ATU News
67 House Members Urge Operating Assistance in Tranist Authorizations
ATU — WASHINGTON, DC (6/1)
Below is a letter led by Representatives Lipinski, D-IL, and Carnahan, D-MO, regarding the need to include language in the federal surface transportation reauthorization bill that would allow public transportation systems to use their federal transit funds for operating assistance purposes. In total, 67 Members, 20 who serve on the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, signed on -- sending a strong message that more flexibility is needed.
At a time when Americans are leaving their cars at home like never before, public transportation systems should not be forced to implement painful service cuts, fare increases, and layoffs because of unpredictable fuel prices and shortages in state and local revenues. Thanks to all who worked to get their Member of Congress on the letter. If you see your representative listed, please take the time to thank them.
The Honorable James L. Oberstar, Chairman
House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure
The Honorable Peter DeFazio, Chairman
The Honorable John Mica, Ranking Member
House Committee on Transportation & Infrastructure
2163 Rayburn House Office Building
The Honorable Jimmy Duncan, Ranking Member
Dear Mr. Chairman, Chairman DeFazio, Ranking Member Mica, and Ranking Member Duncan:
As we prepare to begin work on a new surface transportation authorization, we respectfully urge you to include language in the bill that would allow public transportation systems to use their federal transit funds for operating assistance purposes. Investing in the sustained operation of our transit systems is crucial to keeping America running.
As you know, the current economic and financial situation in the U.S. has had far-reaching effects on public transit agencies. Yet, while transit ridership is increasing in the face of high gas prices and falling disposable income, transit agencies are being forced to implement service cuts, fare increases and layoffs as a result of declining state and local revenues. These conditions are arising in small counties and large metropolitan areas across the country, including such diverse areas as Great Falls, MT, Los Angeles, Carbon County, PA, and Augusta, GA. For example, in St. Louis, MetroLink trains are running less frequently on both sides of the Mississippi River, and more than 500 employees have been laid off. It has been reported that the $213 million Chicago Transit Authority budget shortfall also threatens to cut bus routes and reduce rail service. In order to promote a more multi-modal transportation system, it is critical we invest in our public transportation systems by permitting the use of federal transit funds for operating assistance.
We know you share our concern about the impact that fare increases would have on working families, particularly as they face greater economic difficulties. Similarly, reduced transit services will impose increased challenges on working Americans. We share your frustration that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act was passed without the $2 billion that you had proposed for transit energy grants, which could have been used to pay for fuel costs or more efficient vehicles. Unfortunately, even if that bill had provided transit systems with enough capital funding to double the size of their existing fleets, they likely could not have afforded to put those vehicles into service.
Faced with these converging challenges, we feel that pennitting the use of federal transit funding for system operation costs is a pragmatic option to address the current crisis. If we are serious about finding and maintaining efficient ways to get Americans to work, reducing our dependence on foreign oil, improving Ollr air quality, and combating global walll1ing, Congress should provide the operating funds flexibility to help the public transportation industry thrive. An investment in the operation of our transit systems is an investment in our country and our economy.
Thank you for your consideration of our views.
Sincerely,