The Sarah Debbink Langenkamp Active Transportation Safety Act aims to make biking and walking safer by allowing states and local governments to use federal funds more flexibly. This bill could lead to safer streets and paths for everyone, especially in communities that struggle to afford safety projects.
What This Bill Does
The Sarah Debbink Langenkamp Active Transportation Safety Act changes how existing federal safety funds can be used to improve biking and walking infrastructure. Normally, when local governments want to build things like bike lanes or sidewalks, they have to come up with 20% of the project cost themselves. This can be tough for smaller or poorer communities. This bill allows them to use federal Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) funds to cover that 20% local match, potentially allowing up to 100% of the project to be funded by the federal government.
This doesn't create new money; it just changes how the money can be used. By letting HSIP funds cover the local match for Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) projects, it makes it easier for communities to access federal funds they might otherwise miss out on. The bill also allows HSIP funds to be used for projects that improve safety for everyone, with a special focus on pedestrians and cyclists.
In simple terms, this bill helps communities build safer streets without having to find extra money locally. It aims to reduce the number of accidents involving pedestrians and cyclists by making it easier to fund safety improvements.
Why It Matters
This bill could have a big impact on people's lives by making streets safer for walking and biking. It benefits everyone who uses these forms of transportation, especially in areas that can't afford to improve their infrastructure on their own. By reducing the financial burden on local governments, more projects can move forward, leading to safer routes to schools, parks, and workplaces.
Pedestrians, cyclists, and other "vulnerable road users" like people using wheelchairs stand to gain the most. The bill could lead to more sidewalks, bike lanes, and safer crossings, making it easier and safer to get around without a car. This is especially important for children, older adults, and people in low-income communities who rely more on walking and biking.
Key Facts
- Cost/Budget Impact: The bill doesn't authorize new funding but allows existing funds to be used differently.
- Timeline for Implementation: The bill is still in the "Introduced" stage, so no implementation timeline is set yet.
- Number of People Affected: Potentially millions of pedestrians and cyclists could benefit from safer infrastructure.
- Key Dates: The bill was introduced in the 118th Congress and reintroduced in the 119th Congress.
- Implementation Complexity: State DOTs would need to adjust policies to use the new funding flexibility.
- Real-World Impact: Could lead to more projects like sidewalks and bike lanes in communities that need them.
- Bipartisan Support: The bill has sponsors from both major political parties, indicating broad support.
Arguments in Support
- Addresses Rising Traffic Deaths: Supporters say the bill tackles the increasing number of pedestrian and cyclist deaths by funding more safety projects.
- Unlocks Federal Funds for Small Communities: By covering the local match, the bill helps small and rural communities access federal funds they couldn't before.
- Flexible Use of Funds: It gives local governments more flexibility to address specific safety needs, allowing them to tailor projects to local conditions.
- Builds Complete Networks: The bill supports creating continuous networks for walking and biking, not just isolated improvements.
- Bipartisan Support: The bill has backing from both Democrats and Republicans, showing broad agreement on its goals.
Arguments in Opposition
- Reallocates Limited Funds: Critics worry that using HSIP funds for TAP projects might take money away from other important safety projects.
- Potential Urban Bias: Some argue that the bill might favor urban areas with strong advocacy groups, leaving rural areas behind.
- Federal Overreach: There are concerns that the bill might steer local transportation priorities too much from the federal level.
- Cost-Effectiveness Concerns: Critics question whether all projects funded under this bill will be the most effective in improving safety.
- No New Funding: Some believe the bill doesn't increase overall investment in safety, just changes how existing funds are used.