DATE: Sunday, August 3, 1997                TAG: 9708010009

SECTION: COMMENTARY              PAGE: J4   EDITION: FINAL 

TYPE: Editorial 

                                            LENGTH:   83 lines

FEDERAL TRANSPORTATION DOLLARS KEEP PRESENT LAW

Six years ago, Congress passed, and George Bush signed, a generally good transportation bill that has provided $155 billion to states and cities.

That law expires Sept. 30, and cities, where the bulk of road dollars are spent, will suffer if a worse law succeeds it.

Two advantages of the present law:

It transferred transportation decision-making from Washington to states and cities, ensuring that the people who best understood local transportation problems decided how to solve them. That was a tremendously important step.

It encouraged looking at the whole transportation picture - not just at roads. Locally, for example, funds from the bill have been used for light-rail studies, HOV and ride-sharing programs, and express bus service to the Norfolk Naval Station.

The law had one huge downside:

It distributed transportation funds to states based on 1980 Census figures, to the detriment of fast-growing states like Virginia. For every dollar that Virginia pays in federal transportation dollars, it gets back 79 cents, according to Robert E. Martinez, the Virginia secretary of transportation. That's unfair.

The expiring law is called the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, or ISTEA, pronounced ``ice tea.''

This summer, Congress has been concerned with partisan jousting. Headlines have focused on Buddhist nuns and Republican coups. Not a lot has been said about ISTEA. The public is largely unaware of the issue, yet it is legislation vital to the nation's economic growth. And a great many tax dollars are at stake.

On the bright side, the balanced-budget deal struck last week freed up a 4.3-cent-a-gallon portion of the federal gas tax that has gone toward deficit reduction - $6.5 billion a year. That money now can go to building highways, and the chairman of the House Transporation Committee, Rep. Bud Shuster, R.-Pa., said Wednesday he will help the so-called ``donor'' states, like Virginia, receive a more equitable share of transportation funds.

The 20 or so donor states, many in the South, still face an uphill fight to get an even break. Northeastern States, which receive more than their fair share of transportation funds, will fight to keep what they've got. Their charity knows bounds.

Local leaders, including Gov. George F. Allen and U.S. Sen. John W. Warner, are pushing for a more equitable funding system.

Some funding adjustment should certainly be made to make the law reflect actual population trends and transportation needs. For starters, use 1990 Census figures.

It seems a safe bet that decision-making will not be returned to Washington. That's good, but many governors, including Allen, are seeking to shift more control over expenditures from cities to the states. Every effort should be made to ensure that cities make transportation decisions affecting cities.

Under ISTEA, every economic region, such as Hampton Roads, has its own Metropolitan Planning Organization to make local funding decisions. Local governments have representatives in that organization. It's a good system.

If states gain more centralized control of transportation funds, a higher percentage of dollars may go for highway building and less for other modes of transportation. That's the premise behind a powerful lobbying effort by road-builders seeking to shift more control to states' departments of transportation and to earmark more of the transportation money for road construction.

ISTEA also has environmental implications. The law specifically provides funds for improving air quality in cities through services like ride sharing and mass transit. It also distributes money directly to cities with more than 200,000 residents for transit operations and transit capital projects. Those provisions should be retained. Cities can solve their transportation problems only if they consider all possible solutions - not simply roads.

Transportation lobbyists are busy in Washington right now, as everyone seeks a sip of ISTEA.

Truckers want the new transportation law to allow longer trucks. They're long enough now.

Bicyclists want more bike paths for pollution-free commuting. They speak with enthusiasm, but their words are not backed by large campaign donations.

Road builders want most money to go for roads, as do car manufacturers.

Taxpayers need to interest themselves in this important legislation. It hasn't got a high profile, but the stakes are high. Big dollars are in play along with questions of decentralized power.

Several alternative bills are on the table. The legislation that finally emerges should resemble the old ISTEA with a few minor improvements and one major change: The funds should be more fairly allocated among states.

Send Suggestions or Comments to webmaster@scholar.lib.vt.edu