Click here to listen! AMATS Director Jason Segedy sat down with Ed Esposito and Jody Miller from 1590 WAKR to discuss infrastructure issues and the need to increase the federal gas tax. Click here to listen to the radio interview and read Ed Esposito’s editorial.
Crashes on area roadways, intersections down by 16 percent since 2002
Traffic crashes on the Greater Akron area’s roadways, intersections and freeways continued to decline between 2007 and 2009, according to the latest three-year analysis compiled by AMATS.
The agency bases its analysis on nearly 59,000 crash records from the Ohio Department of Public Safety. AMATS identifies and ranks high-crash roadways, intersections and freeways by a composite score based on number of crashes, crash rate and severity.
Between 2002 and 2004, the area recorded more than 68,200 crashes. Since that time, area crashes have dropped by 16 percent to nearly 59,000. Every three-year analysis conducted by AMATS since 2002 has recorded declines in crashes – the most recent analysis shows a 4 percent decline from the 2006-2008 analysis. Interestingly, the rate of decline appears to have accelerated in the last several years, according to AMATS Engineer Dave Pulay.
“We suspect that’s due to a combination of factors. People are driving less because of the sour economy, which has also led to a drop in vehicle miles traveled,” Pulay continues, “A number of significant safety improvements have also been completed in recent years. Improvements in vehicle safety have also contributed to the decrease in injuries and fatalities.”
The 2007-2009 analysis identifies high-crash roadway sections, high-crash intersections and high-crash freeway locations in the Greater Akron area. As the agency responsible for transportation planning in the area, AMATS uses this information to identify and plan for safety improvements throughout the region.
Among the analysis’ findings are that:
- Most crashes occur in the winter months of January, February and December while the most fatalities occur in the summer months of July and August.
- Portage County is home to the highest ranked high-crash roadway section located on state Route 44, between Tallmadge Road and Interstate 76, and the highest ranked high-crash intersection at state Route 14/44 and state Route 88 (North Freedom Street).
- Deaths from motorcycle accidents accounted for 13 percent of area traffic fatalities between 2007 and 2009.
- Large truck-related fatalities accounted for 7 percent of area traffic fatalities during the period.
To view the full report click here.
For more information, please call AMATS at 330-375-2436.
Moving Beyond 1956… A New Vision for Transportation
Moving Beyond 1956… A New Vision for Transportation
by Jason Segedy
In 1956, President Eisenhower signed the Federal-Aid Highway Act into law. This sweeping piece of legislation appropriated $25 billion in order to construct the Interstate Highway System, the largest and most visionary public works project in American history. It also established the Highway Trust Fund, which paid for 90 percent of the cost of building the system, using revenues that were generated through taxes on fuel.
This brief bit of history is instructive for two reasons:
First, it is a reminder that there once was a time when our federal government was capable of establishing a coherent vision for transportation, mobilizing public support for it, and working tirelessly to complete it. The 47,000 mile Interstate Highway System remains the largest and most comprehensive highway network in the world, and the vast majority of it was constructed in just 20 years.
Second, it demonstrates that the American public will support a massive expenditure of federal tax dollars – $425 billion when adjusted for inflation – if it is confident that it is bankrolling a worthwhile endeavor.
Today, 54 years later, our federal government is rudderless and broke. There is no strategic vision from Washington guiding our national transportation future. Even more disturbingly, our existing system of transportation funding is in deep trouble. Last year, for the first time in history, the Highway Trust Fund went broke. Congress had to provide an emergency infusion of $8 billion in general revenue funds in order to keep the fund solvent. Earlier this year, another $19.5 billion was transferred to a fund that is supposed to be self-supporting. Essentially, we are now borrowing money from China to pay for our transportation infrastructure. This is a future that President Eisenhower would never have imagined.
On the fiscal side of the transportation equation we have three options: cut spending, increase revenue, or do some combination of both. Reduced federal funding levels will mean that already cash-strapped local governments and states will have to tighten their belts even further. It will mean that our aging bridges and roads will continue to deteriorate and become more unsafe. It will also mean that transit systems will have to cut their already limited service even further, making it yet more difficult for our low-income residents to access jobs and economic opportunities.
On the policy side of the transportation equation, the situation is equally dysfunctional. The previous transportation bill expired in 2009, and Congress has yet to pass a new one. There is no national transportation plan and the federal government is unwilling or unable to come up with a vision for transportation that everyday Americans can easily understand and embrace. Our current national transportation policy is schizophrenic. Over 30 percent of federal transportation funds go toward expanding highway capacity, but, at the same time we are spending $8 billion on high-speed rail. We say we want people to consider alternatives to driving, but provide little real incentive to do so. Meanwhile, our existing network of roads and bridges continues to crumble. Washington is trying to be all things to all people and not doing any of them particularly well.
So what should we do?
First, the difficult truth is this: We do not have enough money to pay for the transportation system that we need. Although a tax increase may not be politically palatable, a massive national debt and decaying infrastructure is even less appealing. It is not fiscally responsible and it is not in the public interest for our federal government to resort to deficit spending and rely on other countries to pay for our transportation infrastructure. The beauty of the Highway Trust Fund has always been that it is a self-supporting source of revenue based upon a “user fee” – the gasoline tax. This is no longer the case.
The current gasoline tax of 18.4 cents per gallon has not been increased since 1993. Because the tax was not indexed to inflation, its actual purchasing power has declined significantly. Meanwhile, there are 53 million more people living in the United States than there were 17 years ago.
In the short term, the federal tax on gasoline needs to be raised by 10 cents per gallon and indexed to inflation. This would generate an additional $20 billion per year in revenue. In the long term, a new mechanism for funding transportation should be found; preferably, one that is not predicated upon encouraging people to purchase more gasoline.
Second, Congress needs to pass a new transportation bill. This legislation should clearly define national transportation goals and priorities. It should adopt the same ambitious call-to-action that went into creating the Interstate Highway Act, but one that recognizes our current problems of urban sprawl and an uncertain energy future. It should also reform the convoluted system of dozens of separate federal funding categories, most of which contain cumbersome and outdated rules and regulations. This would improve flexibility and efficiency, and would allow states, metropolitan planning organizations, and transit agencies to better meet locally identified transportation needs. One example of this type of reform would be to allow transit agencies to spend federal funds on operating expenditures. They are currently prohibited from doing so.
Even though 2010 is an election year and Americans are justifiably concerned with high taxes, I believe that people would support an increase in the federal gasoline tax if they understood why it is necessary. According to a recent poll conducted by Building America’s Future, 60 percent of the American public erroneously believes that the gasoline tax is raised every year. At the same time, 62 percent correctly believe that funding decisions are too often based on “politics” rather than the “public good.”
As transportation professionals and policy makers, I believe that it is our duty to provide leadership on this issue; both to ensure fiscal responsibility and to establish a transportation vision that the public can support. We did it in 1956 and we can do it again.
Sincerely,
Jason Segedy
Director
Jason Segedy is the director of the Akron Metropolitan Area Transportation Study (AMATS). AMATS is the metropolitan planning organization responsible for regional transportation planning in Summit and Portage counties.
The opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the AMATS Director and do not necessarily reflect the views of the AMATS Policy Committee.