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

Meet Steve Fulop, Corporate New York’s New Mouthpiece

Streetsblog sat down with former Jersey City Mayor Steve Fulop last week to discuss his new role at the Partnership for New York City.

February 4, 2026

Promising E-Bike Subsidy Pilot Is Denied Funding By State Agency

New York City's first e-bike subsidy program is stalled after not receiving state funding for implementation.

February 4, 2026

Wednesday’s Headlines: Nothingburger From The Albany Sausage Grinder Edition

OK, so the transportation hearing was a bust, but two groups questioned the governor's car insurance proposal, so that's a start. Plus other news.

February 4, 2026

Cyclists in Criminal Court Say Mamdani’s Bike Crackdown is a ‘Waste of Time’

The hearings reveal that the mayor's promise to end criminal summonsing against cyclists has not been kept.

February 3, 2026

‘Lowballing Victims’: Crash Survivors Furious At Hochul’s Car Insurance Proposal

Crash victims and a key state lawmaker are not yet sold on Hochul's car insurance scheme, and hope that the state listens.

February 3, 2026

Opinion: Transit Watchword Should Be Synergy, Not Scarcity

Two fantastic transit ideas — fast and free buses, and a 17-percent expansion of subway mileage — are being set up as adversaries. But they're complementary.

February 3, 2026
See all posts