Federal-Aid Highway Act 1970

Proposition 35 simply gives state and local government the flexibility to use private sector engineers and architects to complete long overdue highway, rail transit and other projects sooner, safely, and at $2.5 billion savings to taxpayers. Supporters of Proposition 35 highlight a few important points, including thousands of overdue highway and rail transit projects that must be completed to alleviate traffic and prepare us for the next quake. In order to complete these thousands of projects both Caltrans and private sector engineers and architects are needed to complete those projects. However, Caltrans bureaucrats stand in the way of accomplishing this by severely restricting government's ability to contract with the private sector. Proposition 35 is the answer to these problems. Proposition 35 is

The U.S. Democratic Senator, John H. Bankhead, was prominent in contribution by amending the Federal Aid Road Act of 1916. This act, “promoted by the national Good Roads Movement, marks the first time that the federal government provided assistance for state highway costs… The Federal Aid Road Act provided funding for the improvement of any rural road over which the U.S. mail was carried” (History of the Federal-Aid Highway Program).

Despite the tremendous economic success in Texas and its overall well-being, the state continues to face its nonstandard set of challenges that must be addressed immediately. Certainly, the most pressing issue is a deteriorating transportation infrastructure, which requires innovation, long-range planning and, of course, investment (Button & Reggiani, 2011). The following study focuses on the deteriorating transportation infrastructure as a major issue facing the state of Texas. The report will also discuss the positions of two major Texas political parties (Republican and Democratic) on the issue. It further explains the ways of their addressing it. Next, it will discuss the overall goals, the position, the level of lobbying and the

In the early 1900s, the United States of America would see the introduction of a piece of technology that would change the way we as a society would look at travel. Henry Ford began production of Model T, the vehicle soon found its way into many American homes. By 1927, the Ford Motor Company had sold nearly 15 million of the mass produced, affordable car. The automobile was no longer a luxury but, a necessity for Americans. During the infancy of the automobile, the roads where nothing more than a mere rutted up path through the country side. Though shortly, people realized the need for better roads. The only problem was, who was going to pay the bill?

When traffic is beyond ridiculous, there’s no surprise when Houston motorists lose approximately $1,090 every year due to the high volumes of vehicles on the road. The congestion is hurting more than just individual drivers; businesses requiring trucking receive an astonishing $646M hit from time lost during these hold ups, which is up from $490M in 2007 (Begley). As Houston grows and seeing as road development is already behind, we can only expect such expenses to increase throughout the decade. Harris County Judge Ed Emmett said it best, “(the challenge) is just trying to stay where we are” (Begley).

You might have heard recently that the United States Trust Fund is currently experiencing a solvency issue due to an increased cost associated with financing road projects. The members of the United States Congress, as well as numerous other influential leaders, have been discussing means of addressing this “broken” Highway Trust Fund. This issue has been consistently thrown on the back burner for some time and due to this procrastination an issue that would have been an easy fix a few years ago has now ballooned into a much larger issue. Lately it seems like every time I turn on the news I have seen news reports of bridges collapsing and pot holes getting worse, it scary to think that I will one day have children driving on these roads if

The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956 pushed for transcontinental highways across America to connect the nation in a safer fashion. President Dwight D. Eisenhower signed the bill into law to improve “speedy, safe transcontinental travel” through a 40,000 mile interstate highway. Since the Cold War pressured Americans into building the highways, support for their construction grew as they provided quick evacuation routes for cities that could be target areas from the impending threat of the Soviet Union. The Act provided that the federal government would pay 90 percent of the cost for building the highway and the law portioned out $26 billion to pay for the construction. The government collected the money for the construction by increasing the

     Everything is bigger in Texas. That’s what a lot of Texans what Americans and people around the world to know – you don’t mess with Texas. In the 1950’s, when President Eisenhower created the first Interstate plan for the country and implemented new roads in almost every single state, it was the largest engineering feat in the modern world. Now, almost half a century later, Governor Rick Perry is set to break that record, with the costliest, largest, and most incredible-sized proportion Texas Trans-Corridor, dubbed the “Texas Superhighway,” a 4000 mile, $175 billion dollar project that won’t be completely functional for another fifty years (Perry). This project certainly

The issue of restoring American bridges comes from a federal point of view, specifically the Department of Transportation that in charge of ensuring the passing of FHTF-RAIAPS. Passing this bill signifies an increase in gasoline tax as well as an increase in corporate tax. FHTF-RAIAPS resembles President’s Obama proposal— to overhaul corporate and business taxes to pay for repairing and replacing the nation’s aging roads, rails, bridges and tunnels— except that he opposed to raising gasoline tax (Shear, 2014). The fact they differ in equitable taxation for gasoline, makes their restructuring approach totally different from obtaining public input, delivering organizational activities, getting outputs and achieving the desired

This book changes the way people should think about the Interstate highways because it shows how much people do rely on them; maybe even too much. The book also makes one think about how much money we spend on gasoline and our reliance on foreign oil companies. The highways are a statement of what the American people are. The Interstate system was a great engineering feat, and it changed the landscape of the United States. It is a controversial subject, but it does reflect us as Americans. Lewis say, “the Interstates have reflected our shifting attitudes about technology, landscape, community, race relations, and the quality of our lives. Indeed,

A State Master Plan for Transportation was adopted, which is a state effort to coordinate planning and delivery of projects, focused on reducing traffic congestion and on expanding bus, rail and other public transit systems instead of adding more freeways. The passage of Senate Bill 45 in 1997 dramatically changed the process by which state and federal transportation funds are allocated for transportation, placing most of the responsibility for planning and prioritizing project funding in the hands of local and regional agencies rather than the state, which allowed the state to delegate the issue to the cities, but still require cities to get approval of said plans In 2004 California approved the Transportation Congestion Improvement Act to protect transportation funds by limiting the use of transportation funds from gas sales tax for non transportation-related needs till 2008. California voters approved Propositions 1A and 1B in 2006 with proposition 1A permanently protected transportation funds and required previously diverted funds to be repaid and proposition 1B authorizing the sale of $19.9 billion in bonds for a broad range of transportation projects. Due

The regulation that will be discussed in this week’s assignment is the Federal-Aid to Highways Act of 1956 found in the e-book: American Transportation Policy. The reason that I have chosen to cover this topic is because this was the start of the development of the highway systems that we are familiar with today. The Federal Highway Act of 1956, in fact, was a bill that was very important with introducing a framework for highways and was done during the Eisenhower presidency.

What was needed, it was thought, was for a major force to co-ordinate the efforts of the states and drive the nation back in the right direction. The Tennessee Valley Authority was one such example of co-ordination. Categorical grants to the states ensured that funds were used as the federal government wished. From now on, people would no longer look to the state capitol for solutions to their problems, but to Capitol Hill; or more precisely, to the White House.

The reform Miami takes three primary factors into account before implementing any kind of reform policy which are: planning, measuring, and monitoring. This practical framework allows them to decipher how spending should be evaluated, how performance should be measured, and how effectiveness should be monitored. There are numerous reforms on a broad spectrum which Miami seeks to take action; however, this paper will hone in specifically on transportation reform.

Complicating TB&T’s asset invest needs is the fact that the once dependable fuel tax is no longer producing revenues at the rate required to maintain transportation infrastructure. According to the Wall Street Journal, improved fuel economy and the rise of hybrid and electric vehicles means that additional driving won 't be matched by higher gasoline sales. Furthermore, how much people pay for the roads won 't necessarily correspond to how much they use them. Traditionally, the United States has met increased demand by building new facilities that expand capacity but this is no longer feasible for a variety of reasons. The time to move through the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process is often extensive, land acquisition may no longer be possible, and now fuel tax revenues may be insufficient to pay for new investments in infrastructure. As a result, transportation agencies and policymakers must explore new approaches to maintaining existing infrastructure and funding