately, the total amount of funding for bicycling projects is equal only to Transportation Enhancements’ FY 2009 level. There is also an opt-out clause that allows states to use the “additional activities” money for the traditional CMAQ activities, if “unobligated balances” accumulate.
For more on this, see the America Bikes side-by-side analysis of MAP-21 with SAFETEA-LU (the current authorization act).
Darren Flusche League Policy Analyst
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Late last week, the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works released their draft of the surface transportation authorization bill, the law that will determine transportation programs and funding. The America Bikes Coalition has reviewed the 600 page document and issued the following statement:
The America Bikes coalition – representing the nation’s leading bicycling and walking groups – today expressed their appreciation for the continued inclusion of funding opportunities for biking and walking in MAP‐21.
America Bikes remains deeply concerned, however, that bicycling and walking programs suffer disproportionate cuts in funding in the new bill, and that significant additional activities are made eligible for these limited funds. We remain committed to working with the EPW Committee and full Senate to resolve these issues, especially in the light of the Senate’s continued, strong bi‐partisan support for bicycle and pedestrian funding as shown in several recent votes on the Senate floor.
The process of honoring the public’s strong support for these programs begins immediately with amendments that have been introduced already by Senate supporters of dedicated funding for non‐motorized transportation.
Specific concerns include:
1. The current dedicated funding programs for bicycling and walking are combined into one program, with significantly less funding;
2. An expanded list of eligible activities are added to this smaller funding pot, including such big‐ticket items as NEPA compliance and land acquisition for wetland mitigation; and
3. The proposed bill effectively allows states to completely opt out of the program and would allow all this money to be redirected to highway construction.
The America Bikes coalition calls on the leaders of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee to restore dedicated funding for bicycling and walking in MAP‐21 and remove the opt‐out provision that would encourage States to eliminate funding for these two modes altogether.
When America Bikes, America Benefits.
From San Francisco to Bentonville, Arkansas, and from Oklahoma City to New York City, communities are increasingly investing in bicycling and walking infrastructure and programs to support popular, healthy and cost‐effective transportation. These investments – made possible by dedicated federal transportation dollars – are working:
• Commuting trips by bike have increased nationwide by more than 40% since 2000; bicycling and walking now account for 12% of all trips in the United States.
• Thousands of Safe Routes to School programs are reducing congestion and improving safety in communities across the country.
• Recreational trails are heavily used and provide crucial economic benefits, especially in rural communities. A transportation bill designed to efficiently move America in this new century should continue to include dedicated funding to create safe and accessible places for people to bike and walk.
Since 2005, a total of just 1.5 percent of annual federal transportation funding has been devoted to supporting these activities. Biking and walking not only comprise more than 12 percent of all trips but also account for 14% of annual traffic fatalities.
Dedicated funding for bike/ped projects – one or two cents of every dollar – is a time‐tested, popular, and effective approach to building a truly multi‐modal national transportation system that offers choice, safety and access for all.
Increasing the safety and use of non‐motorized transportation reduces congestion, saves lives and money, protects the environment…and creates more jobs per million dollars of investment than highway‐only projects: exactly what MAP‐21 should be trying to do.
Dedicated funding for bicycling and walking enjoys broad support at all levels of Government. Less than one week ago, 60 Senators voted in bi‐partisan support of preserving the Transportation Enhancement program – the third such vote in support of the program this year. At the state level, transportation enhancement, safe routes to school and recreational trails programs typically receive at least three times more requests for funding than is available. In May, a survey by the U.S. Conference of Mayors showed solid support among Mayors for funding of bicycling and walking infrastructure.
America Bikes is a coalition of leaders from the bicycle community advocating for positive outcomes for bicycling in the federal transportation bill.
Darren Flusche League Policy Analyst
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Last week in Washington started on a high – and not just the sugar high generated by Halloween candy. We opened registration for the 2012 National Bike Summit. The Summit is a huge deal for us; a lot of work to pull together, but incredibly rewarding to see the growing impact it has each year on our issues and our movement. Clearly, the 2012 edition is going to be as critical as any previous events coming as it does just eight days before the current transportation bill expires.
Our excitement is obviously shared: folks in Arkansas and Oklahoma were proudly telling me later in the week that they had signed up already and even knew what number registrant they were!
Tuesday was a face-to-face America Bikes board meeting…and of course it was also the day of the remarkable Senate vote on Rand Paul’s amendment to strip the transportation enhancements program of all its funding and divert those dollars to bridge repair. Thanks to a massive outpouring of e-mails and calls from tens of thousands of supporters, the amendment was voted down by 60 to 38. We learned the result during the America Bikes board meeting, and it was an exciting moment. Sixty votes in the Senate is actually a pretty big deal. That’s a veto-proof majority and not many issues have garnered that kind of bi-partisan support in this most divided Congress. Yes, Republicans, Democrats and Independents voted together to unequivocally support the continuation of the TE program.
The following day, as if more validation were needed, a huge report was released by the Global Health Institute at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Researchers found that:
Cutting out short auto trips and replacing them with mass transit and active transport would yield major health benefits, according to a study just published in the scientific journal Environmental Health Perspectives. The biggest health benefit was due to replacing half of the short trips with bicycle trips during the warmest six months of the year, saving about $3.8 billion per year from avoided mortality and reduced health care costs for conditions like obesity and heart disease.
Wow, that’s just what the enhancements and safe routes to schools programs could help make happen, right? You betcha. So, thank you, Senators, for having the wisdom to maintain funding for such a valuable program with long-term financial benefits to individuals, communities and the nation. Remember, the total amount of Federal funding going to bicycling and walking projects in FY2011 was around $750 million…so $3.8 billion annually in returns is a pretty good investment by anyone’s standards!
Thursday morning I was traveling and picked up a copy of USA Today. The cover story was a new AAA research report on the phenomenal cost of motor vehicle crashes – $6m for every one of the more than 35,000 fatalities in 2009. Two interesting things beyond the staggering overall costs involved: first, the cost and impacts of crashes far outweigh those caused by congestion, which suggests safety should be higher priority than congestion relief for highway departments. Second, the study compared the relative costs of crashes per capita in different sized cities and showed low and high ranges. Lo and behold, all of the low-end communities – where crashes were the lowest – were Bicycle Friendly Communities of note: San Francisco (gold), Colorado Springs (silver) and Boulder (platinum). Coincidence? I don’t think so.
There is tremendous bi-partisan support for encouraging bicycling and walking as part of Federal transportation program. There are incredible health and environmental benefits to be had from such an investment. And in those places that are investing in making non-motorized transportation work, every resident is benefitting in terms of safety and quality of life, whether they bicycle or not.
Could the week possibly get any better?
Well, late on Friday, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee released their 600-page draft of the next Federal transportation bill. For now, you can look at the bill yourself (enjoy…it is only 600 pages after all), and review thisside-by-side analysis of the critical funding sections for bicycling and walking programs and decide for yourself what impact this might have on funding for those activities. We’ll provide more commentary on Tuesday, ahead of the Committee mark-up on Wednesday – then you’ll discover whether the high’s of the week continued, or the scary part of Halloween came to the fore…
Andy Clarke League President
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
It was great to see the turn-out on Friday when representatives from federal agencies, Maryland and the District of Columbia came together to celebrate the opening of a new section of the Anacostia River Trail at Bladensburg Waterfront Park, part of the Obama Administration’s America’s Great Outdoors program.
Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley praises the new Anacostia River Trail as DC Mayor Vincent Gray, US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Maryland's US Senator Ben Cardin look on.
Officials in attendance included:
Ken Salazar, Secretary of Interior
Ray LaHood, Secretary of Transportation
John D. Porcari, Deputy Secretary of Transportation
Bob Perciasepe, Deputy Administrator, EPA
Martin O’Malley, Governor of Maryland
Ben Cardin, United States Senator for Maryland
Rushern L. Baker, III, Prince George’s County Executive
Vincent Gray, Mayor of Washington, D.C.
Jon Jarvis, Director, National Park Service
Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar (green jacket) and Senator Ben Cardin (brown jacket) ride the new trail.
Darren Flusche League Policy Analyst
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
The Federal Highway Administration is seeking input into which critical areas of research they should invest their limited Surface Transportation Environment and Planning (STEP) Cooperative Research Program funds – and one of the focus areas is bicycle and pedestrian research. The comment period closes November 10, so get your comment in quickly using this FHWA website. This isn’t the place to suggest researching improvements to the bicycle itself, but the environment in which bicyclists operate and the way in which they operate is fair game. The level of interest in bike-related topics is important to the final allocation of research funds, so even if you don’t have a fully-formed research problem statement to submit, please throw your ideas into the hopper.
Andy Clarke League President
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
Thanks to all of you who contacted your Senators, Senator Rand Paul’s (R-KY) amendment that would have diverted Transportation Enhancement funds to bridge repairs, was soundly defeated. Transportation Enhancements are a key source of funding for bicycling and walking infrastructure. The amendment would not have made a significant impact on the state of repair of bridges, but would have drastically impacted active transportation investments. Sixty Senators voted against the measure.
While Sen. Paul once again railed against “squirrel sanctuaries,” as a possible use of Enhancement funds, Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) pointed out that Paul’s amendment would actually hinder bridge repair in certain instances. “The amendment prevents a bridge from being fixed if it is a historic bridge,” Boxer said. “There are thousands of those in this country, including the Brooklyn Bridge.”
Senator Rand Paul's anti-bike amendment failed by a vote of 38 to 60.
This was the thirdtime in two months that the Senate has voted to protect Transportation Enhancements. As long as the attacks keep coming, we’ll keep fighting them. Thank you to the thousands of people who sent action alerts to your Senators. We need to keep reminding them that these are popular, critical, and beneficial transportation projects. So far, they’re hearing us. Now is a good time to thank them.
Here is how the Senators voted (courtesy of www.Senate.gov, hat-tip Eric Rogers):
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Senator Rand Paul is proposing legislation that would take away the small amount of money that goes to bicycling programs and redirect it to bridge maintenance. It would be just a tiny drop in the bucket and it won’t even begin to solve the problems with our bridges. But it sounds good and some Senators might buy it. We must let our Senators know how critical the safety of bicyclists is. We need biking AND bridges, not one or the other.
League President Andy Clake explains what this is all about:
The attacks on bicycling spending seem relentless. Fortunately, no one is more relentless than cyclists. If the critics of bicycling in Congress think they can outlast us, they’re wrong. But they are trying again to do away with Transportation Enhancements. We can’t let any attack go unanswered — and this one is for real.
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
It’s happening again. Just one month ago, Sen. Coburn (R-OK) failed in his efforts to strip funding for Transportation Enhancements from the six-month transportation extension.
Now, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) is taking the lead in trying to destroy Transportation Enhancements. On November 1, the Senate will finalize the transportation appropriations bill, which sets funding levels for FY2012. Sen. Paul has offered an amendment to redirect all funding for Transportation Enhancements to bridge repair. Here’s why his arguments don’t make sense.
This is the third time in a month that a small group of Senators have targeted Transportation Enhancements, using a different angle each time. It is a red herring, and a waste of the Senate’s time and taxpayers dollars to focus on this small and valuable program when we are in dire need of real and viable solutions to fix our failing transportation system.
We agree on the need to keep our bridges safe, but the lives of pedestrians and cyclists are important too. That is why we believe Senator Paul should withdraw his amendment now and let the Senate EPW Committee, which has jurisdiction over writing the next transportation bill, do their job. The Committee is actually scheduled to mark-up their bill on November, 9. That is the appropriate time to discuss changes to the overall transportation program, not during the appropriations process.
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
New York City Transportation Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan, along with US Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and Congressman Earl Blumenauer, announced the release of the print version of the National Association of City Transportation Official’s Urban Bikeway Design Guide.
“This is a guide cities should use,” said Secretary LaHood in front of the Union Station Bike Station. He went on to enumerate all of the exciting things that are happening in cities from New York to Chicago to Portland. The Secretary also said today that he won’t serve a second term as Transportation Secretary — certainly bad news for bicyclists.
“The Urban Bikeway Design Guide is a really critical piece for cities across the country who want to encourage bicycling as part of the transportation mix,” League President Andy Clarke said after the event, “And it fills a real void in available information on designing and implementing more innovative roadway designs and designs that work in our cities. The on-line guide is already a valuable resource to aspiring Bicycle Friendly Communities – the print version just makes it seem even more real and impressive!”
From left, Congressman Earl Blumenauer, Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan, and League President Andy Clarke show off their new NACTO design guides.
The NACTO Urban Bikeways Design Guide takes a ride on Capital Bikeshare.
Darren Flusche League Policy Analyst
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Hard on the heels of a failed move in the US Senate to strip transportation enhancement funding out of the transportation bill, opponents of the program are now trying a new tack: claiming that bridges are falling down because of the funds diverted to “bike paths” and other beautification projects. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) has suggested that enhancement funds – the primary source of Federal funding for bicycling and walking infrastructure – be siphoned off to bridge repair, in part because one key Ohio River bridge in Kentucky is in need of repair and the state transportation agency “doesn’t have the money” to do the repairs.
If this sounds familiar, it is. You may remember some of the same rhetoric surfaced around the time of the Minneapolis bridge collapse, including a statement from then-Transportation Secretary Mary Peters that she later retracted. The arguments being used by Senator Paul don’t improve with age or re-telling and still make no sense. Here are a few of the reasons why:
Safety: Thirteen people died when the Minneapolis bridge collapsed in 2007: since then, close to 20,000 pedestrians and 2,800 cyclists have died on our nation’s highways, largely as a result of poor highway design and an historic lack of safe non-motorized infrastructure – exactly what the enhancement program was created to fix. No bridges have collapsed since 2007.
Fix it First: Between six and ten percent of Kentucky bridges are classified as “structurally deficient” – yet for every dollar Kentucky has spent in recent years on bridge repair, they have spent $6.50 building new roadway capacity; they spent 77% of their stimulus funds on new capacity rather than fixing existing bridges and roadways – the fourth worst record in the nation.
Use it or Lose It: Kentucky isn’t even spending all the Federal transportation money they have already been given for bridges on bridges: in fact, earlier this year they sent $6.9 million of unspent bridge funds BACK TO WASHINGTON DC. They are not alone: nationwide, more than $534 million of unused bridge funds were sent back to Washington DC by state Departments of Transportation.
A Question of Scale: Kentucky has four massive bridge & highway projects in its “transportation improvement program” each one costing between $1.5bn and $4.1bn. The transportation enhancement program for all 50 states is around $900m annually of which bike/ped projects are typically half. This means the entire nation’s primary source of bike and pedestrian program funding for the next 20 years would have to be diverted to rebuild four bridges in Kentucky…bridges that aren’t actually structurally deficient, they are “functionally obsolete”, which means they aren’t as big and wide as the highway lobby wants them to be.
Senator Paul should be a little more skeptical of the rhetoric of many of our state’s highway agencies when they plead poverty, warn of imminent bridge collapse, and complain about “their” funds being taken from them. In far too many cases, state departments of transportation are spending vast sums of public money on the wrong projects in the wrong places for all the wrong reasons. That’s one reason why they often struggle to get approval for projects that take so long to implement – they are still trying to build a 1950s-style highway system long after the sell-by date.
As his Senate colleagues were reminded just a couple of weeks ago, the enhancements program is popular, successful, heavily over-subscribed, and is creating the kind of infrastructure improvements and choices in communities that people want more of, not less.
Andy Clarke League President
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
Moments ago, the Senate passed a clean extension on the Transportation Bill with a large margin of 92-6. This means that all current transportation funding and programs will continue to March 31, 2012 — the date the extension expires. During this time we will have much work to do to ensure that bicycling is included in either a long term transportation bill or another extension. The National Bike Summit conveniently takes place on March 20-22 — our final opportunity to tell our representatives that we need bicycling in the transportation bill.
Votes are not made public until 20 minutes after passage of bills but here is the Senate link to keep checking.
Thanks to all of you for taking part in this very important action alert; telling your senators that “I bike. I vote.”; and spreading the word in your clubs and stores, with your colleagues, and on your social media sites. All of your calls and e-mails made the difference.
Meghan Cahill League Director of Communications
Cahill joined the League in December 2008 and has a BA in Media Communications with a concentration in Italian Studies from the College of Charleston.
Late yesterday afternoon Senator Coburn spoke on the Senate floor demanding that Transportation Enhancements be stripped from the Extension of the Surface Transportation bill, and that he is willing to shut down transportation in order to do it. (See our previous post on this subject for background.)
Sadly, Mr. Coburn’s demands are based on a misrepresentation of the facts about the Transportation Enhancement program, and a serious misunderstanding of the role bicycling and walking play in our nation’s transportation system. Mr. Coburn described transportation enhancements as not having anything to do with safety, or true transportation.
First of all The Transportation Enhancements program is 1.5% percent of the overall transportation program, not 10% as Mr. Coburn would have us believe.
Secondly – Mr. Coburn consistently highlights museums as primary examples of the projects that are funded by TE to try and make his case that TE has nothing to do with Transportation. The reality is that roughly one half (55%) of the 1.5% is usually spent on bicycling and walking infrastructure-such as sidewalks, crosswalks and bike lanes. Bicycling and walking trips make up 12% of all trips in the United States; bicyclists and pedestrians comprise 14% of all fatal crash victims on our nation’s roads – and yet these two modes of transportation receive barely more than 1% of Federal transportation investment. Active transportation is growing in popularity and significance in communities throughout the nation-and this welcome trend is due in part to the investment of Federal transportation funds in bicycling and walking infrastructure.
Thirdly – TE program has very much to do with safety. As mentioned previously, fourteen percent of roadway fatalities are bike riders and pedestrians- two-thirds of which occur on Federal aid Highways. While roadway fatalities have been decreasing- the percentage of fatalities that are bicyclists and pedestrians has increased. Building biking and walking infrastructure saves lives.
The real shame is that by holding up passage of a clean extension of the transportation bill, which Congress had already agreed to pass, Senator Coburn will keep 1.8 million people from working on highway construction projects for another six months.
We understand the Senate leadership has offered Mr. Coburn a chance to offer his amendment for a vote on the floor and although Mr. Coburn has not done so yet, we expect that that will be the case.
We can only hope the Mr. Coburn either withdraws his hold on the extension or allows the Senate to vote on his amendment. The bill extending transportation funding for the next six months is not the legislative vehicle to pass long term national transportation policy. That responsibility lies with the committees of jurisdiction and they should be afforded the opportunity to work out the details on what our nation’s transportation policy will be.
The League urges Congress to pass a clean extension to the transportation bill, and support continued dedicated funding for bicycling and walking programs. If you have not had an opportunity to contact your Senator yet please visit the League’s advocacy center today to do so. This maybe our last chance to make sure we have sufficient votes to beat back the Coburn amendment.
~Walter Finch Director of Advocacy, League of American Bicyclists
Finch joined the League in 2006 and has more than 20 years of experience in the transportation industry. He worked as a government relations associate with G.S. Proctor & Associates, served as the chief of staff for a member of Maryland’s House of Delegates, and worked at the U.S. Department of Transportation as the Special Assistant, Office of the Secretary, Office of Intermodalism.
Today we have sent a national alert asking you to call, e-mail or fax your Senators and ask them to protect funding for critical and popular bicycling and walking programs – please take a moment to do this if you haven’t already.
The good news is that we understand leaders of the House and Senate have agreed on a six-month “clean” extension of the current transportation programs that would preserve the transportation enhancements and other key funding programs for bicycling and walking infrastructure. That will give them six months to continue their work on writing a new transportation program for the longer term. We do not have to take action on the House side as we expect the House to pass it out.
The bad news is that Senator Coburn (R-OK) is still planning on introducing an amendment to strip the enhancements program from the otherwise clean extension. This is no idle threat. Two years ago a similar effort by Coburn was defeated by 59-39 and it’s a very different Congress today than it was in 2009. The additional reality is that if Coburn decides to pick this one issue on which to filibuster – and there’s every reason to believe he will – we will need not just a majority but a super majority of 60 Senators to vote to end a filibuster. That’s a real challenge on almost any issue these days.
So we need to take this threat seriously and contact our Senators today. The ask is pretty simple – “please support a clean extension to current transportation funding and please support continued dedicated funding for bicycling and walking programs in the next transportation authorization.” (Until we see the specific wording we won’t know whether we are asking for a vote for or against his amendment – last time the wording was such that a “no” vote was a vote “for” the enhancements programs.) Let’s send a strong and unmistakable message to Congress that investing in a smart, sustainable transportation system for the 21st century, one that offers choice and safety for all, includes dedicated funding for bicycling and walking.
The blog post from last week (read it for more details on the debate in Congress) went viral. We’ve sen an impressive response to the advocacy alert already. Thank you to all those would acted then. Please continue to spread the word to other supporters of bicycling and transportation options. Have you made the I Bike. I Vote. graphic your facebook picture yet?
Andy Clarke League President
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
Well, we knew September was going to be busy…and sure enough we’re seeing the opening moves in a major attack on funding for bike projects and programs.
This evening, the President talks to the nation about jobs and infrastructure, and he’ll likely repeat his plea for Congress to pass a “clean” extension to the Federal transportation program. The House Republican response includes an explicit demand that funding for bicycling and walking infrastructure be stripped out of the program.
Quick bit of background: the current transportation bill that funds highway, transit and bike/pedestrian improvements across the country basically expires at the end of this month. Congress either has to write a new law (highly unlikely) or agree to continue or extend the existing program for a set period until they write a new long-term law for the next five or six years. And, they can either pass a “clean” extension – not changing anything, just continuing what we’ve had since 2005 – or they might try to change a few things along the way.
Senator Coburn (OK) has said he won’t agree to an extension unless funding for bike projects is stripped out. Representatives Boehner and Cantor have basically said the same thing in the House. Yes, folks, they are willing to hold the entire transportation program hostage – infrastructure spending and millions of real jobs – to get rid of bike projects.
Today, the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee approved their extension bill. It’s clean. Most likely, Coburn will try to force a vote on the floor of the Senate next week to strip out the popular transportation enhancements program…which funds the lion’s share of bike and pedestrian projects around the country. So, if you’ve ridden on a bike trail or bike lanes, or used a bike rack on the front of a bus in the last few years…the chances are you’ve seen the program in action. And if Coburn, Cantor and Boehner succeed, we’ll see a dramatic drop-off in bicycling safety improvements.
Why would they do this, I hear you ask. After all, bike projects create jobs; bike projects improve safety; more bicyclists means less congestion, cleaner air, less oil consumption, fitter and healthier American’s. It’s baffling. It’s not like the transportation program is going to be cut by the amount they strip out for bike funding…no, the money still gets spent but it will likely buy us another mile or two of freeway instead of thousands of small-scale, labor-intensive bicycling and walking improvements.
Equally, the enhancements program is hardly eating up a massive chunk of the transportation program. Even though Cantor and Boehner like to leave the impression that it’s ten percent of the transportation program…it isn’t. Not even close. It’s ten percent of one of dozens of programs that make up the overall program. In fact, enhancements account for barely one percent of Federal transportation funds.
Another myth you’ll hear – most likely from Coburn’s camp – is that states will still be able to spend their funds on bicycling projects if they choose to do so. While that’s technically true, the reality is that most states will stop spending a dime on bike projects overnight. Utah has already stopped their program in anticipation; they just can’t wait!
We have to stop them. We need to save cycling! Go to our on-line advocacy center right now to contact your members of Congress. Tell them you support continued dedicated funding for bicycling and walking projects, and you support a clean extension to the transportation bill.
Andy Clarke League President
Clarke was appointed to the position of Executive Director in April of 2004 after successfully leading efforts to create, interpret and implement the various transportation programs that are available to improve conditions for bicycling and walking as the League’s State and Local Advocacy Director.
This morning at a White House briefing in the Rose Garden, President Obama, flanked by U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumpka and officials from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, called upon Congress to pass a clean extension of the surface transportation bill immediately upon their return next week. Emphasizing the importance of infrastructure investment on jobs and the economy he called upon Congress to stop the partisan gamesmanship and put the country first.
Given the current efforts in Congress to strip away funding for programs important to the bicycling community such as; Transportation Enhancements; Safe Routes to Schools; and Recreational Trails program, the League wholeheartedly supports the President’s message to Congress. We look forward to working with his Administration and supporters in Congress to see that a clean extension of the current transportation bill (SAFETEA-LU) is past. A clean extension means that all current programs in SAFETEA-LU will forgo any cuts or policy changes. Communities across the country will be able to continue to build upon the successes of the past decades to get more people riding more often.
~Walter Finch Director of Advocacy, League of American Bicyclists
Finch joined the League in 2006 and has more than 20 years of experience in the transportation industry. He worked as a government relations associate with G.S. Proctor & Associates, served as the chief of staff for a member of Maryland’s House of Delegates, and worked at the U.S. Department of Transportation as the Special Assistant, Office of the Secretary, Office of Intermodalism.
Construction costs are increasing, according to the Washington State DOT, which tracks costs in several western states. For example, after a steep decline from its peak in 2009, the cost of hot mix asphalt is beginning to tick back up. As state budgets are tightening, it is a good time to invest in transportation projects — like bicycling projects — that rely less on materials and commit a greater share of their totals costs to labor, putting people to work.
In June, the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, released their report, Pedestrian and Bicycle Infrastructure: A National Study of Employment Impacts, which showed that for each million dollars spent, bicycling projects create 46 percent more jobs than road-only projects. In addition to the employment benefits, as DOTs face shrinking budgets and rising costs of materials, bicycling projects can provide the biggest bang for the buck.
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Blog
Subscribe
