As the executive director of the Living Independent Network Corp, Jeremy Maxand does what he can to help people who don’t drive get around in southern Idaho. As in most of rural America, public transit options are limited.
The nonprofit organization, which serves those with disabilities, receives $100,000 annually from the state through a federal appropriation. The money finances cards riders use to pay for transportation, but Maxand described the region’s transit as a “bare-minimum lifeline service” and “piecemeal.”
And yet, even that could soon worsen.
The surface transportation programs authorized by the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, signed by President Joe Biden in 2021, expire by the end of the year. Lawmakers are hammering out the details of the bipartisan BUILD America 250 Act, which would reauthorize those programs. Transportation advocates say the Biden-era legislation failed to broaden Americans’ mobility options beyond cars, but they see the proposed BUILD Act as a significant step backward.
That’s because the bill would authorize $16.5 billion less for public transit than its predecessor, with $103.3 billion over five years compared with the baseline of $119.9 billion in the Jobs Act, according to the American Public Transportation Association. When adjusted for inflation, the BUILD Act would need an additional $24 billion to match that level, according to the Urban Institute. Every state would receive at least $10 million less in formula funding over the five years the law would be in effect.
“There would be a large decline in funding for public transit, and that would especially be true for projects that require what’s called capital investment funding — projects that require major investments for new lines,” said Yonah Freemark, a researcher with the organization.
Freemark said the effects would extend well beyond major cities. “Public transit is often portrayed as something that is subways in New York City,” he said. “The reality is that millions of people rely on public transit in a lot of smaller communities, including a lot of rural communities and tribal communities around the country. … Those rural transit systems are much more reliant on federal support to provide the service that they offer than are the urban transit agencies.”
Many public transit agencies have been struggling financially since ridership plummeted during the pandemic, exacerbating years of underinvestment. Further cuts could have severe effects, particularly in rural areas, transit advocates and experts said.
The cuts could be particularly painful in Idaho, which the Urban Institute estimates would see the nation’s biggest percentage drop in federal formula transit funding, at 18 percent. Maxand noted that local governments have limited ability to raise money for public transportation.
“When the federal funding goes away, everything goes away,” he said. That could leave those with disabilities socially isolated, only able to leave their homes for medical needs.
Maine faces a similar problem. The Urban Institute estimates its federal formula funding would fall 16 percent. Josh Caldwell, a co-facilitator of Transportation for Maine who also works for the Natural Resources Council of Maine, said the state’s transit system already needs improvement.
“Nowhere in the state do we have service that is at the standard that we’d like to see, which is a regularity of every 15 minutes,” he said.
The state receives about 38 percent of its funding from the federal government. The Maine Department of Transportation already faces a $400 million transportation funding shortfall because gas tax revenues have decreased thanks, in part, to the state’s decision to freeze the tax relative to inflation in 2011.
Though less rural than Maine, Indiana would see a comparable decline in federal formula transit funding under the BUILD Act. Austin Gibble, a transit planner in Indianapolis, said the cuts could lead the region’s transit agency IndyGo to delay bus purchases, forcing it to rely on older, less reliable vehicles.
Gibble is more concerned about what the cuts might mean for less populated areas. “Rural agencies in Indiana are already horrifically oversubscribed,” he said. In Hamilton County, the largest county in Indiana without fixed route transit service, Gibble said the waitlist for rides on Hamilton County Express, which requires a reservation, can be weeks long.
The impacts aren’t limited to rural America. The Urban Institute estimates that New York City would lose $2.3 billion over five years. Representative Jerry Nadler, who represents parts of the city, was the lone Democrat on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee to oppose the bill.
“It continues a familiar pattern: Highways are treated as the default national priority, while rail and transit are left fighting for insufficient resources, despite carrying millions of people, supporting regional economies, and reducing congestion,” Nadler said in a statement.
Danny Pearlstein, the policy and communications director at Riders Alliance, said Democrats should think bigger when it comes to transportation legislation.
“The Biden infrastructure bill was not the high water mark,” he said. “We could do much better than that in a variety of different ways, and we shouldn’t hold up bipartisanship as a core value of how we fund transportation when we have such sharply diverted views of the role of government to invest in people and communities.”
LeeAnn Hall, the campaign manager of the Alliance for a Just Society’s National Campaign for Transit Justice, said the debate is also about affordability. Transportation is the second-highest cost in Americans’ household budgets.
Reduced transit service could push some households toward another car, Hall said. “They have to pay more for gasoline. They’re going to be paying more for insurance. They have to think about parking. They have to think about maintenance and repair,” she said. “It’s expanding their household budget.”
Hall argued that investing in transit benefits people whether they use it or not. “Every dollar that we invest in public transit reduces congestion numbers, makes driving safer, and creates opportunities for families to have options,” she said.
As for residents of southern Idaho, Maxand hopes to provide them with as many transit options as possible, but they’re all getting more expensive to run, especially as fuel prices continue rising. He expects federal cuts to hit seniors and people with disabilities the hardest.
“It’s like saying you’re not going to pay for electricity to power the ventilator, but you’re going to leave the ventilator,” he said. “What are we doing here? This is not sustainable.”