On Nov 15, 2021 President Joe Biden signed his insufficient infrastructure bill into law. Earlier today, the social safety net bill was passed by the House. There is a lot of talk about the benefits of Biden’s infrastructure bill, including the $550M of $1.2T going towards transportation infrastructure. Of this, only $5B is going to bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and $20B to roadway safety. The two bills are contradictory, both an improvement and detriment to public health.
This is “the largest federal investment in public transit ever” and “the largest federal investment in passenger rail since the creation of Amtrak,” according to the White House (whitehouse.gov). The health and social benefits touted by these statements are cancelled out by the amount of money dedicated to highways and roads. The funding does little to help the people or the planet, much like an EV Hummer (pictured above).
Biden’s social “safety net” will have a tough time moving forward as economically and politically conservative members of the Senate are sure to vote “no.” The bill includes $401B for health care. I argue that if the bills worked together, both would come up cheaper. As a result, they would have a better chance at being signed into law.
A. de Nazelle et al. emphasize public health is an urban planning policy issue. “Transportation and planning policies that promote active travel by walking and cycling can contribute to these [control obesity, limit chronic disease, and reduce air pollution] goals.”
Investing more in bicycling and pedestrian infrastructure could greatly reduce the funds dedicated to health care. According to transportation engineer George Poulos, the societal costs of walking or biking are $0.01 and $0.08 per dollar you spend, respectively. In contrast, driving costs society $9.20 per dollar.
The automobile itself emits pollution and emissions which directly affect the health of community members and the infrastructure built to support them alters the way we move through the environment. A car-centric urban fabric comes at the expense of walkers, rollers, and cyclists. Urban planning policies that increase walking and cycling, while supporting public transportation are shown to reduce household vehicle ownership rates and vehicle speeds.
Included in the infrastructure bill is a requirement for states to develop Complete Streets programs. These are roads that are built to be accessible and safe for “people of all ages and abilities” according to Congress. By their definition this includes walking, cycling, transit, and automobiles. This is a step in the right direction although contradicted by the large sums of money going towards highway building.
$15B of the infrastructure bill’s funds will go to supporting EV use by building a network of chargers and implementing EV school buses. While this is a great step toward environmental protections, the continued support of roads and vehicles undermines pedestrian safety. Nazelle’s research highlights that traffic injuries are the second leading cause of death for people aged 5-29. Support for the motor vehicle is also present in the social safety net bill, $22B is going to EV tax credits and $15B for renewable fuels like biodiesel. Biden did the right thing when he included $4B in tax credits for electric bikes. The credit provides a 30% refundable tax credit, capped at $1,500 (theverge.com).
Neighborhood design that centers walkability and public transportation promotes walking and contributes to a healthier community. Research found that “policies and planning decisions that increase walking and cycling can also reduce household vehicle ownership rates and vehicle speeds.” Investing in public health starts with restructuring the infrastructure bill to move away from road building and instead investing more in walkability. Instead, the $26B dedicated to public health will be used to fix problems caused by the injection of $110B into roads and bridges.
By Anthony Tortorici
Highlighting how much more we're spending on active transportation while still funding roads and highways at such blindly, stubbornly high levels is disingenuous, to put it mildly. It reminds me of the saying, "adding sugar makes the poison go down easier". I know we're far from being in a political environment where we can make significant progress to undo all the harm caused by our car-centric society, but seeing the president in an electric hummer is just such a gross photo-op, despite being entirely expected.
ReplyDeleteThe part of this bill I'm most curious about is the $100 billion in discretionary funding to be awarded by Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. My hopes aren't extremely high that the distribution of those funds will look much different than rest of the bill, but I suppose we'll just have to submit good grant proposals and hope for the best.