In Washington, Anywhere-but-California Disease Strikes Again : Funneling federal transit dollars to Tuscaloosa makes about as much sense as funding a snow removal program for San Diego.

Once again it’s that time of year in Washington--the sun is out, tourists 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 provision mandates an arbitrary and artificial 12 1/2% cap on transit funding for each of the 50 states while threatening to open up 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, smaller 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. Urban areas of California such as Los Angeles, San Diego and San Francisco have a lot more people and a lot more need for transit funds than, say, Tuscaloosa, Ala.

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

Because California represents about 12 1/2% of the nation’s population, some would say that there is nothing wrong with limiting California to 12 1/2% maximum participation in every federal program. However, it would be silly and unlikely for California 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 Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which serves 1.3 million Angelenos daily. MTA uses approximately 70% of these funds for purchasing new buses, building and maintaining bus facilities and repairing buses. This means reduced routes, longer lines and slower service resulting in overcrowded buses--and more crowded freeways as today’s bus riders shift to automobiles.

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