With almost one in ten American workers currently unemployed, smart investment in infrastructure is an efficient way to create jobs right now. The job creation potential of infrastructure has been well-documented. Economists Mark Zandi and Alan Blinder, for example, explain in a report they coauthored that every dollar spent on infrastructure yields $1.57 in economic growth.
To generate the most jobs, every study has shown that it is important to prioritize investments in public transportation. Academic analysis concludes that public transit generates 31 percent more jobs per billion dollars invested than similar spending on highways. Models developed with the Federal Highway Administration likewise show transit investments generate 19 percent more jobs. Similarly, an analysis of U.S. Department of Transportation data shows that 2008 stimulus dollars spent on public transportation projects created up to twice as many jobs as highway spending for the same amount of money. The consistent finding is clear: to create jobs, invest in public transportation.
For spending on highways, it is important that money be directed to repair and maintenance rather than the construction of new highways. Too many roads and bridges across America remain in a state of disrepair that pose dangers and cause costly delays. Although investment in highway repair does not create as many jobs as public transit, it creates 9 percent more jobs per billion dollars than building new highway miles, according to the same studies.
Additionally, the long-term development of a national high-speed rail network could be critical to rebuilding America's declining manufacturing sector. Auto factories that were shut down during the last decade could be reopened and repurposed to manufacture the new railcars and bullet trains of the future.
Better Transportation Investment Reduces our Dependence on Oil
Our transportation system consumes more oil than the entire economy of any other country in the world, other than China, according to Department of Energy data. The disastrous consequences of our oil addiction were on full display last spring when billions of gallons of oil spilled into the Gulf. Our over-reliance on oil is also a national security concern, as it forces our nation to rely on foreign regimes which are often hostile or unstable.
Investing in more and better public transportation is critical to reducing America's oil dependence because it provides more energy-efficient ways to travel. Existing public transit reduced the amount of gasoline America used in 2006 by 3.4 billion gallons, according to an analysis of EPA data. The U.S. PIRG Education Fund calculated that this saved us over $9 billion in gas costs. Not surprisingly, metropolitan areas with better public transit systems accounted for most of these oil savings.
To partially pay for the proposed investment, President Obama rightly calls for cutting government subsidies for oil companies. There is no reason why corporations, like Exxon-Mobil and BP, that make billions in profits should receive public handouts and tax subsidies. These unnecessary tax breaks and subsidies should be eliminated, and the savings should be used to pay for cleaner, more efficient transportation projects.
Better Transportation Investment Reduces Congestion and Pollution
In addition to creating jobs and reducing our oil dependence, investment in public transportation and high-speed rail would reduce traffic congestion and global-warming pollution.
For instance, the Texas Transportation Institute's 2007 Annual Urban Mobility Report calculated that public transit prevented over 500 million hours of delays in 2005, saving the country more than $10 billion.
Also, our transportation system accounts for a full third of the country's global warming pollution. The U.S. PIRG Education Fund calculated that public transit reduced emissions of harmful global warming pollution by 26 million metric tons in 2006. That is equivalent to taking almost 5 million cars off the road.
Better Transportation Investment Means Less Earmarks, and More Results
In addition to providing much needed funding for more public transportation, President Obama's plan seeks to spend our transportation dollars more efficiently. Over 100 federal programs would be consolidated under the proposal, similar to a 2009 proposal by U.S. House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee Chairman James Oberstar. President Obama also proposes to allocate money based on performance, rather than earmark-driven politics. Such reforms are essential to ensuring that we get the biggest bang for our buck.
With the economic recovery slow to pick up steam, President Obama's call for a new transportation bill is a timely opportunity to spur job growth now while making crucial investments in America's future. We strongly encourage you to write an editorial urging Congress to move forward with President Obama's proposal for comprehensive reform and the reauthorization of the surface transportation bill.
Arrived in Boston that afternoon, took the "T" from the airport to Washington Square, in Brookline. It is about 5 miles from the airport and about a 20 minute drive in no traffic. The "T" took 75 minutes, including 45 minutes on the "Green Line" from Government Center to Brookline - a distance of perhaps 3 miles. This in one of the better U.S. cities for public transportation. Now we wonder why people drive everywhere.
And makes energy lobbyists and CEOs go crazy and their profits rule inside the Beltway.
Honest question, what's with the left and trains? I mean did their parents never give them a train set of something when they were kids?
There isn't a light rail, subway or passenger rail system in the country that doesn't have to subsidize EVERY rider a lot . . . not to mention that in many places, we don't build up like in the NE, we buld outwards.
Trains are not efficient when it comes to passenger transportation but they can be very efficient when it comes to transporting goods.
Please inform us how you arrived at the conclusion that trains are not efficient when it comes to passenger transportation? Are you simply parroting a politicized argument or did you actually do some research?
Who cares what this guy said . . .
He also told us in 2008 that the best stimulus was food stamps . . .
So if we only would have just put everyone on food stamps it would have been the 90s tech boom all over . . . LOL
THEN maybe we could get a bit more bang for our buck.
Leave us who want the freedom of a vehicle alone.
In your last sentence you state "Leave us who want the freedom of a vehicle alone." I assume tha you were so excited that you left the word "alone"
However,You have succinctly described the way americans feel about paying for community services such as mass transit.
It's astounding to me that just because you personally don't use bus, rail or subway systems that you feel no obligation to help create a better transportation environment for your fellow citizens. How un-American.
You are obviously a life long member of the 'I don't use it so I ain't paying for it" group.
I suppose if you don't have children you would vote against paying for better public schools?
The level of selfishness in America has never been so high.
A good transportation benefits the over all economy, people are able to travel to and from work faster ,spending less time in gridlocked traffic and spending more time with their families.
You don't see it that way, all you see is more money in your pocket, with the weak excuse "I don't use it so why should I pay for it!" All this while everybody else has to cope with aging transit systems in places like Houston , Tampa , and LA ( Forbes Magazine).
BTW Forbes magazine is not exactly a bastion of socialist indoctrination.
Here's the link: http://www.forbes.com/2008/04/24/cities-commute-fuel-forbeslife-cx_mw_0424realestate3_slide_6.html
EngChina.
The maintenance of highways and railroads won't create as many jobs, as pointed out, but that is partly because once it is done...you don't still have the people on salary. A new high speed rail is only a benefit to the economy if it pays for itself (ignoring for the moment the debt and interest repayment on the cost of building it). If it doesn't run profitably, you have burdened the economy with an ongoing deficit...hardly a stimulus move.
The major issue with MOST public transportation projects. Well, perhaps not the MAJOR issue. Most of them don't meet their operating expenses even disregarding their capital costs. But certainly A major issue.
But if these things truly ARE worthwhile, we ought to be able to fund them by selling tax-free mutual funds to people within the US. The alternative is to have China own even more of us than they already do.
If it did it wouldn't be in such disrepair.
If it did states wouldn't be adopting billions in bonds paid back from general funds to maintain and grow them.
If it did local governments wouldn't be approving special taxes via sales or property assessments to suplement their ability to improve and maintain them.
You are attempting to apply an economic status to transportation infrastructure which is no longer true. We would never pay the gas taxes necessary to make it so again as voters. Some states do get lucky and live off my tax dollars but it is no longer self funding by any stretch of the imagination.
When gas went to $4.00 and up sales revenues on gas dropped, the states lost money because they project tax revenues for their budgets.
That might make this administration look good, and we
can't have now can we? Let's just hold the country hostage
for awhile longer, shall we? Maybe until mid-November.
We need manufacturing jobs, and a better educated population.