TESTIMONY OF THE
AMERICAN PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION
BEFORE THE
SENATE BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE
ON TRANSIT INVESTMENT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005
*******
March 25, 2004
SUBMITTED BY
American Public Transportation Association
1666 K Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 496-4800
APTA is a nonprofit international association of
over 1,500 public and private member organizations including transit
systems and commuter rail operators; planning, design, construction
and finance firms; product and service providers; academic institutions;
transit associations and state departments of transportation. APTA members
serve the public interest by providing safe, efficient and economical
transit services and products. Over ninety percent of persons using
public transportation in the United States and Canada are served by
APTA members.
INTRODUCTION
Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, on behalf of the
American Public Transportation Association (APTA), thank you for this opportunity
to testify on the Administration’s proposed Fiscal Year (FY) 2005 Budget for
the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).
ABOUT APTA
APTA’s 1,500 public and private member organizations serve
the public by providing safe, efficient, and economical public transportation
service, and by working to ensure that those services and products support
national economic, energy, environmental, and community goals.
APTA member organizations include public transit systems
and commuter railroads; design, construction and finance firms; product and
service providers; academic institutions; and state associations and departments
of transportation. More than ninety percent of the people who use public transportation
in the United States and Canada are served by APTA member systems.
BACKGROUND
Mr. Chairman, on behalf of APTA’s 1,500 member organizations,
I want to thank you, and the Members of this Committee, for your support of
public transportation issues generally, and in particular your successful
effort to pass a long-term authorization bill that addresses critical public
transit investment needs, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, and Equitable Transportation
Efficiency Act (SAFETEA), S.1072. In that regard, I am pleased to advise you
that the APTA Board of Directors at its March 7, 2004 meeting during APTA’s
Legislative Conference, unanimously approved a resolution in support of the
bill and commending the Senate Banking Committee on its outstanding leadership
in crafting the legislation. I would be pleased to submit a copy of APTA’s
resolution for the record.
Mr. Chairman, SAFETEA builds and improves upon the success
of ISTEA and TEA 21, both of which helped to increase transit ridership by
providing significant investments in transit infrastructure. The Senate-passed
SAFETEA bill grows investment in the federal transit program while building
on the successful structure of the existing program. It increases investment
for existing programs and addresses unmet program needs with funding growth.
Like APTA’s reauthorization proposal, SAFETEA provides extra growth for the
rural formula program, and it establishes a new tier under the small urban
formula program for communities that provide higher than usual levels of transit
service. It guarantees funding for all programs, regardless of whether they
are funded with general funds or trust funds, and maintains a level playing
field for modal investments by preserving the 80/20 federal match for all
federal transit capital programs. Again, we thank you for crafting this critically
important piece of legislation.
FISCAL YEAR 2005 TRANSIT INVESTMENT
APTA believes it is crucial to build on the success of TEA
21 - and the Senate’s action on SAFETEA - by continuing to provide significant
investment in the nation’s transit and highway infrastructure in the FY 2005
budget. That investment advances key national goals by producing jobs, providing
more mobility options to all Americans, improving the environment and reducing
dependence on foreign oil, and by providing a solid return on the investment.
In short, we urge that Congress provide no less than the $8.65 billion level
included in the Senate-passed SAFETEA bill in FY 2005.
THE ADMINISTRATION’S 2005 BUDGET
In contrast to this Committee’s proposal for transit funding
in FY 2005, Mr. Chairman, the Administration’s Fiscal Year 2005 budget proposes
to freeze funding for the federal transit program at the FY 2004 level of
$7.266 billion. Here’s why we think that is a bad policy.
Fails to Meet Capital Needs
The Administration’s proposed funding level would not even
fund the transit capital costs of maintaining current service, let alone support
funding levels needed to improve the system. Communities
across the country are rehabilitating and expanding public transportation
systems and constructing new ones. According to the Federal Transit Administration
(FTA), more than 550 local public transportation operators currently provide
services in 319 large and small urban areas; 1,260 organizations provide public
transportation in rural areas; and 3,660 organizations provide services to
the aging population and disabled individuals throughout the nation.
Through improved mobility, safety, security, economic opportunity
and environmental quality, public transportation benefits every segments of
American society – individuals, families, businesses, industries and communities
– and supports important national goals and policies.
At the same time, the growing problem of traffic congestion
continues to choke America’s roadways and constrain community and business
development. Polls consistently show that most Americans view congestion as
a serious problem that continues to grow every year. Last year APTA and the
American Automobile Association (AAA) released the results of a poll that
showed 95 percent of Americans said traffic congestion, including commutes
to and from work, has grown worse over the last three years. The poll also
showed 92 percent of Americans said it was important for their community to
have both good roads and viable alternatives to driving. A separate poll by
Wirthlin Worldwide found that 30% of respondents had used public transportation
in the last year, which means that some 86 million Americans use public transportation
each year.
Annual federal appropriations for the federal transit program
have increased significantly in each of the years under TEA 21. Federal funding
increased from just under $4.4 billion in Fiscal Year 1997 to $7.2 billion
in Fiscal Year 2003. TEA 21 provided predictable growth in the federal investment
in public transportation, leading to impressive results. Service was expanded
and improved, ridership reached its highest levels in 40 years, and public
demand for additional capital investment in transit projects, new transit
services, and improvements of existing systems is at record levels. This demand
for additional service and capital projects comes at a time when many existing
assets are nearing the end of their useful lives and need to be improved or
replaced. The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) concludes that an annual capital investment of more than $44 billion
is needed to adequately maintain and improve existing transit system infrastructure.
Mr. Chairman, now is not the time to stop growing the transit program.
Fails to Grow Program; Program Structural Changes
In fact, Mr. Chairman, the Administration’s FY 2005 budget
proposal would reduce by $103 million the funding which the Administration
had proposed for transit in FY 2005 under its own reauthorization proposal
that was released just last May. Inflation would further erode the purchasing
power of a funding level that is already well short of addressing capital
needs.
The FY 2005 budget proposal also continues to include program
changes that have been consistently rejected by Congress. For instance, it
calls for the elimination of the discretionary bus and bus facilities program,
for which there is great demand.
The Administration’s proposal also would fold the fixed-guideway
modernization program into the formula grants program and permit the use of
fixed-guideway modernization funds for non-fixed-guideway purposes. The fixed-guideway
modernization program was originally designed to ensure the proper modernization
of the nation’s older rail transit systems, and it helps ensure that as federal
new start investment projects age they can be modernized. Rail systems in
large metropolitan areas carry billions of passengers each year and their
ridership has grown substantially in recent years. Many of these systems are
approaching capacity constraints. The Administration proposal would allow
these funds to go to urbanized areas and be used for any transit purpose,
not just modernization. We are concerned that diverting these funds from fixed-guideway
modernization, where needs far exceed available recources, would only exacerbate
unmet modernization needs and potentially result in the deterioration of some
of the nation’s most valuable capital assets. The fixed-guideway modernization
has been a critical component of the federal transit program structure since
1982, and it is a great success.
Balanced Transportation Investment
The Administration’s FY 2005 budget proposal also modifies
its proposed six-year transit/highway reauthorization bill. It would increase
funding for its previously proposed six-year reauthorization bill by $9 billion,
but all of that increase would be directed at highway programs. In contrast,
the proposal would actually reduce authorized transit funding under the six-year
bill by $2.2 billion, from $45.8 billion to $43.6 billion. And of that amount,
only the Mass Transit Account portion, $37.6 billion, would be guaranteed.
If only guaranteed funding were made available, as has generally been the
case under TEA 21, transit funding would only reach $6.6 billion by FY 2009,
which is some $630 million less than the actual FY 2003 funding for transit!
Mr. Chairman, such a proposal would bring an end to the balanced
transportation investment between highways and transit that has been fostered
under both ISTEA and TEA 21, and has been so critical to the growth of a balanced
intermodal transportation system. Investment in transit makes sense because
it is in demand. Nationwide, many systems are bursting at the seams, with
the highest ridership in 40 years and a huge backlog of capital improvements
identified. In growing communities where transit has not been a priority in
the past, citizens are demanding new services and capital projects. Public
transportation supports a solid and growing economy by providing access to
labor, decreasing time lost to congestion, and freeing highway and road space
for the movement of goods and people. Public transportation represents an
efficient use of scarce financial resources, because it helps to mitigate
congestion in densely populated areas and provides a mobility option to millions
of Americans. Public transportation represents an environmentally responsible
transportation option because it uses less fuel and emits far less pollution
per passenger than the automobile. A report by economists Robert Shapiro of
the Brookings Institute and Kevin Hassett of the American Enterprise Institute
demonstrates that transit emits less pollution per passenger than the automobile,
and if Americans used public transportation for only ten percent of their
daily travel needs, the United States could significantly reduce its dependence
on foreign oil. But people can’t use what they don’t have. Now is not the
time to shrink transit investment.
Proposal Undermines Job Creation and Economic Benefits
Mr. Chairman, the Administration says it is focused on creating
jobs and improving the economy, but its budget proposal fails to recognize
the role public transportation can play in meeting these key goals. It is
well known that increased investment in our nation’s transit and highway infrastructure
will help the economy and produce jobs. The Department of Transportation has
demonstrated that for every $1 billion in federal highway and transit investment,
47,500 jobs are created or sustained.
The jobs that investment in public transportation can
create are high-paying, stable, and cannot be exported. The jobs created are
not just those needed to operate new and expanded transit service, which are
significant, but significant job creation also occurs in the private manufacturing
sector, which supports and supplies the public transportation industry. For
instance, transit buses are built in, among other places, Anniston, Alabama;
Wichita, Kansas; Brownsville, Texas; Lamar, Colorado; St. Cloud, Minnesota;
Hayward, California; Imlay City, Michigan; Pembina, North Dakota; and Oriskany,
New York. Engines for those buses may be built in Detroit, Michigan or Columbus,
Indiana. Spending on transit also benefits hundreds of other private sector
companies around the United States that build rail cars, fareboxes, vehicle
parts and equipment or provide software, engineering, and construction services
for the transit industry. According to a Cambridge Systematics, Inc. study,
for every $10 dollars spent on transit capital projects, $30 dollars in business
sales is generated. Every $10 dollars invested in transit operations results
in $32 dollars in business sales.
Congestion Relief and Transportation Access
Mr. Chairman, public transportation serves another important
economic purpose: alleviating highway congestion. According to the Texas Transportation
Institute’s "2003 Urban Mobility Report", congestion costs $69.5 billion annually
– more than 3.6 billion hours of delay and 5.7 billion gallons of excess fuel
consumed. The report finds that without public transportation there would
be 1 billion more hours (30 percent) more delay. The average driver loses
more than a week and a half of work (62 hours) each year sitting in gridlock.
The average cost of congestion per peak road traveler is $1,160 a year. Congestion
holds up more than 64 percent of the nation’s freight that moves by truck
on highways, which represents annual value to the economy of more than $5
trillion. As Paul Weyrich and Bill Lind of the Free Congress Foundation demonstrate
in their study, "How Transit Benefits People Who Do Not Ride It", public transportation,
by alleviating congestion, brings real benefits not just to those who use
it, but also to those who do not use it.
But public transportation does not just improve the economy
by taking cars off the road – it provides transportation options to low-income
workers who cannot afford to drive to work. According to the Surface Transportation
Policy Project, the proportion of household expenditures devoted to transportation
has grown from 14 percent in 1960 to almost 20 percent today. A recently published
U.S. DOT Bureau of Transportation Statistics Issue Brief found that
Americans who commute by car or truck spent about $1,280 per year in 1999,
while those who were able to use public transportation to get to and from
work spent just $765 per year. Clearly public transportation provides real
and needed savings for the many entry-level workers coming into the workforce
who are so critical for the nation’s economy.
Demand for Public Transportation Service and Options
Last November voters in several cities, including Denver,
Houston, Grand Rapids and Kansas City, approved by large margins new local
taxes to provide new and expanded public transportation services. These were
just a few of efforts across the country to increase funding for transportation
infrastructure, and they follow successful actions in other cities over the
past five years to expand transit service, including votes in Phoenix, Charlotte,
Dallas and Minneapolis.
That these referenda have been approved should come as no
surprise. Polls have consistently shown that the American public not only
supports increased public transportation services but also supports providing
the resources to pay for it. A Wirthlin Worldwide poll taken for APTA showed
that 80 percent of Americans surveyed see quality of life benefits from increased
investment in public transportation; 76 percent support public funding for
the expansion and improvement of public transportation; two-thirds support
pro-public transportation Congressional candidates; and a majority of Americans
believe transportation investment is preferable to tax cuts to stimulate the
economy. These findings hold true across areas of all sizes - urban, suburban,
small town and rural.
The Wirthlin Worldwide poll demonstrates that support for
public transportation has increased dramatically not only in our biggest cities
but in smaller urban communities and rural areas as well, where 40 percent
of America’s rural residents have no access to public transportation, and
another 28 percent have substandard access. It is estimated that
rural America has 30 million non-drivers, including senior citizens, the disabled
and low-income families, all of whom need transportation options. According
to a survey of APTA members, bus trips in areas with populations less than
100,000 increased from 323 million to 426 million in a recent five-year span.
Further Mr. Chairman, the Administration budget fails to
help transit meet the needs of the nation’s population of persons who choose
not to, or cannot, drive because of age or a disability. For many in this
population, public transportation may be the only option to living a fully
independent and productive life. According to an AARP report for instance,
32 percent of people with disabilities over 65 report that inadequate transportation
is a problem. The report states further that while public transportation is
more economically efficient in areas with high population density, many older
Americans with disabilities live "outside of central cities in communities
where public transportation is found least often." This is becoming a growing
problem, and it is clear that we need to begin to address the important transportation
needs in these areas. The Administration’s budget fails to recognize this
need.
TRANSIT AND HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Chairman, let me conclude with a brief summary of what
we are doing regarding transit security. Transit systems around the country
are working hard to make our service more secure for the millions and millions
who use it every day. In testimony two days ago before the Senate Commerce,
Science, and Transportation Committee, on the safety and security of passenger
rail and public transportation systems, I highlighted $6 billion in critical
security needs the transit industry has identified as necessary to keep America’s
public transportation systems safe.
APTA’s recent survey on public transportation security identified
needs of at least $5.2 billion in additional capital funding to maintain,
modernize, and expand transit system security functions to meet increased
security demands. More than $800 million in increased operating costs for
security personnel, training, technical support, and research and development
have been identified, bringing transit security funding needs to a total of
more than $6 billion.
The Administration’s FY 2005 budget for the Department of
Homeland Security (DHS) does not request any specific line item funding for
transit security. We think it should. To increase security, APTA is requesting
that the President’s FY 2005 budget request for the Department of Homeland
Security be amended to include a specific line item for public transportation
and that these funds be provided directly to transit systems so that additional
security measures can be implemented in a timely manner. Mr. Chairman, we
respectfully request your assistance and the assistance of this Committee
in this regard.
CONCLUSION
In conclusion Mr. Chairman, the Administration’s budget
proposal to freeze funding for FY 2005 has many shortcomings. It does not
grow the federal transit program. It would fail to continue the success of
TEA 21 by changing the overall structure of the federal transit program that
has served us so well. It fails to provide adequate resources to meet current
capital needs, let alone improve or enhance service. In contrast, APTA recommends
that Congress provide no less than the $8.65 billion authorized under the
Senate’s SAFETEA bill for FY 2005 as developed by this Committee. We applaud
the Senate for passing this balanced and important legislation and we look
forward to working with this Committee as it works with the House of Representatives
to develop a strong six-year authorization bill that addresses the nation’s
need to preserve and improve the nation’s surface transportation system.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks. I would be pleased
to try and answer any questions you or other members of the Committee may
have.
Some of these pages may include links to documents in the Adobe PDF format. Please download the Adobe PDF reader if you have not already done so.
