In episode 17 of the Infrastructure Technology Podcast, Gavin, Brandon, Jessica and Noah examine the proposed Build America 250 Act, the bipartisan surface transportation reauthorization bill that would replace the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act when it expires later this year. The discussion explores how the legislation seeks to continue federal investment in roads, bridges and public transit while introducing new priorities focused on workforce development, project delivery, safety and digital infrastructure. The hosts break down the bill's major provisions and explain why its bipartisan support makes it one of the most significant transportation proposals currently under consideration in Congress.

Listen time

27:31

Here is a transcript from the episode:

GJ: Welcome to the Infrastructure Technology Podcast. I'm Gavin Jenkins, head of content at Roads and Bridges, and we got a full team. Today, we're going full court press, and it is because we are talking about the Build America 250 Act. We got Brandon Lewis. He is an associate editor of Mass Transit. We have Jessica Parks, staff writer at Roads and Bridges, and we have coming off the bench from Brooklyn, New York, Noah Kolenda. How you guys doing today?

NK: We're doing great, thank you. 

BL: It's a Tuesday, and it's a podcast day, and let's roll.

GJ: Alright, let's roll. Let's talk about this. Alright, so IJA that we all know and love is going to be going away on September 30th and our wonderful leaders in Washington, D.C. are going to try to put in its place the Build America 250 Act and the headline here is that it's a bipartisan five-year surface transportation reauthorization bill. Where do we want to start? I think we should kick it over to you Brandon, and I can get into where it is right now and where it stands, but just tell me what your initial thoughts are of it right now.

BL: Yeah, so I'm not going to bore all our listeners out there about all the facts and all the data and all the funding because we could spend hours and hours, we could have a whole podcast just on that alone, but one of my biggest takeaways from this legislation is the safety aspect of it for transit. There is a lot in here about bus driver safety, and in the legislation, it recommends designing safety standards to the USDOT secretary, requiring a fully enclosed operator workstation barrier and newly manufactured fixed-route buses that are at least 30 feet in length and are purchased with federal funds. It talks about the fact that the national transit database would be required to report fare evasion revenue by mode, as well as violent crime data on vehicles and in facilities. There's also funding in here for Amtrak when it comes to safety, as well as an emergency relief program for rail under the Federal Railroad Administration. So this administration has talked a lot about one of its main goals in transportation is to make sure that not only people, but workers feel safe, and this legislation does a lot for that.

GJ: Okay. Alright. So that's a great place to start. Safety is definitely a huge part. I think that there's a lot of our sponsors. I know AX is a huge sponsor of Roads and Bridges, and they did a wonderful job advocating Congress to make sure that safety was a huge part of this bill, and it is part of the foundation. Before we go on, let's talk about where it is right now so that we have an understanding because it is not done. And so there are several steps to make it a law. Right now it's just we are through committee approval, which is the first step that's completed. The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee approved the bill by a 62-2 vote. The next step is a house floor vote. We haven't gotten that yet. The full house must pass the bill. After that, then we go to the Senate and the Senate action we need. The Senate will likely develop its own transportation bill or substantially modify the house's version. And after that, then we get conference negotiations. The House and the Senate will negotiate, or what will they have, they call it reconciliation. They'll reconcile the differences between their two versions of the bill, and this is where significant changes often occur. Honestly, for months now in Roads and Bridges, I've been writing Op-Ed pieces about how they have to come together and the importance of keeping a lot of what the IJA is, and I think that negotiating right there is going to be huge. And after that, then there's the final votes, the final House vote, then there's the final Senate vote, and then it goes to the White House, where President Donald Trump hopefully will sign it. So we're only in step one of a seven step process, and it is now almost July 4th, and September 30th is coming, and these politicians tend to take lots of vacations in August. So nothing's a slam dunk yet. So that's where we are. And now I want to talk about what else is in it that we know. We like the safety. Noah, let's kick it over to you. What do you like about it?

NK: Yeah, so I kind of focused for my research on this towards the priorities of the American Public Transportation Association just to kind of ground the research a little bit. And so on that front, the association got a lot of its operational and project delivery reforms covered in the legislation. However, it's still kind of looking for a stronger guaranteed transit and passenger rail funding along with other governance liability and tax policy changes. But really the headlining things for me really come down to the emergency relief funding and other large scale, like I said, project delivery reforms. So that's things like the Cooperative Procurement Authority, which streamlines the vehicle procurement process, so the agencies can get vehicles on the ground faster. It also adjusted some of the bus fleet spare ratio protections and just kind of gives agencies more discretion in their fleet management, and it preserved a dedicated rail title from the IJA, which was a very big priority of the association in this negotiation. So a lot of headlining things coming for APTA in this legislation. However, there are still some priorities that they're working on in Washington.

GJ: Okay. Jess, over to you. From a Roads and Bridges standpoint, what is in the bill that we like?

JP: So I think that this bill gives a lot of power and authority to counties that they previously didn't have. I mean, counties own 38% of the country's bridges, and they don't really even get a lot of funding. So with this legislation, counties will have access to 22% of funding in the bill and through formula set aside sub allocation and discretionary grant opportunities, 22% of bridge funding, let me clear that up. That is a 270% increase in funding for county owned bridges and especially at a time when 40,000 county owned bridges are structurally deficient, so this will have a huge impact on the local level.

BL: Huge.

JP: Huge, yes. Also, a lot of bridges will be able to actually fund their project. A lot of counties will actually be able to fund their projects because there's a 95% cost share for locally owned bridges, so that actually brings the project into the realm of possibility for many of these municipalities. 

GJ: The bill reauthorized federal transportation programs from fiscal year 2027 through fiscal year 2031. And then there's roughly 580 billion billion, with a ‘B’, in total authorizations, and this is the bill that determines how federal transportation dollars flow for the next five years for contractors, engineers, dots and suppliers. It's arguably the most important infrastructure legislation since the IJA in the fall of 2021. There's 45 billion in bridge funding, and I mean, obviously we're huge fans of bridge funding here at Roads and Bridges, but it's so critical because every year as our nation puts bridges out of poor condition by repairing them or rehabilitating them more fall into poor condition, it's just such an uphill climb. There's about five billion more than was provided under the IJA, so this is actually more money there. House leaders are calling it the largest federal investment in bridges in U.S. history, which is just great. I was shocked that they were able to do that, and I'm hoping that that doesn't change through the negotiations. So Brandon kicking it over to you, what's not in it?

BL: Yeah, so I think on the transit side right now, and I know Noah, I think you'll talk a little bit about this from APTA’s perspective, but I think there could be a little bit of concern on maybe a little bit on the rail side. And again, Noah, I'm sure you probably have this as well, but one of APTA’s recommendations was to shorten the grant award period for the federal-state partnership for inner city passenger rail from 30 days to three days. That would obtain new insurance coverage under the rail passenger liability cap, which again would be extended from 30 days to one year, which basically would give commuter rail agencies more time to secure coverage in the insurance market. The cap was adjusted from 200 million to 323 million, but it does not address the 30-day coverage window. So again, there's a lot to go here in this, but I think that some of the concerns would be potentially more on the rail side.

GJ: Yeah, Noah, do you want to dive into that?

NK: And I would agree and furthering on that insurance liability aspect, this insurance market is not even a U.S. based one. The APTA president and CEO was mentioning to us that these rail agencies are having to go out to Bermuda and other countries and are all having to go and negotiate these rates at the same time, and it's a very tight window for them to obtain coverage. And so while the cap being raised is good because it provides more coverage, should there be an incident, not extending that window, according to the association, is really putting a tight pressure on the agencies when they go to obtain this insurance coverage, and APTA put together a whole plan as part of the recommendations that kind of explains their position on this insurance liability program and how they think it should function, and it went largely unanswered in the bill, unfortunately, so there's still a lot to go on insurance and rail liability in that regard. So yeah, unfortunately a big unanswered portion from APTA.

GJ: Jess, is there anything that's not in it that our audience, Roads and Bridges, should be concerned about?

JP: Well, one of the things that's kind of contentious in the bill for Roads and Bridges is there was an amendment after the markup that states would have an opportunity to opt into that would increase the weight limits of trucks on their roadways. So currently the federal limit of trucks is 80,000. We have an opportunity to bump that up to 91,000. Of course, that allows more products on a truck proves sufficiency, maybe gets more trucks off the road. However, a lot of counties, the National Association of Counties, is against that because every trip begins and ends on a local road, and that's going to add accelerated pavement distress and structural fatigue on county roads and bridges, so I kind of wanted to see what you guys thought about that debate.

GJ: Brandon, Noah, do you guys have any opinions on that?

BL: Well, Jess, I got to say I'm glad you cleared it up that it is the amount that is on the truck because I was about to ask the dumbest question in the world and basically say, ‘Is that how much the truck weighs?’ You only have a certain amount of truck that weighs on there. But yeah, I mean, again, I don't know the ins and outs of how much a bridge can hold a truck, but I would think the more you can hold on a truck, the better.

GJ: Yeah, that's absolutely the point. The more the better. So that's obviously true what Jess said. There's a lot of other things in it that we want to hit that our readers might not like. I think that the first thing is the funding doesn't reach IIJA levels. So one of the biggest criticisms is that while the authorization number is large, especially for the bridges, it does not replicate the enormous influx of general fund money that accompany the IJA. That is a huge part of it. The IJA provided substantial advanced appropriations beyond the traditional highway trust fund funding. This bill relies more heavily on traditional trust fund mechanisms, so some agencies may find the funding environment less generous than what they experienced during the IJA. There's less emphasis on some newer grant programs. The bill shifts focus towards the traditional programs, like I said, but some climate focused and community focused initiatives created or expanded during the IJA are reduced, consolidated or eliminated, and that's where you really get the sense of who's in power. The IJA is a democrat-led Biden-era bill, this is the Republicans in power, they're leading the charge. And so they're rolling back some of those, getting rid of some environment friendly, climate focused things, so for many highway contractors, this won't be viewed negatively, but for some urban agencies and advocacy groups, it will, and right now, resiliency is such a huge topic in our industry, so I think that once this gets across the finish line, I think that that will definitely be a huge issue. And then the EV situation, even with new EV fees, some transportation finance experts argue that the long-term trust fund sustainability remains unsolved or unresolved. Congress still lacks a permanent solution for declining gas tax revenues, and that's another big issue is the gas tax revenue. So with no major gas tax reform, the bill does not fundamentally overhaul federal transportation finance, and Congress still avoids the larger question of what replaces the gas tax in the future once EVs really start gaining steam. Okay, so that is where we are. So now we know both sides. We've painted a broad stroke of what's in it, what we like, and what's not in it, what we don't like. So from here I think we should be a little bit more positive. I think we should dive a little bit more into what we like. So I'm going to kick it back over to the Mass Transit side. Brandon, Noah, tell us a little bit more about what you're excited about.

BL: Yeah, I think for me, again, I just go back to the safety element and the fact that this funding is going to go towards buses and new transportation projects. Also, I think the big emphasis on making sure that fair collection evasion is viewed as a safety hazard and trying to implement more of those fair collection… i'm sorry, I'm blanking. 

GJ: You're blanking. We did it. We stumped Brandon.

BL: The strategy. We got the fair collection strategies is what I was trying to say.

GJ: Noah, hop on in there. What else should be happy about? Where should we examine in the positive side?

NK: Absolutely. So I think something especially important for us here on the ITP is the workforce development expansions that are made in this bill. So it expands the eligible workforce training, funding sources, including rural transit programs, and it helps agencies address workforce shortages, so this is really what we've been trying to target on season three is kind of the next generation of the transit workforce and just kind of like this roads, bridges, transit, moving people, workforce and so that was a really big highlight for me was just funding and more dedicated programming in that department.

GJ: Yeah, absolutely. That's such a great point. I'm so glad you brought that up, Noah. And also since we are a technology podcast, we have to say that IJA was really about expanding broadband and getting Wi-Fi to rural areas, and that it's so huge, not just for people who live in those areas, but for construction workers. Once they get out there to do projects in rural areas, those guys need wifi for their phones and they need not only their phones, but all the connected tech that they're using to fill roads. And so I don't see that much of an emphasis on that in this bill because it's more traditional, but having said that, it's also predictable, and that's one of the most positive things about this is the industry values a certainty above all else, and that's what this is. The five-year authorization gives DOT’s confidence, it gives contractors confidence, it gives suppliers confidence, and it improves workforce and helps them plan, and that certainty and confidence just helps people sleep at night and gives them the knowledge that they're going to be able to plan projects for the next five years.

BL: For sure. And Gavin, you were also talking about Wi-Fi as well. One of the biggest things that's happened here in the transit industry is not only at stations, but on buses and in trains, transit agencies starting to offer that Wi-Fi connectivity as we move more towards the digital age and a lot of these agencies are encouraging people to use apps to not only get their ride, but to track their trip and getting those connectivity in those stations has been a big emphasis here over the last decade.

GJ: Absolutely. I think another thing that with the more reliable and conservative aspects of this bill, you also have project delivery reform and virtually every transportation organization complains about permitting delays and so this bill attempts to address that issue directly, and it wants to get things faster, get projects off the ground. Alright, so I think we've done a nice broad stroke of everything. Jess, are there any closing thoughts that you'd like to have about where this is and where it's headed?

JP: No, I mean, I'm excited to see where it will end up. I think that it's a really, really good starting place. I do think that, I think it's in a good spot to go forward. I think that there is a lot of really, beneficial stuff in here that's just not on the Roads and Bridges side at least isn't the most contentious. So I do see on both sides really it's wanting to support the industry, I hope, and pushing a lot of these forward. However, I know we need a lot more on the public transit side. I do know that's a major area, so I'm excited to see more go in on that aspect.

GJ: Brandon, any final thoughts from you?

BL: So I think one of the bigger positives that I've gotten from just researching and reading and all the things about this bill is all the comments that the lawmakers and the politicians have said that this is truly a bipartisan bill, and I think that that will help move it along because I think early on, like you said, Gavin, there was a little bit of a concern that maybe it might lean the direction of where the current administration is. I think that there is a good balance of what both sides want, and I think that will hopefully lead to a resolution that will eventually make everyone happy.

GJ: Yeah, it's a lot of compromise. The committee really did a great job getting it through. There's a lot of compromise. It's a great piece of bipartisanship. I'm worried about the Senate. I'm worried about there being maybe Trump's arch or the ballroom funding being attached to this for some reason. There's so many ways this could be derailed before September 30th. You never know, but I think at the end of the day, it's a back to basics transportation bill. There's more bridge funding. There's strong highway formula programs, faster project delivery. The faster project delivery is where the democrats really compromised. There's greater state flexibility and there's a stable five-year funding framework and without the extraordinary one-time spending surge that came from the IIJA, but there's still plenty of money there. Noah, any final thoughts from you?

NK: I'm a little concerned on that September 30th deadline, but otherwise I think, like you said, the compromises that came out to get this legislation, at least over this first of seven finish lines was well done, and while I think there's still definitely room for improvement and in more negotiation as this reaches its final form, I think it's a good start. I think we've got a lot of really important elements like safety and workforce development in here that I was really hoping for before the first iteration came out.

GJ: Don't worry about the deadline. Congress is really good at kicking the can down the road. I've lived through so many shutdowns at this point and also the debt ceiling increases, they'll kick the can down the road. It's going to be fine. It's just the final product of the bill and the negotiations to come. That's what scares me. Alright, before we go, Fourth of July, America 250, I think we should acknowledge that this country is turning 250, and I think that our mobility and our transportation is part of what makes this a great nation. Brandon, are you just proud to be an American with the 250th birthday and our mobility and our transportation?

BL: I am. And again, I am not a political guy, so I don't like to talk politics and do all this stuff, but I have always said that even with a lot of America's challenges and problems, we are still the land of the free, 

GJ: Land of the free and home of the brave.

BL: And I am very proud to be an American.

GJ: Alright, Jess?

JP: Yeah, I'm very proud to be an American as well. I echo what Brandon said, especially we have so much going on this year, it's easy to love being American. We've got the World Cup, we got America 250. I mean, there's no better time to stay at home. 

GJ: Are you guys watching the World Cup? I'm telling you the news coverage of the World Cup, it's as if they're all listening to our podcast. For real about traffic and bottlenecks.

BL: The coverage has been fantastic. Go Team USA! I have not watched a ton. I've watched some highlights. I have not watched a game in full, but right now at the time we're recording, they look really good.

GJ: Brandon, do you watch any patriotic type movies around the Fourth of July?

BL: No, I do not.

GJ: So you're not watching the Patriot, you're not watching any documentaries about the American Revolution? George Washington?

BL: Nope. I was never a history guy in school. I was always the math guy.

GJ: Oh, well, math. We're writers. What are you talking about?

JP: I'm the same way. Math was my best subject.

GJ: Well, I highly recommend the American Revolution documentary that came out last year. There's a great George Washington documentary on Netflix. Celebrate Our country, learn our history, and I don't know, we should probably wrap it up there.

JP: Read our Roads and Bridges America 250 coverage coming out. Well, it's already out, but by the time this podcast is.

GJ: We're breaking it down. We're naming our favorite roads, the most important roads in America.

NK: Awesome. That's so cool.

GJ: Well, we better wrap it up before Maz kills us. Alright. For Roads and Bridges, I'm Gavin Jenkins.

JP: I'm Jessica Parks.

BL: I’m Brandon Lewis.

NK: And I'm Noah Kolenda.

GJ: Alright, well stay tuned. We'll be back next week with a new episode. And until then, goodbye.