[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 161 (Tuesday, October 25, 2011)]
[House]
[Page H7013]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RETAINING AND STRENGTHENING THE TRANSPORTATION ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from
Oregon (Mr. Blumenauer) for 5 minutes.
Mr. BLUMENAUER. Today's Washington Post has an interesting article
about the possibility that Congress will jettison the Transportation
Enhancement funding. Best known for providing resources for bike and
pedestrian activities, it also opens the door to a wide range of
important benefits. Sadly, the language in the article betrays a lack
of understanding on the part of those who would eliminate these
important programs.
For instance, they single out somehow that this was forcing the
creation of wildlife corridors--turtle tunnels, passages that don't
just comply with our environmental responsibilities. These aren't
something to trivialize. More Americans die in collisions with moose,
with deer--or, for that matter, from swerving to avoid a turtle in the
roadway--than die on our airplanes and buses in a given year. These are
not trivial issues. These are areas that give choices to be able to
deal with meaningful transportation problems.
Right now, as I speak, there are millions of Americans stuck in
traffic--burning fuel, wasting time, raising their blood pressure. The
investment in complete transportation systems, which includes bike and
pedestrian activities, means that there are hundreds of thousands of
cars that aren't in front of these people in the roadway because
they're able to walk or bike to work, and they're not fighting these
commuters for a parking space.
These programs are about safety. In the communities that enhance bike
and pedestrian activity, everyone is safer. Look at the numbers in New
York City or in my hometown of Portland, Oregon. It isn't just the
pedestrian and the cyclist who are safer, but it's also the individual
motorist. Traffic accident rates for everybody have declined.
It gives people transportation choices. More people can let their
children walk or bike to school safely on their own because of the Safe
Routes to School program rather than producing another bulge in the
early morning commute. Choice also means healthier communities and the
people who live in them. It's easier to get gentle exercise, cleaner
air, less energy wasted.
The costs associated with pollution and obesity are astronomical.
This gives values to families. Communities that have balanced
transportation programs actually spend less on transportation. The
figures for my hometown of Portland, Oregon, show that the average
family saves $2,500 a year not being stuck in traffic, in a commuting
mess--money that they can spend on health care or books, restaurants or
housing.
It's not just pedestrians and cyclists who would be shortchanged if
we jettison these programs. The same adjustments that make it safer to
walk or bike also have a profound impact on people who rely on walkers,
baby strollers, motorized scooters. These enhancements have enhanced
the community for the elderly, the disabled, and the young.
We also, frankly, have a current debate that shows exactly why we
need a national policy. It's easy for people to get confused or misled.
Nobody is forced to build a specific project. It forces State
transportation officials to work harder and think differently, but it
gives people more choices, more value, better health, stronger
communities. It means that all our communities are more livable and
that our families are safer, healthier, and more economically secure.
The 20-year legacy of the Transportation Enhancement program is
strong. That's why they are the most requested transportation projects
that Congress has entertained for the last 20 years. I do hope that we
debate it fully and fairly. In the end, if we do, I am confident we
will retain these important programs, and if anything, we will
strengthen them.
____________________