DMI Blog

John Petro

State Wish Lists: Stimulus Funds for Road Expansion

From the U.S. PRIG, via Streetsblog: Congress asked states to submit lists of transportation infrastructure projects that are "ready to go" for the stimulus package. Unfortunately, many states are looking to greatly expand road capacity.

U.S. PIRG just released a great report [PDF] outlining what's known so far (most states haven't even gone public with their requests). Here are some updates since the last time we checked in on these wish lists:

* The Texas ask includes a whopping $6 billion for roads (97 percent of the total wish list), including $3.4 billion for expansion projects.
* North Carolina is just as brazen, asking for $5 billion for roads, of which $3.4 billion would fund expansion.
* South Carolina wants to spend nearly all of its $3.2 billion ask on roads, 80 percent on expansion.
* New York pretty much splits the difference between roads and transit, asking for about $1.8 billion for each (the analysis does not break down the road requests by expansion and maintenance)

I'll say it again: stimulus funds for roads should be restricted to maintenance and repair. We should not be expanding roads during a time of historic declines in vehicle miles traveled. The U.S. PRIG report also suggests allowing stimulus funds to go to transit agencies for operating costs, a good idea since it will allow these agencies to prevent layoffs and even expand employment and service.

Streetsblog also links to an online petition by Transportation for America "urging Congress to impose oversight on states and avoid throwing money down the sinkhole of new highway capacity."

John Petro: Author Bio | Other Posts
Posted at 4:04 PM, Jan 07, 2009 in Transporation
Permalink | Email to Friend | Comments (2)


Comments

We live in a town where a historic bridge needs repair. Instead of repairing the bridge, which is on a county road, they are moving the bridge to another loaction and totally replacing it. Because they are using state funds (stimulus funds) it needs to be built to certain specifications.. in particular bringing the weight capacity up to 25 tons from 3 tons and narly tripling the cost of the project. Meanwhile, the truckers it will invite will probably reduce the ratable base. Government planning at its best... the unanticipated consequences.

Posted by: Eric Weinstein | September 1, 2009 06:52 PM

We live in a town where a historic bridge needs repair. Instead of repairing the bridge, which is on a county road, they are moving the bridge to another loaction and totally replacing it. Because they are using state funds (stimulus funds) it needs to be built to certain specifications.. in particular bringing the weight capacity up to 25 tons from 3 tons and narly tripling the cost of the project. Meanwhile, the truckers it will invite will probably reduce the ratable base. Government planning at its best... the unanticipated consequences.

Posted by: Eric Weinstein | September 1, 2009 06:53 PM


Post a comment

Verification: