**Table of Contents Contents 1ac – Mass Transit
Solvency Extensions – Fed Key
Download 325.66 Kb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- The consequences of our automobile-centered transportation system, however, are national in scope. Traffic congestion, oil dependence and global warming
- Property owners
- dividuals concerned with national security, who would support reductions in America’s dependence on foreign oil
- Federal government needs to lead the way—key to solving Robert Puentes
- Federal policy can and should play a powerful role in helping metropolitan areas
- in public transit and support of transitoriented development
- the federal government should EMPOWER states and metropolitan areas to grow in energy-efficient and sustainable ways
Solvency Extensions – Fed KeyNational action is key to mobilize support necessary to implement an effective transit policy Dr. Phineas Baxandall et al., A BETTER WAY TO GO: MEETING AMERICA’S 21ST CENTURY TRANSPORTATION CHALLENGES WITH MODERN PUBILC TRANSIT, U.S. PIRG Education Fund, 3—08, p. 55-56. Transit has long been seen as primarily a local issue—something of concern to city-dwellers and some suburbanites. In many states—even some with robust transit systems—there is still little or no investment of state government resources in transit systems. And at the federal level, transit advocates have often felt compelled to accept greater spending on highways as a means to achieve greater investment in transit. The consequences of our automobile-centered transportation system, however, are national in scope. Traffic congestion, oil dependence and global warming pollution are issues that affect all Americans and deserve a national response. A wide variety of constituencies have a potential interest in expanding transit infrastructure in the United States. This “grand coalition” potentially includes the following: • Metropolitan area residents, who represent more than 80 percent of the American population and who would benefit most directly from reduced congestion and the ability to use transit.133 • Businesses—both those located in metropolitan areas that would benefit from their employees’ and customers’ access to transit and those that rely on the shipment of goods and would benefit from reduced highway congestion. • Property owners in corridors to be served by transit, who would likely see property values increase. • Construction firms and organized labor, which would benefit from the jobs created in transit system construction, operations and maintenance. • Environmentalists, who would support reductions in global warming emissions and other forms of pollution. • Low-income, elderly and disabled people, who would benefit from an increased range of transportation choices. The elderly could represent an especially important constituency, as the population of Americans ages 65 and older is projected to increase by 20 million between 2000 and 2020.134 • Individuals concerned with national security, who would support reductions in America’s dependence on foreign oil. As long as the transit debate is about one transit line or one city at a time, there will be little hope of mobilizing a wide range of interests behind a major commitment to transit. To generate excitement and widespread support, there must be a compelling vision for what an expansion of transit service would look like and how it would benefit the United States—in short, a national roadmap for transit. Federal government needs to lead the way—key to solving Robert Puentes, Fellow and Director, Metropolitan Infrastructure Initiative, Brookings Institution, Testimony before the Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, Committee, 9—9—08 , http://www.brookings.edu/~/media/research/files/testimony/2008/9/09%20transportation%20puentes/0909_transportation_puentes.pdf Federal policy can and should play a powerful role in helping metropolitan areas—and so the nation—reduce energy consumption through targeted and prioritized investments in public transit and support of transitoriented development. The cross-boundary challenges justify a more decisive federal policy that helps metropolitan areas promote energy- and location-efficient development. Mr. Chairman, to do that I believe we need a systemic change in the way we think about, design, and implement transportation policies. This means the development of a three-pronged strategy to lead, empower, and maximize performance across the nation. First, the federal government must LEAD and develop a coherent national vision for transportation, and focus on specific areas of national importance such as reducing our dependence on foreign oil. Second, the federal government should EMPOWER states and metropolitan areas to grow in energy-efficient and sustainable ways. Third, the federal government should OPTIMIZE Washington's own performance and that of its partners in order to spend taxpayer dollars better and implement the vision. In the short term, the proposed transit provisions of the substitute energy bill are consistent with this overriding frame. Emergency transit funding to accelerate capital investments is needed to accommodate ridership increases and provide adequate service to the vast reaches of the country without it. Additional formula funding is needed is avoid service cuts at the precise moment that Americans try riding the bus or train for the first time and evaluate their options. The program to boost the energy efficiency of transit systems—thereby cutting operating costs and helping curb dependence on foreign oil—is also a critically important component. The proposed Transit-Oriented Development Corridors grant program also provides an empowering model through a competitive process to metropolitan actors with proposals for growing differently. The considerations for evaluating grant recipients are, I believe, the right ones: clear justification and outcome orientation that includes reducing energy consumption; ensuring a metropolitan-wide perspective on choosing the location of the project; coordinating with all actors and promoting public/private partnerships; mixing uses and housing types; and harmonizing transportation with other policy areas such as housing, economic development, and land use. Directory: file -> view view -> Western Europe after wwii view -> Author study: paul fleischman view -> Qpa1 7ela study Guide view -> Arctic Oil/Gas Neg view -> November 1970 Approximately 150,000-500,000 deaths Bhola Cyclone Bangladesh view -> Grade Level: 6 Unit of Study: Caribbean glce view -> Citation: Duffield, Katy view -> Table of Contents Lesson # view -> Chinese Wind Energy Disad Download 325.66 Kb. Share with your friends:
|