Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1970
Encyclopedia
The Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1970 added to the Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964
by authorizing an additional $12 billion of the same type of matching funds.
The laws, while the first major federal investments in urban transit, have been criticized both for going too far (is transit a federal or local responsibility?) and not going far enough (the 50:50 match was much less than the 80:20 match provided for new highway construction). It is also thought that these capital funds distorted the priorities of transit agencies to building new capital projects (rails) rather than more cost effective projects that required less capital (but perhaps more operating) outlay (buses). Thus since the 1970s the United States has seen a large number of new rail starts while bus service continues to deteriorate.
Earlier legislative attempts at establishing a federal transit funding program were opposed by labor unions because they did not protect unionized workers, and thus failed to gain sufficient support in Congress. The unions feared that public entities would take over failing privately held transportation companies and cease to recognize the union (the National Labor Relations Act
does not apply to public employers). The version that finally did pass included provisions that require public entities receiving federal transit money to enter into protective agreements (often referred to as "Section 13(c) agreements") that would be approved by the Department of Labor. The Secretary of Labor must certify that the transit authority has made a "fair and equitable" labor protective arrangement before the authority can receive assistance.
Although the Federal Government is prohibited from dictating labor standards of public employees directly (see, e.g., National League of Cities v. Usery
), it can use the "power of the purse" and refuse to grant funds to states who don't enter into these protective arrangements.
Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964
The Urban Mass Transportation Act of 1964 provided $375 million for large-scale urban public or private rail projects in the form of matching funds to cities and states. The Urban Mass Transportation Administration was created...
by authorizing an additional $12 billion of the same type of matching funds.
The laws, while the first major federal investments in urban transit, have been criticized both for going too far (is transit a federal or local responsibility?) and not going far enough (the 50:50 match was much less than the 80:20 match provided for new highway construction). It is also thought that these capital funds distorted the priorities of transit agencies to building new capital projects (rails) rather than more cost effective projects that required less capital (but perhaps more operating) outlay (buses). Thus since the 1970s the United States has seen a large number of new rail starts while bus service continues to deteriorate.
Earlier legislative attempts at establishing a federal transit funding program were opposed by labor unions because they did not protect unionized workers, and thus failed to gain sufficient support in Congress. The unions feared that public entities would take over failing privately held transportation companies and cease to recognize the union (the National Labor Relations Act
National Labor Relations Act
The National Labor Relations Act or Wagner Act , is a 1935 United States federal law that limits the means with which employers may react to workers in the private sector who create labor unions , engage in collective bargaining, and take part in strikes and other forms of concerted activity in...
does not apply to public employers). The version that finally did pass included provisions that require public entities receiving federal transit money to enter into protective agreements (often referred to as "Section 13(c) agreements") that would be approved by the Department of Labor. The Secretary of Labor must certify that the transit authority has made a "fair and equitable" labor protective arrangement before the authority can receive assistance.
Although the Federal Government is prohibited from dictating labor standards of public employees directly (see, e.g., National League of Cities v. Usery
National League of Cities v. Usery
National League of Cities v. Usery, 426 U.S. 833 , was a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Fair Labor Standards Act could not constitutionally be applied to state governments. The case was overruled by Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority, 469 U.S...
), it can use the "power of the purse" and refuse to grant funds to states who don't enter into these protective arrangements.
See also
- bus discretionary capital
- National Mass Transportation Assistance ActNational Mass Transportation Assistance ActThe National Mass Transportation Assistance Act of 1974 is a United States federal law that extended the Urban Mass Transportation Act to cover operating costs as well as construction costs...
of 1974