Commentary: Demand more from transportation bill

Commentary: Demand more from transportation bill

  • 0
Los Angeles traffic on the 105 freeway near the 405 interchange in Southern Calif.

Los Angeles traffic on the 105 freeway near the 405 interchange in Southern Calif. (Al Seib/Los Angeles Times/TNS)

Americans now face the impacts of climate change in our everyday lives. Flooding and wildfires endanger us from Miami to Houston to Los Angeles. Rising seas will now inevitably impact our coasts, while rising temperatures threaten the habitability of cities nationwide.

This crisis is spurring both the American people and U.S. politicians to act. Across the country, young people have called "climate strikes." Media coverage of environmental issues is on the rise. Several members of Congress and presidential candidates have called for a Green New Deal that would invest federal resources to green the economy while creating quality jobs, an idea that polls well in moderate districts.

Against this backdrop, it might seem encouraging that, over the summer, members of the U.S. Senate's Environment and Public Works Committee unanimously advanced a bill, the America's Transportation Infrastructure Act, that The Washington Post called "the first transportation bill to acknowledge climate change." After all, transportation is the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.

What the headlines don't say is that the ATIA "acknowledges" climate change in the same way that sending a pallet of bottled water to Flint, Mich., "acknowledges" the lead crisis. The bill's historic contribution to climate change is a $10 billion program to pay for projects that reduce emissions and protect infrastructure from the effects of climate change.

But the same bill would add $32 billion to traditional road programs that states use to expand and widen highways, encouraging us to drive more often, for longer distances. This bill doubles down on the programs that have bequeathed the United States the most carbon-intensive transportation system in the developed world. It goes against the settled science, which tells us that greening transportation will require both electric vehicles and building our cities and infrastructure in ways that make it easy to drive less often.

How could federal transportation policy actually reckon with the climate crisis? It would mean setting a clear goal that states reduce transportation emissions, with consequences for not doing so. It would recognize that highways are fossil fuel infrastructure as surely as pipelines and coal plants are, and make states justify road megaprojects instead of giving them blank checks to build.

It would also have to do more to make it possible to get around outside of private vehicles, and in doing so would fix long-standing mobility gaps. Cities like Denver and Nashville, Tenn., wouldn't struggle to find money to install sidewalks, which are missing on 40 to 60% of their street networks. Public transit systems wouldn't routinely stop running on the weekend and at night, and instead would provide real access for more people.

The received wisdom on Capitol Hill is that we clamor for a bipartisan agreement on infrastructure, regardless of whether that deal offers real hope for a sustainable future. That's an old idea for an old world.

In today's world - and despite the fact that it includes a few good programs - the ATIA looks too much like cynical politics. It treats the climate like any other interest group, not the urgent fight of our time. We have to demand more.



Steven Higashide is an urban planner, the author of "Better Buses, Better Cities" (Island Press, October 2019), and director of research at TransitCenter. This column was produced for the Progressive Media Project, which is run by The Progressive magazine, and distributed by Tribune News Service.


Be the first to know

* I understand and agree that registration on or use of this site constitutes agreement to its user agreement and privacy policy.

Related to this story

Most Popular

President Trump has offered multiple lines of defense against House Democrats' allegations that he appeared to abuse the power of his office in his dealings with Ukraine's new government. Some are situational and temporary, such as his argument that the process was illegitimate because it hadn't been authorized by a vote of the full House (which it now has been). But one that we are likely to ...

The Fourth Amendment prohibits "unreasonable searches and seizures." But the Supreme Court has interpreted that protection pretty loosely when it comes to traffic stops, for which the police need only "reasonable suspicion" that the law is or has been broken. (The same indulgent standard applies when police stop and frisk a pedestrian.) Last week the justices heard arguments in a case that ...

When I crossed through Checkpoint Charlie from West Berlin to East Berlin nearly 30 years ago, the failures of former East Germany were immediately obvious. The grey unkempt landscape and dilapidated buildings looked as though that country hadn't been repaired since American and Soviet tanks faced off yards apart decades earlier in one of the most tense nuclear showdowns. While there, I ...

  • Updated

Even before his ill-advised mockery of President Trump's request for "a favor" from new Ukrainian leader Volodymyr Zelensky, House Intelligence Committee Chairman Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.) was seen by Republicans as blinded by bias against Trump. And now that Schiff is leading the initial phase of the House impeachment inquiry, he has become Exhibit A in the GOP argument that the whole thing ...

Republicans have been engaging in some interesting contortions in conjuring a defense for President Donald Trump's attempt to get Ukrainian officials to investigate the family of political rival Joe Biden. The most plausible approach is one Pennsylvania Sen. Pat Toomey signed on to last month, saying that he is keeping an open mind but that even if Trump asked Ukraine for a favor, the offense ...

It's an all but foregone conclusion that the House of Representatives will impeach Donald Trump, and it is almost as certain that the Senate will not convict him. For those convinced of the president's venality, the latter prospect makes it imperative that the formal indictment in the House - the articles of impeachment - be detailed and all-encompassing. The articles' content, the exact way ...

On Nov. 1, presidential candidate and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) announced a proposal billed as a financing plan for "Medicare for All." Unfortunately, it does not even acknowledge, let alone finance, the costs of Medicare for All. There is an analytical consensus on the approximate costs of Medicare for All, to which my 2018 study for the Mercatus Center has contributed - as have studies ...

Thirty years ago, the fall of the Berlin Wall signaled the end of the Cold War. Where there had been two superpowers locked in a dangerous decades-long post-World War II rivalry, only one remained. A global order commonly but misleadingly referred to as bipolar gave way to a new era even more misleadingly referred to as unipolar. The onset of this unipolar order induced in Washington a mood of ...

Left without remedy, an injustice does not heal. It compounds. This is the fundamental principle behind a 2006 lawsuit filed by a coalition concerned for Maryland's four historically black colleges and universities: Morgan State University, Coppin State University, Bowie State University and the University of Maryland, Eastern Shore. It alleges that the state funded largely white institutions ...

While impeachment inquiries rage on and the 2020 race heightens, we need not forget the policy battles we've been fighting for years that affect Americans, regardless of immigration status, each and every day. Since 2012, the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA, program has shielded young immigrants who came to the U.S. as children from deportation, allowing them to legally work or ...

Get up-to-the-minute news sent straight to your device.


News Alert

Breaking News