\nnational poll that Transportation for
\nAmerica<\/a> released this week makes it clear that Americans are overwhelmingly
\nin favor of increasing our access to transportation options, no matter where
\nthey live in America—big cities, suburbs, small towns, or rural areas. The
\nmajority believes that their community—and the country as a whole—would
\nbenefit from an expanded and improved
\npublic transportation system including rail and buses<\/strong>.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Americans <\/p>\n But why<\/strong> do Americans think we need to increase spending on public transportation and <\/p>\n Well, <\/p>\n Our <\/p>\n Somewhat <\/p>\n So <\/p>\n Do <\/p>\n “If <\/p>\n Talking about <\/p>\n Stephen Davis is the Online Coordinator for Transportation <\/p>\n David Goldberg is the communications director for Related Links:<\/strong><\/p>\n How to improve a Hummer’s mileage and add retro style<\/a><\/p>\n Everything you need to know about Obama’s new fuel-economy rules<\/a><\/p>\n
\nnot only underestimate<\/strong> how much of their tax dollars actually go to
\nroads and bridges, 58 percent think we should be spending more of those
\ndollars on public transportation and expanding other options<\/strong>. This is
\ncertainly encouraging news, and it shows just how disconnected a lot of D.C.
\npolicymakers are from what Americans really want.<\/p>\n
\nensure that more Americans have access to different ways to get around? <\/p>\n
\none thing we learned is that it’s not to
\nprevent global warming<\/strong>. Among a lot of very good reasons to provide more
\noptions, global warming ranked last, with a bare majority of 52 percent seeing
\nit as a likely outcome. That’s not too surprising: even many environmentally
\nminded folks don’t automatically make the connection between having options to
\ndrive less and reduced emissions. The evidence to make that case is
\naccumulating rapidly, but it gets much less discussion than fancy hybrid
\nvehicles or dreams of cleaner fuels. And global warming skeptics don’t buy any
\nof it, of course.<\/p>\n
\npast polling has shown that nearly everyone cares about oil dependency,
\nhowever.<\/p>\n
\nsurprisingly, then, reducing oil dependency only did slightly better than
\nglobal warming as a rationale for more, and cleaner, transportation options.
\nOne obvious reason is that most people don’t realize that the lion’s share of
\nour oil consumption is for transportation. Once they’re told that 70 percent of oil consumption goes to
\nmotoring around<\/strong>, support for reduced oil use as a rationale leaps to nearly
\ntwo-thirds—and this crosses party and
\ngeographic lines<\/strong>. And when they’re
\nsubsequently asked which of many potential outcomes would be the best reason to support expanded options,
\nreducing our dependence on foreign oil
\ntops the list<\/strong>.<\/p>\n
\nwhat’s the lesson? We all need to start talking about the 70 percent solution
\nto oil dependency: reducing the amount
\nwe burn for transportation<\/strong>. There are three<\/strong> ways to do it: More efficient vehicles,
\nrenewable and\/or diversified fuel sources, and spending less time driving
\naround. The technology for the first two is in development, while the
\ntechnology for the last has existed in one form or another for many, many
\nyears. Walkable neighborhoods, streetcars,
\nlight rail, buses, and safe streets for walking can work in tandem with newer
\ntechnologies such as broadband internet and wireless networks, to make it
\npossible for people to avoid some trips, take others by transit, foot or bike—and still drive their hybrids when it makes sense to do so.<\/p>\n
\nAmerican voters need to understand all this to strongly support a federal
\ntransportation program that invests substantially in providing these less
\noil-consumptive options? Well, it wouldn’t hurt, but as the poll shows, people
\nhave plenty of other good reasons as it is.<\/p>\n
\nAmericans themselves were crafting the transportation bill,” T4 America
\nco-chair Geoff Anderson said yesterday, “we would see a doubling of the share for public transportation; an
\nironclad system of accountability for restoring existing roads and bridges
\nbefore simply building more of them; and a strong commitment to making all
\nour streets safe enough for kids to bicycle to school or so seniors can walk
\nto nearby restaurants or the drug store<\/strong>.”<\/p>\n
\ntransportation on terms that Americans relate to strongly will help us move the
\ndebate forward, and more importantly, start building the kind of transportation
\nsystem that Americans overwhelmingly want and need.<\/p>\n
\nfor America Campaign (T4).<\/p>\n
\nTransportation for America Campaign (T4) and Smart Growth America.<\/p>\n