EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

One of the most important tasks facing the upcoming Congressional review of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) is defining the federal role in U.S. transportation policy. The current ISTEA reflects the view of Congress in 1991, when this innovative statute was enacted, that transportation policy should be a partnership undertaking, with standards, goals and procedures set at the federal level but choices about how to meet nationally important objectives made at the local and state levels. The current ISTEA also reflects a prominence for energy efficiency concerns, among others, in transportation planning and investment. These strategies, and the statutory provisions that support them, must be maintained. Indeed, our nation's energy security, and our planet's health, depend on it.

Transportation accounts for a staggering two-thirds of U.S. oil consumption. According to the Congressional Office of Technology Assessment, the average American citizen uses five times as much energy for transportation as the average Japanese and nearly three times as much as the average citizen of western Europe. Moreover, transportation energy use is growing fast, at a rate of about 2.6 percent per year in the 1980s. Average new car fuel economy has been declining since 1987, and miles of passenger travel have been growing over four times faster than the driving-age population.

This portends major consequences for American foreign policy. Already, we import nearly half of our annual oil consumption, and the proportion is projected to climb to nearly 60 percent in ten years. Most of the increase will be supplied by the OPEC nations of the Persian Gulf, leaving the U.S. vulnerable to price shocks and other consequences due to political uncertainty in that region. Unfortunately, we cannot blast and drill our way out of this problem; even if the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, for example, were opened to oil development, America's petroleum supply would be extended by only 200 days.

Our energy-intensive transportation habits also threaten planetary health. Because of fossil fuel combustion and resultant carbon dioxide emissions, the mean surface air temperature of the earth has been increasing and is expected to increase an additional 2º C. or more in the next century. Consequences may include substantial sea level rise, flooding, spread of malaria and other tropical diseases, migration of populations, and major ecosystem changes.

In this context, increased energy efficiency is an imperative. Efficient transportation planning and investment must be part of the solution, but local communities and states cannot be expected to make decisions on their own to alleviate national or international problems that do not have immediate local consequences. We need clear leadership and guidance from the federal government with direction, incentives and funding programs that will link local decisions to collective national needs and strategies. Recent polling data indicate strong public support for federal energy conservation and environmental protection programs.

ISTEA establishes a sound, nonregulatory framework for local innovation in transportation efficiency. The law sets a number of energy efficiency goals for our nation's transportation system and establishes a sensible planning system for addressing them. It also promotes efficiency by requiring that planning be based on realistic budgetary assumptions and thorough economic analysis. It allows communities and states a large measure of flexibility in drawing upon federal funds to assist local priorities, but assures that at least some investments are made consistent with energy and environmental objectives by setting aside modest portions of overall federal assistance for these purposes.

ISTEA's partnership approach is working. Communities have begun to adopt innovative planning processes to meet efficiency goals. The law's funding mechanisms are being applied to support improvements in important local transportation management concerns such as intermodal freight connections, automobile traffic flow, and commuter travel. Indeed, ISTEA is gaining recognition as a model of new-generation government for the twenty-first century. It is important that the reauthorization stay the course to assure that we continue down this path.

At the same time, the reauthorization should consider a number of improvements to strengthen the law's efficiency-enhancing potential. These changes should retain local and state implementation flexibility but strengthen the incentives for improved performance in meeting national goals.

In the end, ISTEA can be only a component, not a panacea, in our national energy policy. We must improve the efficiency of vehicles as well as provide choices that reduce automobile dependence. We must conserve energy in sectors other than transportation. But ISTEA's role in a comprehensive strategy is critical, and rolling back any of the law's efficiency-promoting features would be a disaster. Instead, the reauthorization should maintain a strong federal leadership role in the transportation efficiency partnership. Let's keep the "E" in ISTEA.