Federal Transportation Funding: Selected Programs, FY2000-FY2010

John Williamson
Information Research Specialist

This report consolidates budget information on selected programs of the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT): the Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST); the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA); the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA); the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA); the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA); the Federal Transit Administration (FTA); the Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), which was split in 2004 into the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA); and the Maritime Administration (MARAD). The period covered, FY2000 through FY2010, provides information on the budget treatment of these programs during the last year of the Clinton Administration, the Bush Administration, and the first year of the Obama Administration. In addition to footnotes on each affected table, a separate table has been created to reflect program funding in the DOT under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA, P.L. 111-5, 123 Stat. 115). The data in this report, presented in a series of tables, provide an overview of spending trends for the period and information on congressional appropriations actions at the House, Senate, and conference committee levels.


Date of Report: December 2, 2010
Number of Pages: 24
Order Number: R41541
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Surface Transportation Program Reauthorization Issues for the 112th Congress

Robert S. Kirk, Coordinator
Specialist in Transportation Policy

William J. Mallett
Specialist in Transportation Policy

David Randall Peterman
Analyst in Transportation Policy

John Frittelli
Specialist in Transportation Policy

Linda Luther
Analyst in Environmental Policy

James E. McCarthy
Specialist in Environmental Policy

Brent D. Yacobucci
Specialist in Energy and Environmental Policy

The law authorizing federal surface transportation programs expired at the end of FY2009, but Congress has failed to enact a new authorization. Surface transportation programs continue to operate on the basis of authority provided in extension legislation.

This situation should not be a surprise to those familiar with the history of the reauthorization process. Especially during the last two decades, reauthorization has become a difficult undertaking. This is primarily due to controversy over how and to whom federal-aid highway funds should be distributed. The most recent law, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU or SAFETEA) (P.L. 109-59), was enacted 22 months after previous legislation had originally expired. Previous reauthorization bills also were enacted well behind schedule.

The most difficult issue to be considered during reauthorization is how to finance it. The highway trust fund and the revenue sources that feed it have been a reliable mechanism for financing highway and transit programs for five decades, but this is no longer the case. Fuel taxes, which provide most of the money for surface transportation, are unlikely to provide a solid long-term foundation for this desired growth, even if Congress were to raise them modestly. The choice for policymakers, therefore, is to find new sources of income for an expanded program, or alternately to settle for a smaller program that might look very different from the one currently in place.

One perennial subject of debate concerning the highway program is whether grants to individual states are in line with the taxes those states’ motorists pay into the highway trust fund—the socalled donor-donee issue. The use of earmarks and possible programmatic reorganization will likely be prominent concerns in committee discussions of reauthorization. Specific programs, such as the Highway Bridge Program, can be expected to receive extensive congressional attention due to public concerns about the condition of the nation’s transportation infrastructure. Congress also can be expected to look closely at transit program spending levels and priorities.

Freight issues have also been of growing importance in recent years and figure to get significantly more attention as part of the reauthorization debate.


Date of Report: December 1, 2010
Number of Pages: 34
Order Number: R41512
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Changes in Airport Passenger Screening Technologies and Procedures: Frequently Asked Questions

Bart Elias
Specialist in Aviation Policy

In the autumn of 2010, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) began deploying new technologies and procedures for screening passengers at airport checkpoints. Reports of negative public reaction to some of these changes have prompted intense congressional interest in TSA passenger screening. This report addresses some of these concerns.


Date of Report: November 23, 2010
Number of Pages: 12
Order Number: R41502
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies(THUD): FY2011 Appropriations

David Randall Peterman
Analyst in Transportation Policy

Maggie McCarty
Specialist in Housing Policy

President Obama requested a total of $123.7 billion for the agencies included in H.R. 5850/S. 3644, the Transportation, Housing and Urban Development, and Related Agencies Appropriations (THUD) bill for FY2011. This request represented an increase of approximately $1.6 billion (1.3%) over the $122.1 billion provided in the FY2010 THUD appropriations act. The House-passed bill would provide $126.4 billion (3.5% over the FY2010 enacted level); the Senate Committee on Appropriations recommended $122.8 billion (less than 1% over FY2010).

The single largest new item in the budget request was $4 billion for a national infrastructure investment fund to provide federal funding for, and promote investment from other sources in, infrastructure projects of national or regional significance. Neither the House nor the Senate funded this request.

The President’s FY2011 budget requested a total of $77.7 billion in funding for the Department of Transportation (DOT). That was $2.0 billion (2.6%) above the $75.7 billion provided for FY2010. The House-passed bill would provide $79.4 billion; the Senate Committee on Appropriations recommended $75.8 billion. Since both bills rejected the request for $4 billion under DOT for a new infrastructure fund, this freed up $4 billion to be applied to existing programs within the overall requested level.

The President’s FY2011 budget requested about $45.6 billion in net new budget authority for the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), a decrease of about 1% from the FY2010 enacted level. However, the requested decrease in net new budget authority would actually represent a 3% increase in new funding for HUD programs, as the overall increase in appropriations would be more than offset by a substantial increase in offsetting collections and receipts, which are expected to come from proposed changes to the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) mortgage insurance programs. The FY2011 HUD funding bill approved by the House would provide about $1 billion more for HUD than requested by the President, a 1% increase in net new budget authority over the FY2010 enacted level and a 5% increase in appropriations for HUD programs in aggregate. Like the House bill, the FY2011 HUD funding bill approved by the Senate Committee on Appropriations would provide about $1 billion more for HUD than requested by the President. Like the House bill, the Senate Appropriations Committee bill would provide a 1% increase in net new budget authority over the FY2010 enacted level and a 5% increase in appropriations for HUD programs in aggregate.


Date of Report: November 17, 2010
Number of Pages: 26
Order Number: R41492
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.

Surface Transportation Funding and Finance

John W. Fischer
Specialist in Transportation Policy

Robert S. Kirk
Specialist in Transportation Policy

William J. Mallett
Specialist in Transportation Policy

Federal surface transportation programs are currently funded primarily through federal fuel taxes on gasoline, diesel, and other fuels that are deposited in the highway trust fund. Although there has been some modification to the tax system, the basic fuel taxes have not been increased at the federal level since 1993. Prior to the recession that began in 2007, annual increases in driving, with a concomitant increase in fuel use, were sufficient to keep revenues rising steadily on an annual basis. This is no longer the case. Further, future changes in the nation’s vehicle fleet as a result of federal fuel economy standards, including increased use of electric hybrid and fully electric vehicles, are expected to suppress future fuel use even if annual increases in vehicle mileage resume.

Congress has yet to address the surface transportation program’s revenue issues, except by increasing transport spending from the U.S. Treasury general fund. Many members of Congress have expressed an aversion to raising fuel taxes, and alternative methods of financing surface transportation have not received serious legislative consideration.

These financial issues have delayed reauthorization of federal surface transportation programs. In the past Congress has reached agreement on reauthorization only when it could count on sufficient revenues to meet many of the competing demands for funding. With efforts to reauthorize the existing, but already expired, surface transportation program at a standstill, the programs authorized by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU or SAFETEA) (P.L. 109-59) continue to operate as a result of extension legislation and cash infusions to the trust fund from the U.S. Treasury general fund.

This report focuses on possible revenue sources for surface transportation infrastructure. It begins with a brief discussion of the problems associated with the trust fund financing system and then explores possible immediate and longer-term solutions to the financing problem. Some of the major issues discussed in this report are:

• Raising motor fuel taxes offers a simple short-term solution to the revenue issue, but is not a long-term solution due to likely future declines in fuel consumption.
• Proposals such as replacing current motor fuel taxes with a fuel sales tax or a fee based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) pose their own problems, and in any event will require overcoming numerous administrative and political barriers.
• The trust fund system itself may be a barrier to increased or more effective federal transportation spending, and its continuation in its current form could be reconsidered.
• The general aversion to taxation in the current economic climate has drawn attention to private and nontraditional funding sources, such as tolls, leveraging private capital through pubic-private partnerships (PPPs), existing federal loan guarantees, and creation of a national infrastructure bank. These nontraditional funding mechanisms could potentially make an important but somewhat limited contribution to overall national infrastructure needs.

Date of Report: November 10, 2010
Number of Pages: 31
Order Number: R41490
Price: $29.95

Follow us on TWITTER at http://www.twitter.com/alertsPHP or #CRSreports

Document available via e-mail as a pdf file or in paper form.
To order, e-mail Penny Hill Press  or call us at 301-253-0881. Provide a Visa, MasterCard, American Express, or Discover card number, expiration date, and name on the card. Indicate whether you want e-mail or postal delivery. Phone orders are preferred and receive priority processing.