The Combat for Protected Streets Intensifies: Government Motion Threatens State & Native Funding

Final Up to date on: thirty first Might 2025, 01:17 am

In 1892, when the nascent League of American Bicyclists (then the Wheelmen) was in the beginning of our struggle for bicyclists’ rights, we took a petition with 150,000 signatures to Congress to demand a “Highway Division” that might work to make sure individuals biking had secure, good roads for transportation or recreation.

In 1991, it was Congress that established the primary main sources of federal funding for bicycling and strolling tasks. Within the 18 years earlier than 1991, all 50 states mixed spent a complete of $40 million — roughly $2 million per 12 months.

In 2021, it was Congress that continued to strengthen and enhance the emphasis on federal assist of energetic transportation modes like bicycling, with funding obtainable to states at ranges as excessive as $1.4 billion per 12 months.

Now, in 2025, it’s the government department by way of the U.S. Division of Transportation (USDOT) that’s attempting to undo the bipartisan legal guidelines handed by Congress — threatening many years of labor to construct higher roads for individuals who bike and threatening the protection of our very lives.

Whereas we have been alarmed in March by a possible freezing or cancellation of discretionary grants, we are actually astonished by this new assault on all federal transportation funding, which might essentially imply a catastrophic blow to bicycling and strolling tasks.

In a letter to all recipients of USDOT funding, Secretary of Transportation Sean Duffy threatens to withdraw funding to recipients that don’t “comply absolutely with all relevant Federal legal guidelines and laws” after which goes on to particularly declare that any program or venture — whether or not it’s described in impartial phrases or not — is a violation of federal legislation whether it is primarily based on “discriminatory insurance policies or practices designed to realize so-called ‘variety, fairness, and inclusion’ or ‘DEI.’”

This isn’t simply the Administration making selections on grants they’ve been given permission to find out, that is the Administration rescinding state and native governments’ rights to find out what’s finest for his or her communities. That is holding congressionally-directed federal funding hostage, which has been legally directed to state and native governments, in an effort to compel compliance from these state and native governments on unrelated authorized insurance policies.

After DEI, the letter takes purpose at cities’ and states’ immigration coverage, noting that recipients’ compliance and cooperation with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) is obligatory. Cities or states that obtain federal transportation funds and in addition situation driver’s license to undocumented individuals, or who decline to cooperate with ICE, are known as out and given a alternative: finish these insurance policies or danger USDOT funding.

This letter raises so many questions: Is each recipient of federal transportation funds now probably in violation and liable to shedding all funding? Or worse, the clawing again of “attainable restoration of funds expended” the letter additionally threatens? Or much more arbitrarily, the termination of funding merely if USDOT determines it’s “now not within the public curiosity”?

That we don’t know the solutions to those questions is the place the letter’s energy lies.

Whether or not or not this letter is legally binding or has the authority to vary the legislation of the land, as decided by Congress and signed by a number of presidents over time, it’s the uncertainty that may stall state and native governments from having the ability to construct higher, safer roads.

We already know some cities and states have put tasks on maintain. We already know some recipients are nervous about signing new agreements.

Although Duffy’s letter doesn’t say “bicycling” as soon as, its intent will stall progress on bike security for years to return.

And Duffy is elsewhere proving he’s no pal to bicyclists. At a discussion board in Washington final week, Secretary Duffy was requested concerning the March memo on reviewing all funding for bike infrastructure. Right here’s how Streetsblog reported on his reply:

“I’m not against bikes,” he started. “However in New York … they need to increase bike lanes, after which they get extra congestion. … What are the roads for, and the way will we use our roads? If we put bikes on roadways, after which we get congestion, it’s a extremely unhealthy expertise for lots of people.

“I do assume it’s an issue once we’re making large investments in bike lanes on the expense of autos,” he added. “I do assume you see extra congestion whenever you add bike lanes and take away car lanes. That’s an issue.”

The way forward for secure bicycling hangs within the stability proper now. (None of that’s true, by the best way, and Streetsblog’s article breaks it down properly.)

Here’s what the League is engaged on and how one can assist:

• Signal our petition! — Already signed? Share it far and large! On the conclusion of Bike Month, we’ll be sharing the signatures with Secretary Duffy and Congress.
• We’re assembly with congressional workplaces in Washington each week, maintaining the strain on legislators to make sure federal funding for bike lanes retains flowing. You’ll be able to assist by reaching out to your member of Congress (you could find them utilizing our Motion Middle.) Invite them to go to new bike infrastructure subsequent time they’re within the district, go for a journey, or plan to fulfill with them of their district workplace.
• We’re looking forward to the subsequent five-year transportation authorization invoice in 2026 and dealing to make sure our priorities are Congress’s priorities within the subsequent invoice. Whereas the street is tough in the meanwhile, we all know progress is feasible — as a result of we’ve seen it in motion since 1892.

Article from the The League of American Bicyclists.