Summertime, and Anywhere-but-California Disease Strikes Again

Once again it’s that time of year in Washington--the sun is out, tourists on summer vacations roam the museums and monuments and the yearly outbreak of “ABC” inflicts senators and representatives from across the country.

A Washington phenomenon, ABC is not in the Constitution, you can’t find it on the Internet, it strikes Democrats as readily as Republicans and although you don’t have to worry about catching it yourself--Californians are naturally immune--every year we Californians in Washington have to fight it off.

Ignoring California’s contributions to Uncle Sam’s wallet and our sheer size, when it comes to allocating federal dollars, many in our nation’s government follow the ABC mantra: Anywhere but California.

The Senate Appropriations Committee recently condoned a particularly blatant and unreasonable example of ABC in passing a transportation appropriations bill that included a so-called transit equity provision.

This mandates an arbitrary and artificial 12 1/2% cap on transit funding for each of the 50 states while threatening to open new disputes in previously agreed upon transit funding formulas. The provision irresponsibly undermines the Transportation Equity Act of the 21st Century (TEA21) less than a year after painstaking and bipartisan crafting by Congress.

Unlike TEA21, which accounted for the vast differences among states’ transit needs, transit equity deliberately disregards population and transit ridership in determining state-by-state transit funding.

Transit funds pay for buses, light rail and subways. Under transit equity states with a fraction of the population of California and, more importantly, a fraction of the transit ridership, would receive more--and California would receive less.

The transit equity provision is anything but equitable. This time around, ABC hits California as well as New York. Together the two states represent nearly 20% of the U.S. population and nearly 50% of the nation’s transit riders. With transit equity, these two states would see desperately needed transit funds looted and parceled out to the other 48 states. The two states with nearly half of the transit ridership would be limited to only 25% of transit funds.

In the year 2000 alone, California is poised to suffer a whopping $118-million cut in funding, much of it from the Los Angeles metropolitan area. Transit equity may sound sweet, but it certainly tastes sour for Californians who stand to lose a total of $468 million over the next four years.

Because California represents about 12 1/2% of the nation’s population, some would say that there is nothing wrong with limiting the state to 12 1/2% maximum participation in every federal program. However, it would be silly and unlikely for California to get a full 12 1/2% of every federal program. California is unlikely to receive one-eighth of the nation’s funds for emergency snow removal aid or corn-to-ethanol programs.

Unfortunately, Los Angeles County will bear the brunt of the burden in California--to the tune of $48 million per year. This would be a devastating blow to the already cash-strapped Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which serves 1.3 million Angelenos daily.

I am determined to cure this bout of ABC before our transit funds are raided and the quality of life is significantly damaged for millions of Californians. Along with California’s House delegation and our two Senators, I will remain vigilant and weary of new outbreaks of Anywhere but California disease.