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

Friday Video: Amtrak Is Way More Successful Than You Think

Why do so many people still treat Amtrak as a failure — and what would it take to deliver the rail investment that American riders deserve?

October 24, 2025

Hundreds of Community Groups — From the Conservatives to the Socialists! — Demand Daylighting

Two hundred New York City groups from across the ideological spectrum joined calls to ban parking at corners in order to improve safety and visibility, also known as daylighting.

October 24, 2025

OPINION: Canal Street — Not The Vendors — Is the Problem

If Zohran Mamdani becomes mayor — and is true to his vision for a fair, livable city — he will have to take on this long-ignored corridor. Here's how.

October 24, 2025

Vision Zero Cities: Bicycles Are Not Cars So They Shouldn’t Have to Follow the Same Rules

The default in nearly all states is to impose the same traffic rules on bicycles as on motor vehicles even though the needs of cyclists are so different.

October 24, 2025

Friday’s Headlines: Today’s the Day Edition

Mayor Adams's new 15 mph speed limit is officially goes into effect today. Plus more news.

October 24, 2025

Cough, Cough: DEP Considers Largest Ever Exemption Request to City’s Anti-Idling Law

Academy Bus claims no technological alternatives exist for heating and cooling buses without idling. Advocates warn an exemption would "gut" the city's 50-year-old idling ban.

October 23, 2025
See all posts