What Was Everyone Fighting About_ |
| On June 9, 1998, President Clinton signed into law a new federal
transportation bill called TEA-21, The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century. It
is in every sense a direct successor to the 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation
Efficiency ActISTEA. In spite of TEA-21's complexity and the many disagreements it
provoked during almost two years of debate, this new law both leaves the groundbreaking
reforms of ISTEA intact and provides new opportunities for innovation. Now that TEA-21 is
here, the transformation of our 1950s-era highway building program into a flexible
transportation program achieved in 1991 can no longer be called an aberration. ISTEA was
created by a Democratic Congress dominated by Northeasterners and a Republican President,
and its reforms have been continued by a Republican Congress led by Southerners and a
Democratic President. ISTEA, and all it represents, is here to stay. This means that ISTEA's weaknesses live on as well. It allowed people to rethink their choices about spending money, but did not require them to. TEA-21 is no different, and making it a success on the ground will take hard work. The purpose of this guide is to explain in simple terms the major elements of TEA-21 and how they came to be, highlight the parts of the new law that create new opportunities for progress, and draw attention to some new threats. |
|
Category |
Total 6-year funding (billions) |
1. Total Amount Authorized |
$216.3 |
|
$173.1 |
|
$41.0 |
2. Total Contract Authority |
$209.3 |
|
$171.7 |
|
$36.0 |
3. Total Amount Guaranteed |
$198.7 |
|
$162.7 |
|
$36.0 |
|
|
State |
Change in Total Funding, TEA-21 vs. ISTEA (percent increase) |
State |
Change in Total Funding, TEA-21 vs. ISTEA (percent increase) |
South Carolina |
79.3 |
Oregon |
49.9 |
Georgia |
69.7 |
Wisconsin |
48.1 |
Tennessee |
62.1 |
North Dakota |
47.8 |
Idaho |
61.9 |
Alaska |
47.3 |
Nevada |
61.8 |
Rhode Island |
47.2 |
Virginia |
61.8 |
Kansas |
47.1 |
Michigan |
61.2 |
Pennsylvania |
46.8 |
Montana |
61.1 |
California |
45.6 |
Alabama |
60.6 |
New Mexico |
45.3 |
Delaware |
60.5 |
Nebraska |
42.9 |
Texas |
60 |
Iowa |
42.8 |
Arizona |
59.5 |
West Virginia |
41.3 |
Wyoming |
58.3 |
Minnesota |
40.1 |
Utah |
57.8 |
Washington |
37.2 |
Louisiana |
57.6 |
Ohio |
36.9 |
Mississippi |
57.6 |
New York |
35.4 |
Florida |
57.3 |
Arkansas |
31.6 |
South Dakota |
57 |
New Jersey |
30.3 |
Oklahoma |
55.6 |
Illinois |
29 |
North Carolina |
54.7 |
Maryland |
28.7 |
New Hampshire |
53.1 |
Maine |
17.2 |
Missouri |
52.9 |
Connecticut |
12.8 |
Colorado |
52.3 |
District of Columbia |
12.4 |
Indiana |
52.2 |
Hawaii |
7.3 |
Vermont |
50.8 |
Massachusetts |
-41.2 |
The Transit Guarantee
Transit Funding Category |
Guaranteed |
Non-Guaranteed |
Urbanized Area Formula Grants |
$17.28 billion |
$750 million |
Other Formula Grants |
$1.94 billion |
-- |
Bus Programs |
$2.80 billion |
$500 million |
New Starts |
$6.09 billion |
$2.09 billion |
Rail Modernization |
$6.09 billion |
$500 million |
Planning |
$364 million |
$170 million |
Research |
$281 million |
$162 million |
Job Access |
$500 million |
$250 million |
Clean Fuel Grants |
$500 million |
$500 million |
University Transportation Centers |
$36 million |
-- |
Administration |
$364 million |
$78 million |
TOTAL |
$36.00 billion |
$5.00 billion |
TEA-21 Reference: