Skip to Content
Streetsblog New York City home
Streetsblog New York City home
Log In
Federal Funding

A Smart Way for the Feds to Fund Transit Service

After yesterday's post on the campaign to increase federal funding for transit service, some readers expressed concern that the proposal on the table would let metro areas avoid paying for their own transit operations. The way things stand, big transit agencies can't spend federal cash to run their trains and buses. If they could, the thinking goes, what's to keep local governments from reducing the share they chip in?

Well, I neglected to mention that the bill in question, H.R. 2746, includes a good mechanism to prevent that from happening. In fact, it provides an excellent incentive for metro areas to bump up their dedicated transit funding.

Basically, Rep. Russ Carnahan's bill would allow a transit agency to spend more of its federal money on operations only if that agency receives more local revenue too (not counting farebox revenue). Making federal support for transit service contingent on a local match is a great incentive to push local transit policies in a better direction. And lots of American cities really need that push.

Consider: In New York, we have the biggest constituency for transit of any metro area in the nation, and this April we could barely muster enough votes in our state legislature to avoid crippling service cuts. Transit riders in other parts of the country aren't so lucky. In St. Louis, which Carnahan represents, voters turned down a referendum in November that would have increased transit funding with a half cent sales tax. Now, St. Louis transit riders are suffering through some of the worst service cuts in the nation.

It's true that the Carnahan bill is not a cure-all. It doesn't enlarge the feds' total pot of money for transit, so the more federal cash transit agencies spend on service, the less they will have available to spend on expanding and maintaining their systems. But without the greater flexibility provided by the Carnahan bill, and without the local incentives it includes, it seems like many transit agencies will be left to ponder the question: Why buy more trains and buses if we can't afford to run them?

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog New York City

DOT Aims to Build First Ave. Tunnel Bike Lane Before September’s UN General Assembly

DOT hopes to have the concrete-protect tunnel bike lane installed this summer, but its exact plans are still in development.

May 7, 2024

Waste Reforms Could Require Data on Crashes, Dangerous Driving

The proposal affects at least one trucking company with a deadly driving record.

May 7, 2024

When it Comes to Federal Infrastructure Grants, Size Does Matter

Cities and municipalities with larger budgets and staff are more likely to win competitive federal infrastructure grants, the Urban Institute has found.

May 7, 2024

Tuesday’s Headlines: Real Estate Greed Against Good Bike Lane Design Edition

A real estate developer's opposition to the Ashland Place protected bike lane yields some baffling bike lane markings. Plus more news.

May 7, 2024

City Considers Fixes for Another Ridiculously Slow Cross-Bronx Bus

Potential bus improvements are on the table for the Bronx's Tremont Avenue, but the Adams administration's failures on nearby Fordham Road loom large.

May 6, 2024
See all posts