America’s Interstate Highway System celebrates 55 years

As President Obama has said, to win the future, we must dream big and build big.  One of the best examples of dreaming and building big in our nation’s history is America’s Interstate Highway System, which marks its 55th anniversary today.

On June 29, 1956, President Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, which established a program for funding and building the new system.  This legislation has been hailed by historians as one of the top ten bills in American history, surpassed only by the Civil Rights Act and Medicare, and the Interstate Highway System has been called the greatest public works project in history. 

First Interstate highway construction project begins in Missouri.

The Act proposed a length of 41,000 miles of limited-access roads linking 90 percent of all cities with populations of more than 50,000, and directed the federal government to distribute $25 billion among the states over 13 years to meet 90 percent of the cost. 

In addition to the original 41,000 miles, several complete Interstate Highways have since been added to the original system, which is currently about 47,000 miles long.

The Interstate Highway System is critical to our economy and our way of life.  Through 10 presidential administrations and 28 sessions of Congress, Americans planned and paved a state-of-the-art highway network that connects people with schools and jobs, and carries products of agriculture and industry to market.

Although the Interstate System accounts for about 1.1 percent of the nation’s total public road mileage, it carries 24 percent of all highway travel.

Every citizen has been touched by this system. That’s because even if they don’t drive on it, every item we buy has traveled over the Interstate System at some point.

Simply put, without modern interstate highways, there would be no modern United States. 

DOT’s Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) works with states to ensure interstate routes will continue to support America's economic competitiveness in the future.  And just last week, FHWA Administrator Victor Mendez joined state and local officials to break ground on I-269 in north Mississippi, a new interstate highway that will help connect communities in Mississippi to major shipping corridors.

Fifty-five years later, America’s Interstate Highway System continues to shape our economy and way of life, and this Administration is committed to continuing to repair our existing infrastructure while also building new ways to move people and goods.  That’s how we strengthen our communities and our economy.

Comments

[mcas]

Just imagine if kept private transport (walk/bike/car/truck) for local travel, instead. Those Billions could have easily made high-speed trains the most relaxing and efficient way to get people and goods around this great nation -- for a fraction of the cost and a fraction of the 40,000 lives a year lost to car crashes.

[jewelry making supplies]

We admire those hard-working guys and I think it will be a milestone for the current projects. Cheers, yes we can.

[Jason Segedy]

I do believe that we need to dream big. Here is an editorial that I wrote last year, respectfully submitted for your consideration.

Moving Beyond 1956… A New Vision for Transportation

by Jason Segedy

In 1956, President Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act into law. This sweeping piece of legislation appropriated $25 billion in order to construct the Interstate Highway System, the largest and most visionary public works project in American history. It also established the Highway Trust Fund, which paid for 90 percent of the cost of building the system, using revenues that were generated through taxes on fuel.

This brief bit of history is instructive for two reasons:

First, it is a reminder that there once was a time when our federal government was capable of establishing a coherent vision for transportation, mobilizing public support for it, and working tirelessly to complete it. The 47,000 mile Interstate Highway System remains the largest and most comprehensive highway network in the world, and the vast majority of it was constructed in just 20 years.

Second, it demonstrates that the American public will support a massive expenditure of federal tax dollars – $425 billion when adjusted for inflation – if it is confident that it is bankrolling a worthwhile endeavor.

Today, 54 years later, our federal government is rudderless and broke. There is no strategic vision from Washington guiding our national transportation future. Even more disturbingly, our existing system of transportation funding is in deep trouble. Last year, for the first time in history, the Highway Trust Fund went broke. Congress had to provide an emergency infusion of $8 billion in general revenue funds in order to keep the fund solvent. Earlier this year, another $19.5 billion was transferred to a fund that is supposed to be self-supporting. Essentially, we are now borrowing money from China to pay for our transportation infrastructure. This is a future that President Eisenhower would never have imagined.

On the fiscal side of the transportation equation we have three options: cut spending, increase revenue, or do some combination of both. Reduced federal funding levels will mean that already cash-strapped local governments and states will have to tighten their belts even further. It will mean that our aging bridges and roads will continue to deteriorate and become more unsafe. It will also mean that transit systems will have to cut their already limited service even further, making it yet more difficult for our low-income residents to access jobs and economic opportunities.

On the policy side of the transportation equation, the situation is equally dysfunctional. The previous transportation bill expired in 2009, and Congress has yet to pass a new one. There is no national transportation plan and the federal government is unwilling or unable to come up with a vision for transportation that everyday Americans can easily understand and embrace. Our current national transportation policy is schizophrenic. Over 30 percent of federal transportation funds go toward expanding highway capacity, but, at the same time we are spending $8 billion on high-speed rail. We say we want people to consider alternatives to driving, but provide little real incentive to do so. Meanwhile, our existing network of roads and bridges continues to crumble. Washington is trying to be all things to all people and not doing any of them particularly well.

So what should we do?

First, the difficult truth is this: We do not have enough money to pay for the transportation system that we need. Although a tax increase may not be politically palatable, a massive national debt and decaying infrastructure is even less appealing. It is not fiscally responsible and it is not in the public interest for our federal government to resort to deficit spending and rely on other countries to pay for our transportation infrastructure. The beauty of the Highway Trust Fund has always been that it is a self-supporting source of revenue based upon a “user fee” – the gasoline tax. This is no longer the case.

The current gasoline tax of 18.4 cents per gallon has not been increased since 1993. Because the tax was not indexed to inflation, its actual purchasing power has declined significantly. Meanwhile, there are 53 million more people living in the United States than there were 17 years ago.

In the short term, the federal tax on gasoline needs to be raised by 10 cents per gallon and indexed to inflation. This would generate an additional $20 billion per year in revenue. In the long term, a new mechanism for funding transportation should be found; preferably, one that is not predicated upon encouraging people to purchase more gasoline.

Second, Congress needs to pass a new transportation bill. This legislation should clearly define national transportation goals and priorities. It should adopt the same ambitious call-to-action that went into creating the Interstate Highway Act, but one that recognizes our current problems of urban sprawl and an uncertain energy future. It should also reform the convoluted system of dozens of separate federal funding categories, most of which contain cumbersome and outdated rules and regulations. This would improve flexibility and efficiency, and would allow states, metropolitan planning organizations, and transit agencies to better meet locally identified transportation needs. One example of this type of reform would be to allow transit agencies to spend federal funds on operating expenditures. They are currently prohibited from doing so.

Even though 2010 is an election year and Americans are justifiably concerned with high taxes, I believe that people would support an increase in the federal gasoline tax if they understood why it is necessary. According to a recent poll conducted by Building America’s Future, 60 percent of the American public erroneously believes that the gasoline tax is raised every year. At the same time, 62 percent correctly believe that funding decisions are too often based on “politics” rather than the “public good.”

As transportation professionals and policy makers, I believe that it is our duty to provide leadership on this issue; both to ensure fiscal responsibility and to establish a transportation vision that the public can support. We did it in 1956 and we can do it again.

Sincerely,

Jason Segedy

Director

Jason Segedy is the director of the Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (AMATS). AMATS is the metropolitan planning organization responsible for regional transportation planning in Summit and Portage counties.

The opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the AMATS Director and do not necessarily reflect the views of the AMATS Policy Committee.

[Jeimy M]

Obama have right,you have to dream big to build big,its very right frase.