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

Earth to Albany: Don’t Pander to Every Driver in the City with Toll Exemptions

Two-dozen of the state's leading good governance groups demanded that the legislature reject bills that would gut congestion pricing.

February 5, 2025

The Explainer: What To Know About The MTA’s New Congestion Pricing-Backed Debt

You asked for it, you got it: a 2,000-word explainer on municipal bond sales.

February 5, 2025

Wind in their Sales: Congestion Pricing is No ‘Toll’ on the Broadway Box Office

Despite doom prognostications, congestion pricing has not hurt Broadway's bottom line a bit — and, in fact, may be boosting it.

February 5, 2025

Wednesday’s Headlines: Tin Cup Edition

Road safety wasn't on the agenda for Mayor Adams in Albany on Tuesday. Plus more news.

February 5, 2025

Kirsten Gillibrand Trots Out Bogus FDNY ‘Toxins’ in Quest to Weaken Congestion Pricing

Gillibrand's solution to potential toxins in the subway is more automobile toxins in the air.

February 4, 2025
See all posts