Andrea Bernstein

Chris Ward, head of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (Stephen Nessen/WNYC)

DNA Info's Julie Shapiro has the details of quite a speech outgoing Port Authority Chief Chris Ward gave in Lower Manhattan this morning.

"What I learned, as my hand got singed in the oven, was that you can't raise tolls anymore to what they would have to be to sustain the Port Authority," Ward said Wednesday morning at a Lower Manhattan Marketing Association breakfast.

The Port Authority Chairman is, by tradition, appointed by the New York Governor, in this case, Andrew Cuomo.  Cuomo took office in January 2011 -- Ward was already at the helm, having been appointed by the previous Governor, David Paterson.

It's been long suspected that Cuomo -- who is known to trust a relatively tight inner-circle of advisers -- would let Ward go after the tenth anniversary of the September 11 attacks. (The Port Authority owns the World Trade Center site, in addition to three area airports, several   Hudson River crossings, and the PATH commuter train to New Jersey.)

Despite his almost-on-the-outs status (or maybe because of it)  Ward pushed a toll hike on the Hudson River crossings this summer. Governors Andrew Cuomo and Chris Christie, of New Jersey, ultimately accepted a hike, but a smaller one than Ward had initially pushed.  As a result, Ward said, he became, in the eyes of the public, the bad guy.

"I somewhat paid the political price of saying [the tolls] could have and should have been higher."

Ward himself believed that he would be asked to leave after the tenth anniversary of the September 11 attacks. But Ward jumped before he could be pushed, letting word leak out of his imminent departure.  Ward himself hasn't said anything publicly, until, it would seem, today, when he warned that a decreased budget for the Port Authority would mean an ever worsening local transportation system.

"You're going to be stuck in traffic on the George Washington Bridge," Ward said. "You're going to be stuck on buses trying to get into the Port Authority Bus Terminal. You're going to be stuck at LaGuardia and JFK because [they] don't have enough runway capacity."

NJ Governor Chris Christie (photo courtesy of NJ Governor's Office/Tim Larsen)

UPDATED: New Jersey Governor Chris Christie made two things perfectly clear in his announcement that he won't run for president.  "Now is not my time" Christie said, saying there was too much work for him to do in New Jersey  to leave now.   And this:  he wants to "make sure Obama is a one-termer."

That feeling may be mutual.

Late last week, New Jersey and the U.S. DOT  settled a year-long tussle over a transit tunnel that was to run under the Hudson River from New Jersey to Manhattan, a project Christie pulled the plug on last year. But bitterness and rancor remain, even as Christie bows out of his chance to take on Obama directly.

(Read down in the post for some choice words U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood had for Governor Christie, in an overlooked letter LaHood wrote last April.)

Once upon a time,  governors  of both political parties did not fight with the federal DOT, which was seen a source of funds for the kinds of public works that make local officials look good -- roads, bridges, tunnels -- big projects that were seen to create jobs, make constituents happy, and, most of all, give politicians all-important ribbon-cutting opportunities.

But in 2010, Christie showed that he was perfectly willing to stop a big project literally in its tracks, to the increasing consternation of the usually amiable LaHood, himself a former Republican Congressman from Peoria, Illinois.

At issue was a $9 billion transit tunnel under the Hudson River, the largest new transit project in the nation. The tunnel, known as the Access to the Region's Core, or ARC tunnel, was already under construction. It was to have created an extra pathway for NJ Transit trains, which now share a tunnel with Amtrak. That tunnel is at capacity.

A year ago, Christie halted work, so he could review the project's finances. Christie said he feared the project could cost New Jerseyans billions of dollars more than projected. Big infrastructure projects do tend to run over budget -- but project supporters argued that the construction jobs it would create, along with increased business activity and rising property values along the train line, would offset any increases. That, at least, was the logic that has propelled these kinds of projects forward in the past.

When I first began calling around to federal officials and Washington insiders in the fall of 2010, there was widespread disbelief that Christie would pull the plug on the project.

Both because billions of dollars of federal money would not be coming to New Jersey (the federal government, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and NJ Transit were each footing a third of the $9 billion bill), and also because no one seemed to think Christie would be willing to generate such animosity amongst federal officials whom he might need help from later.

But he was.

In fact, as Christie was publicly mulling a decision he’d already clearly made, the U.S. DOT was strenuously lobbying him (Ray LaHood himself traveled to Trenton twice to make the case).  But publicly, no one from the federal government was talking.  There were no red hot pokers from the Obama administration side.

Just how angry Ray LaHood became only began to come out as the tunnel was being buried –- literally, as workers began throwing dirt back into the hole after the project had been killed (a second time, as it happened, since Christie, in response to LaHood's treatises, gave the project a temporary reprieve.)

"Chris Christie’s decision to terminate America’s largest transportation project was particularly disappointing," LaHood wrote in an op-ed in the Newark Star Ledger the day after the project died. "Unfortunately, his choice comes with profound consequences for New Jersey, the New York metropolitan region and our nation as a whole."

"Tens of thousands of jobs that the tunnel would have created will be lost. Future New Jerseyans will face shrinking property values, suffocating road traffic, interminable train delays and increasing air pollution. A $3.358 billion federal investment in the region’s economic future will move elsewhere."

But even though the project was dead, the bitterness only seemed to escalate.  The U.S. DOT demanded that New Jersey pay back $271 million in funds already spent on the project, which Christie refused to do. Characteristically pugnacious, Christie hired the well-connected law and lobbying firm, Patton Boggs, to argue his case in Washington.

Periodically, the DOT would release stats on how interest and penalties were accruing on the project.

Privately, Ray LaHood was getting more and more irate. In a letter (pdf) to U.S. Senator Frank Lautenberg in April, LaHood wrote:

"In February 2010, Governor Christie sat in my office and expressed his full commitment to the completion of the ARC project. In March of 2010, when several news stories called Governor Christie’s commitment to the completion of the ARC project into question, I asked the Governor to restate that commitment in writing. He did so in a letter to me dated April 6, 2010,”

And, then essentially, LaHood called Christie a liar. “The possibility that this project’s cost could run [as high as $12 billion] was first shared with New Jersey Transit as far back as August 2008. Any notion that the potential for cost growth constituted new and emergent information when the Governor made his decision is simply not accurate.”

LaHood held to his position that he would not relent on his demand that Christie pay back the $271 million. By last week, with interest and penalties, the bill had grown to $274 million.  But New Jersey’s two Democratic U.S. Senators, Lautenberg and Robert Menendez, had been arguing that New Jersey could pay a lesser amount and at the same time agree to direct $128 million for transit projects in New Jersey.

On Friday the U.S. DOT announced that it had agreed to settle the case.  It would accept $95 million from New Jersey, plus the $128 commitment for transit spending.

But Christie tossed into his statement a claim that the $95 million would be offset by $100 million in insurance premium refunds. “First I’m hearing of that,” shot back one federal official when asked.

The implication –- and Christie said as much in his statement –- was that the settlement contains “not one additional dollar of New Jersey taxpayer money.”

But that’s not exactly right.  If Christie had gotten his way, and paid zero to the federal government, presumably New Jersey would have been able to pocket the $100 million in insurance premium refunds, not use it to offset a $95 million payment.

Still, though, Christie was able to create the impression he’d boxed his opponent into a corner, again.

That’s a stance we’ll likely see much of from Christie in the next year -- whether he's a candidate for president or not

Austin, TX, got a new commuter rail in 2010.

Transit ridership increased by 85.7 million trips, or 1.7 percent nationwide, in the first six months of 2011, according to a report released today by the American Public Transit Association, the pro-transit lobbying group.

The report said ridership increased across the board on commuter rail, light rail and bus systems, with the biggest jumps on commuter rail in Austin, TX, which added a new service, (221.4 percent) and Nashville, TN (38.5 percent)

Light rail saw ridership hikes in Seattle (42.2 percent) and Dallas, TX (32.3 percent).

Miami and Orlando had the biggest upticks in bus ridership, showing a rise of about ten percent in both cities.

You can see the full report here.  Analysis coming soon.

New Jersey has agreed to pay the federal government $95 million for a never-built transit tunnel under the Hudson River. The U.S. Department of Transportation and  NJ Governor Chris Christie's administration have been engaged in a bitter dispute over $271 million in federal funds that New Jersey had already spent on the tunnel when Governor Christie pulled the plug on the project a year ago, citing a fear of cost overruns on the $9 billion project.

Under the terms of the deal, New Jersey has also promised to direct $128 million of the money to transit projects approved by the DOT. That money was already allocated for New Jersey, but could, in theory have gone to other projects. This is nearly identical to a deal offered by the DOT in December.

Construction on the he so-called "Access to the Region's Core" -- or ARC -- began during the administration of Christie's predecessor, Governor Jon Corzine.  The tunnel, which would have been completed in five year's time, would have doubled transit capacity for commuter trains going from New Jersey to Manhattan.

Christie had initially said he was in favor of the project, but last fall he changed his mind, saying he feared the project would go way over budget.

This had been a marquee project for the U.S. Department of Transportation -- it was the biggest transit expansion underway in the nation.  U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood strenuously fought to save the project, traveling to Trenton and offering a number of sweeteners.

But Christie was unpersuaded, and workers began filling in the hole that had been dug last fall.

The bitterness over the tunnel's cancellation spilled over into a dispute about whether New Jersey would have to pay back funds it had already spent, with LaHood insisting that New Jersey pay back all the money, plus penalties and interest. Christie's administration hired the influential lobbying firm, Patton Boggs, at a cost of about $1 million, to negotiate the deal.

Today's settlement represents about a third of what the federal government initially said NJ owed. Governor Christie's office said the full amount would be covered by insurance on the project.

New Jersey Senators Frank Lautenberg and Robert Menendez -- both Democrats and vocal critics of the project's cancellation -- praised today's decision nonetheless, saying they didn't want New Jersey to have to pay nearly $300 million to the federal government for an unrealized project.

Tom Wright, Executive Director of the Regional Plan Association, which had worked on the ARC tunnel for 20 years, said, at the end of the day, he too approved of the decision. "You don't want big projects to be canceled with no repercussions," he said in a phone interview. "But at the end of the day you want that money for transit projects going forward."

New Jersey has agreed to pay the federal government $95 million for a never-built transit tunnel under the Hudson River.  The U.S. Department of Transportation and Governor Chris Christie's administration have been engaged in a bitter dispute over $271 million that New Jersey had already spent on the tunnel when Governor Christie pulled the plug on the project a year ago, citing a fear of cost overruns on the $9 billion project.

Now that wifi has pulled into New York subway platforms, Brian Lehrer checks in with listeners to hear what it sounds like to have cell phone service on the platforms.    Some of the comments:

"I can't hear you over the train!"

"A train is coming, I have to go."

"Everyone is looking at me."

Listen to your subway future, here.

Deputy Transportation Secretary John Porcari

Deputy Transportation Secretary John Porcari lowballed the numbers for transit in the American Jobs Act in his conference call earlier this week.

The actual numbers, the D.O.T says are:

$27 billion for rebuilding roads and bridges

$9 billion for repairing bus and rail transit systems (not $2 billion, as the Deputy Secretary said)

$5 billion on projects selected through a competitive grant program (these tend to be local projects of national significance, like Bus Rapid Transit systems)

$4 billion on high-speed rail construction

$2 billion on airport improvements

$2 billion on Amtrak upgrades

$1 billion on NextGen air traffic control

This spending, by the way, would be  far more focused on getting money out into the economy quickly -- through the unglamorous mechanism of maintenance and repair -- than was the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (aka, "the stimulus").  That bill favored "shovel-ready" projects, which still often needed final stages of approval before they could start.

Now, we know, right now, that the American Jobs Act is given about a zero chance of passing the GOP-controlled House.  But the President is stumping hard for it or it in the key swing states of Ohio, North Carolina, and most recently, Colorado.

Flooding and other hurricane damage on the Port Jervis train line.

The New York MTA says it will cost $50 million to repair a rail line in Rockland and Orange counties that was badly damaged by Tropical Storm Irene.

2,300 riders a day use the line, making it one of the mostly lightly used rail lines in the network.  (For our previous reporting on the decision-making that went into the decision to rebuild the line, click here.)

Train service on the Port Jervis line will resume in peak periods and many off-peak periods in December.

Engineers say flooding from the storm washed away thousands of tons of ballast and earth that supported the tracks along one 14-mile stretch in particular, where the rails are badly twisted and suspended in mid-air.

Trains on the line have been largely replaced by buses. The MTA says the replacement bus service will add another 10 million dollars to the tab by the time all service is restored to normal next fall.

The signals will cover platforms and mezzanines but will extend only a short distance into tunnels.

Contractor Transit Wireless has five years to set up service at the other 271 stations, and only AT&T and T-Mobile subscribers will initially be able to use the service. Other cell phone carriers are expected to participate soon.

Read more over at wnyc.org.

Despite unhopeful signs from Congress, the Obama administration is continuing its drumbeat of support for the American Jobs Act.  Deputy Transportation Secretary John Porcari will be in New York Tuesday at a conference on transit and jobs. Today Pocari held a conference call with BlueGreen Alliance Senior Policy Analyst Brian J. Lombardozzi to push the idea that transit creates jobs.

"Transit is literally connecting people with opportunities," Pocari said,  "It's connecting people to jobs, to school, to the grocery story. It's an economic lifeline to the American poulation."

Pocari said, "If you are honest with yourself, you'll realize any transit system was built and paid for by our parents and grandparents."

Pocari said the American Jobs Act would spend $2 billion on maintaining a state of good repair.  Update from the DOT. The American Jobs Act has $9 billion for repairing roads and bridges.  That money, Porcari said, could quickly and easily into the economy, creating jobs.

Earlier this year, the Federal Transit Administration, Peter Rogoff, said $78 billion is needed to bring the nation's seven largest transit systems into a state of good repair.

But even that $2 billion looks like an uphill battle. When an Associated Press reporter asked Pocari about Congressional proposals for "big cuts in transit," and about the politics of getting the jobs act passed, he didn't answer directly saying, "We want to make sure local leaders have the flexibility to determine what's appropriate.  We would not try and dictate what's best."

The train tracks under the East River that support hundreds of Long Island Railroad cars daily will be replaced during a $48 million job that begins next month as the result of what officials said were "significant water drainage issues."

UPDATED WITH CLARIFICATION ON FUNDING OF STUDY Nothing sets off a noisier debate in pro- and anti-cycling circles than a set of data.

So when two Hunter College professors, William Milzcarski and Peter Tuckel, on Monday released a study saying injuries of pedestrians by cyclists were higher than previously believed, both sides rushed to the battlements.

Biking advocates point out  that it was the same team who did the earlier study (Milczarski says the earlier report was based on a sampling of data from the Consumer Product Safety Commission, not an actual count by hospitals).   The advocates said the study failed to point out that overall, biking has shot up in New York, but streets have gotten safer for cyclists and pedestrians.

For its part, the New York Post was ready with an editorial arguing that New York's bike share system will soon lead to carnage, and the study provided a ready supply of ammo for that argument.

Now the researchers' own colleagues are jumping into the fray, as the New York Times' City Room blog reports, arguing the study is "skimpy" and "an unfinished document."

What the study does do:  it counts injuries caused to pedestrians by cyclists, based on actual data from hospitals.

What it does not do:  say who caused the crashes, how serious the injuries were, or compare the figures to injuries of cyclists by motor vehicle drivers, or injuries of pedestrians by motor vehicles.

And though the study shows there's been a decline in injuries over four years, it doesn't highlight that in its summary.

By the way, Milczarski doesn't dispute that his study had a singular focus. He acknowledges the Stuart Gruskin foundation funded asked him and his colleague look into a particular line of inquiry (Gruskin was a pedestrian killed by a cyclist), and that the study analyzed the data on a specific question: how many pedestrians are injured by cyclists.

Milczarski says he'd thought it would be an easy question to answer, and that, unlike pedestrian-motorist crashes, it hadn't been studied.  "This was something no one knew about, he said in an interview.  It was like a mystery waiting to be uncovered."

(Editor's note:  The initial press release said the study had been done "on behalf of the Stuart Gruskin foundation." )

And, FWIW, Milczarki says he's pro-bike share, and intends to use the system when its up and running next summer.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (photo courtesy of Gov. Cuomo's flickr page)

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo met repeatedly in the first eight months of the year on marriage equality, the property tax cap, and even farmer’s markets. But his schedule from January 1- August 31, made available online Thursday, shows no meetings or phone calls with Port Authority chief Chris Ward or Metropolitan Transportation Authority CEO Jay Walder.

The two men run powerful, multi-billion dollars transportation authorities, and are appointed by the Governor.

The Governor did meet with Transportation Commissioner Joan McDonald on more than one occasion on the Tappan Zee Bridge, which is in need of replacement. He held a meeting in March on unspecified “Transportation and Infrastructure” issues, and had several appointments and public events surrounding an initiative to crack down on texting while driving.

The New York Times reported last month on how Walder and Cuomo only met once – but the schedules reveal in fresh detail a governor consumed with issues other than transit and transportation. He held dozens of meeting on marriage equality, the budget, and ethics reform. His public schedule lists in detail attendees at meetings on economic development, and Medicaid reform. When he meets with local legislators, religious leaders, or union brass, every name is detailed.

To be sure, the Governor’s schedule does not indicate every individual staffer he met with or every issue he discussed. There are numerous entries that just say, for example, “conference call with staff.” But a read through the documents (which show his prepared schedule, and are not a complete record of actual events) shows issues that have held his sustained attention, including the budget, property tax caps, and especially, marriage equality. There are no entries that say “transit,” and just one that says MTA – a call on August 26 on preparations for hurricane Irene.

An MTA spokesman referred questions on the schedule to the Governor’s office. The Governor’s spokesman, Joshua Vlasto, would only say, “the Governor and his administration spoke with officials at the MTA and the Port Authority frequently.” Vlasto did not respond to a follow-up question of how frequently the Governor personally spoke or met with MTA or PA officials.

The schedules include the period when MTA chairman Jay Walder announced he was leaving for a job in Hong Kong and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey raised tolls for Hudson River bridges and fares for the PATH train. They show a dinner with NJ Governor Chris Christie at Beacon Restaurant on July 29, two weeks before the toll proposal was announced.

Both governors initially denounced the proposal, then came around to supporting it in modified form. Tolls were raised last weekend.

Cuomo has appointed a wide-ranging search committee to replace Walder, who is leaving next month. The Governor has kept thoughts about the replacement to himself, saying only he’d like to announce a replacement before Walder leaves on October 21. He has appointed a real estate executive, Howard Millstein, to head the NY Thruway Authority, and has appointed two real estate executives, Scott Rechler and Jeffrey Lynford to the board of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Cuomo appointed the former Bronx Borough President and democratic mayoral nominee, Fernando Ferrer, to the MTA board earlier this year.

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo met repeatedly in the first eight months of the year on marriage equality, the property tax cap and even farmer’s markets.  But his schedule from January 1- August 31, made available online Thursday, showed no meetings or phone calls with Port Authority chief Chris Ward or Metropolitan Transportation Authority CEO Jay Walder.

UPDATED WITH TRANSCRIPT In a speech heavy with both passion and symbolism, President Barack Obama made an impassioned pitch for infrastructure spending, arguing both immediate jobs and the nation's future depend on it.  The President traveled to Cincinnati, Ohio, home of the Brent Spence bridge, connecting Speaker John Boehner's district in Ohio to Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's district in Kentucky.

The President was in full campaign mode as he dropped the final "g"s in his words (as in, I'm askin' you), veered off script, and even let his audience boo his political opponents without shushing them.

"The thing is there are bridges and roads and highways like [the Brent Spence Bridge] throughout the region" the President said. "A major bridge that connects Kentucky and Indiana just closed down for safety reasons.  Another aging bridge that crosses over the Ohio River in Ironton could be replaced right now.  There are rail stations in Cleveland and Toledo in desperate need of repair.  And the same is true in cities and towns all across America.  It makes your commute longer.  It costs our businesses billions of dollars -- they could be moving products faster if they had better transportation routes.  And in some cases, it’s not safe.

Now, we used to have the best infrastructure in the world here in America.  We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad, the Interstate Highway System.  (Applause.)  We built the Hoover Dam.  We built the Grand Central Station.  (Applause.)  So how can we now sit back and let China build the best railroads?  And let Europe build the best highways?  And have Singapore build a nicer airport?  At a time when we've got millions of unemployed construction workers out there just ready to get on the job, ready to do the work to rebuilding America.  (Applause.)"

The full text follows:

THE PRESIDENT:  Hello, Cincinnati!  (Applause.)

Well, it is good to see all of you.  It is good to be back in Cincinnati.  (Applause.)  I have to say I drove by the Bengals’ practice -- (laughter.)  And I was scouting out some plays in case they play the Bears -- (laughter.)  Did I hear somebody boo the Bears?

AUDIENCE:  Booo!  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  We've got some folks I just want to make sure are acknowledged here today.  First of all, the Secretary of Transportation, Ray LaHood, is in the house.  Give him a round of applause.  (Applause.)  We've got the mayor of the great city of Cincinnati -- Mark Mallory is here.  (Applause.)  We've got the mayor of Covington, Mayor Denny Bowman.  (Applause.)  Senator Rand Paul is here.

AUDIENCE:  Booo --

THE PRESIDENT:  Rand is going to be supporting bridges, so we've got to -- (applause.)  And we've got Congressman John Yarmuth in the house.  (Applause.)

Now, it is good to be back.  I was just in Columbus a little while ago, and I figured I couldn't get away with not giving     Cincinnati a little bit of love.  (Applause.)

I want to thank the good folks at Hilltop Concrete for having us here today.  I especially want to thank Ron for his introduction.

Companies like Hilltop, construction companies, have been hit harder by this economic crisis than almost any other industry in America.  And there are millions of construction workers who are still out there looking for a job.  They're ready to work, but things have been a little tough.  That doesn’t mean that there is not plenty of construction waiting to get done in this country.

Behind us stands the Brent Spence Bridge.  It’s located on one of the busiest trucking routes in North America.  It sees about 150,000 vehicles every single day.  And it’s in such poor condition that it's been labeled "functionally obsolete."  Think about that -- functionally obsolete.  That doesn’t sound good, does it?

AUDIENCE:  Nooo!

THE PRESIDENT:  It’s safe to --

AUDIENCE MEMBER:  Kind of like John Boehner.  (Laughter.)

THE PRESIDENT:  It's safe to drive on, but it was not designed to accommodate today’s traffic, which can stretch out for a mile.  Shipping companies try to have their trucks avoid the bridge.  Of course, that only ends up costing them more money as well.

The thing is there are bridges and roads and highways like that throughout the region.  A major bridge that connects Kentucky and Indiana just closed down for safety reasons.  Another aging bridge that crosses over the Ohio River in Ironton could be replaced right now.  There are rail stations in Cleveland and Toledo in desperate need of repair.  And the same is true in cities and towns all across America.  It makes your commute longer.  It costs our businesses billions of dollars -- they could be moving products faster if they had better transportation routes.  And in some cases, it’s not safe.

Now, we used to have the best infrastructure in the world here in America.  We’re the country that built the Intercontinental Railroad, the Interstate Highway System.  (Applause.)  We built the Hoover Dam.  We built the Grand Central Station.  (Applause.)  So how can we now sit back and let China build the best railroads?  And let Europe build the best highways?  And have Singapore build a nicer airport?  At a time when we've got millions of unemployed construction workers out there just ready to get on the job, ready to do the work to rebuilding America.  (Applause.)

So, Cincinnati, we are better than that.  We're smarter than that.  And that’s why I sent Congress the American Jobs Act 10 days ago.  (Applause.)  This bill is not that complicated.  It's a bill that would put people back to work rebuilding America -- repairing our roads, repairing our bridges, repairing our schools.  It would lead to jobs for concrete workers like the ones here at Hilltop; jobs for construction workers and masons, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, architects, engineers, ironworkers -- put folks back to work.  (Applause.)

There is work to be done, and there are workers ready to do it.  So let’s tell Congress to pass this jobs bill right away.  (Applause.)

AUDIENCE:  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!

THE PRESIDENT:  Pass this bill!  (Laughter.)  Pass the bill!

Tell them to pass the jobs bill, and not only will we start rebuilding America, but we can also put thousands of teachers back to work.  (Applause.)

I was with the President of South Korea -- I was up at the United Nations.  We were doing a bunch of stuff.  And he's told me in the past -- I've asked him, I said, what's your biggest challenge?  He says, oh, education.  I said, well, what are you dealing with?  He said, well, you know what, we're hiring so many teachers we can barely keep up, because we know that if we're going to compete in the future we've got to have the best teachers.  (Applause.)  And we've got to have our kids in school longer.  And we've got to make sure that they're learning math and science.

Well, while they're hiring teachers in droves, what are we doing?  We're laying off teachers.  It makes no sense in this new global economy where our young people's success is going to depend on the kind of education that they get.  So for us to be laying off teachers doesn’t make sense for our kids, it doesn’t make sense for us, it doesn’t make sense for our economy.

Pass this jobs bill and put teachers back in the classroom where they belong.  (Applause.)

AUDIENCE:  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!

THE PRESIDENT:  They need to go and pass it.

Tell Congress to pass this jobs bill, and companies will get tax credit for hiring America’s veterans.  (Applause.)  We've been through a decade of war now.  Almost 2 million people have served.  And think about it.  They're suspending their careers; they're leaving their families; they're putting themselves in harm way -- all to protect us.  The last thing they should have to do is fight for a job when they come home.  (Applause.)  And if we pass this jobs bill it makes it easier for employers to hire those veterans.  That’s why we need to tell Congress to do what?  To pass the bill.

AUDIENCE:  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!

THE PRESIDENT:  The American Jobs Act will cut taxes for the typical working family by $1,500 next year.  It will cut taxes for every small business in America.  It will give an extra tax cut to every small business owner who either hires more workers or raises those workers’ wages.  How many people here would like a raise?  (Applause.)

And we know that most small businesses are the creators of new jobs.  We’ve got a lot of folks in Congress who love to say how they’re behind America’s job creators.  Well, if that’s the case, then you should be passing this bill, because that’s what this bill is all about, is helping small businesses all across America.

Everything in this jobs bill has been supported in the past by Republicans and Democrats.  Everything in this jobs bill is paid for.  The idea for a big boost in construction is supported by the AFL-CIO, but it’s also supported by the Chamber of Commerce.  Those two don't get along on much, but they agree we should rebuild America.  (Applause.)

And, by the way, thanks to the reforms that we’ve put into place, when we start rebuilding America we’re going to change how business is done.  No more earmarks.  No more boondoggles.  No more bridges to nowhere.  We’re going to cut the red tape that prevents some of these construction projects from getting started as quickly as possible.  And we’ll set up an independent fund to attract private dollars and issue loans based on two criteria:  how badly is a construction project needed, and how much good will it do for the community.  Those are the only things we should be thinking about.  Not politics.  (Applause.)  And, by the way, that’s an idea that’s supported by a Massachusetts Democrat and a Texas Republican.  It’s a good idea.

So my question is, what's Congress waiting for?  Why is it taking so long?  Now, the bridge behind us just happens to connect the state that’s home to the Speaker of the House --

AUDIENCE:  Booo --

THE PRESIDENT:  -- with the home state of the Republican leader in the Senate.

AUDIENCE:  Booo --

THE PRESIDENT:  Now, that’s just a coincidence.  (Laughter.) Purely accidental that that happened.  (Laughter.)  But part of the reason I came here is because Mr. Boehner and Mr. McConnell, those are the two most powerful Republicans in government.  They can either kill this jobs bill, or they can help pass this jobs bill.  (Applause.)  And I know these men care about their states. They care about businesses; they care about workers here.  I can’t imagine that the Speaker wants to represent a state where nearly one in four bridges are classified as substandard -- one in four.  I know that when Senator McConnell visited the closed bridge in Kentucky, he said that, “Roads and bridges are not partisan in Washington.”  That’s great.  I know that Paul Ryan, the Republican in charge of the budget process, recently said that "you can’t deny that infrastructure does creates jobs."  That's what he said.

Well, if that’s the case, there’s no reason for Republicans in Congress to stand in the way of more construction projects.  There’s no reason to stand in the way of more jobs.

Mr. Boehner, Mr. McConnell, help us rebuild this bridge.  (Applause.)  Help us rebuild America.  Help us put construction workers back to work.  (Applause.)  Pass this bill.

AUDIENCE:  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!

THE PRESIDENT:  Let’s pass the bill.

AUDIENCE:  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!  Pass this bill!

THE PRESIDENT:  Now, some folks in Congress, they say, well, we don’t like how it’s paid for.  Well, it’s paid for as part of my larger plan to pay down our debt.  And that's why I make some additional cuts in spending.  We already cut a trillion dollars in spending.  This makes an additional hundreds of billions of dollars in cuts in spending, but it also asks the wealthiest Americans and the biggest corporations to pay their fair share of taxes.  (Applause.)

Now, that should not be too much to ask.  And by the way, it wouldn’t kick in until 2013.  So when you hear folks say, oh, we shouldn’t be raising taxes right now -- nobody is talking about raising taxes right now.  We’re talking about cutting taxes right now.  But it does mean that there’s a long-term plan, and part of it involves everybody doing their fair share.  (Applause.)

THE PRESIDENT:  Now, this isn’t to punish success.  What’s great about this country is our belief that anybody can make it. If you’re willing to put in the sweat, if you’re willing to roll up your sleeves, if you’re willing to work hard, you’ve got a good idea, you’re out there taking a risk -- God bless you.  You can make millions, you can make billions of dollars in America.  This is the land of opportunity.  (Applause.)  That’s great.  All I’m saying is, if you’ve done well -- I’ve done well -- then you should do a little something to give something back.  (Applause.) You should want to see the country that provided you with this opportunity to be successful, and be able to provide opportunity for the young people who are going to be coming up behind you.  (Applause.)

And all I’m saying is that everything should be fair.  You know, you learn the idea of fairness when you’re two, three years old.  Right?  You’re in the sandbox and you don’t want to let somebody play with your truck -- (laughter) -- and your mom or your daddy go up and they say, “No, hon, that’s not fair, you’ve got to share.”  Isn’t that what they say?  Things have to be fair.  So all I’m saying is that Warren Buffett’s secretary should not be paying a lower [sic] tax rate on her income than Warren Buffett.  (Applause.)  That doesn’t make any sense.  A construction worker who’s making 50 or 60 grand a year shouldn’t be paying higher tax rates than the guy who’s making $50 million a year.  (Applause.)  And that’s how it’s working right now.  Because they get all these loopholes and tax breaks that you don’t get.

So for me to say, let’s close those loopholes, let’s eliminate those tax breaks, and let’s make sure that everybody is paying their fair share -- there’s nothing wrong with that.  (Applause.)

Now, this is about priorities.  It’s about making choices.  If we just had all kinds of money and everybody was working, and we hadn’t gone through the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression, then maybe we wouldn’t have to make choices.  But right now we’ve got to make some choices.  We’ve got to decide what our priorities are.  If we want to pay for this jobs plan, and close the deficit, and invest in our infrastructure, and make sure we’ve got the best education system in the world, the money has got to come from some place.  Would you rather that the oil companies get to keep their tax loopholes?

AUDIENCE:  No!

THE PRESIDENT:  Or would you rather make sure that we’re hiring thousands of construction workers to rebuild America?  (Applause.)  Would you rather keep in place special tax breaks for millionaires and billionaires?

AUDIENCE:  No!

THE PRESIDENT:  Or would you say, let’s get teachers back in the classroom so our children can learn?  (Applause.)

Now, the Republicans, when I talked about this earlier in the week, they said, well, this is class warfare.  You know what, if asking a billionaire to pay their fair share of taxes, to pay the same tax rate as a plumber or a teacher is class warfare, then you know what, I’m a warrior for the middle class.  (Applause.)  I’m happy to fight for the middle class.  I’m happy to fight for working people.  (Applause.)  Because the only warfare I've seen is the battle against the middle class over the last 10, 15 years.

It’s time to build an economy that creates good, middle-class jobs in this country.  It’s time to build an economy that honors the values of hard work and responsibility.  It’s time to build an economy that lasts.  And, Cincinnati, that starts right now.  That starts with your help.  (Applause.)  Maybe some of the people in Congress would rather settle their differences at the ballot box than work together right now.  In fact, a while back, Senator McConnell said that his “top priority” -- number-one priority -- was “to defeat the President.”  That was his top priority.

AUDIENCE:  Booo --

THE PRESIDENT:  Not jobs, not putting people back to work, not rebuilding America.  Beating me.  Well, I’ve got news for him, and every other member of Congress who feels the same way.  The next election is 14 months away, and I’ll be happy to tangle sometime down the road.  But the American people right now don’t have the luxury of waiting to solve our problems for another 14 months.  (Applause.)  A lot of folks are living paycheck to paycheck.  A lot of folks are just barely getting by.  They need us to get to work right now.  They need us to pass this bill.  (Applause.)

So I’m asking all of you -- I need everybody here to lift your voices -- not just in Cincinnati, but anybody who's watching TV, or anybody who's within the range of my voice -- I want everybody to lift up their voices.  I want you to call.  I want you to email.  I want you to tweet.  I want you to fax.  I want you to visit.  If you want, write a letter -- it’s been a while. (Laughter.)  I want you to tell your congressperson that the time for gridlock and games-playing is over.  Tell them you want to create jobs, so pass this bill.  (Applause.)

If you want construction workers rebuilding America -- pass this bill.  (Applause.)  If you want teachers back in the classrooms -- pass this bill.

AUDIENCE:  Pass this bill!

THE PRESIDENT:  If you want to cut taxes for middle-class families -- pass this bill.

AUDIENCE:  Pass this bill!

THE PRESIDENT:  If you want to help small businesses, what do you do?

THE AUDIENCE:  Pass this bill!

THE PRESIDENT:  If you want veterans to share in the opportunities of this country, what should you do?

THE AUDIENCE:  Pass this bill!

THE PRESIDENT:  Now is the time to act.  Because we are not a people that just sit back and wait for things to happen.  We go ahead and make things happen.  We’re tougher than the times we live in.  We are bigger than the politics that we’ve been seeing these last few months.  Let’s meet this moment.  Let’s get back to work.  Let’s show the world once again why America is the greatest nation on Earth.

God bless you.  And God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)

END                                                         3:12 P.M. EDT

We'll post the text of the speech soon (the President veered off script a number of times, getting all folksy, dropping the final "g's off words), and have more details on the President's trip in a bit.  Meantime, you can listen to the live stream here.

Transit use is down. Carpooling is down. And driving to work alone is up. That’s according to data just out this morning from the American Community Survey.

The U.S. Census Bureau released detailed survey data showing how commuting habits have changed in recent years. As we begin to parse the numbers, here's an initial look at how Americans are getting to work, and how New Yorkers are different from the rest of the country when it comes to rush hour habits.

Between 2006 and 2010, the data show, the percentage of Americans driving to work alone rose from 76.0 percent to 76.6 percent. During the same period, the number of Americans taking public transportation rose just a tenth of a percentage point – but declined last year to 4.9 percent, down from 5.0 percent in 2009.

The U.S. Census says those number are statistically significant.

Carpooling nationally dropped more dramatically from 2006, down from 10.7 percent to 9.7 percent. Meanwhile, walking to work has hovered around 2.8 or 2.9 percent. And people getting to work by other means, including bike or motorcycle, has remained steady at 1.7 percent.

The American Community Survey measures the primary way of getting to work not combinations of different modes.

The data also show what an outlier New York City is -- more than eleven times as many New Yorkers take public transportation to work as do their counterparts nationwide. Click around on the map above for a sampling of the numbers by neighborhood.

New Yorkers by and large take transit or walk to work, with the notable exceptions of Eastern Queens and the entire borough of Staten Island.

A big chunk of Lower Manhattan residents -- more than a third in some census districts -- walk to work. No other neighborhood in the five boroughs fields close to that number of walkers.

Bucking the national trend, transit use in New York City has been steadily rising since 2006 -- from 54.2 percent of New Yorkers in the five boroughs in 2006 to 55.7 percent in 2010. In some neighborhoods, more than 70 percent of people commute by transit. New York City had previously estimated that 76.7 percent of people commute without the use of a private car.

These new ACS figures show the figure is even higher. Just 22.7 percent of New Yorkers drive to work, down from 23.6 percent in 2006.

Despite the changes in how New Yorkers get to work, commute times have held more or less steady over this period. The median commute nationally is about 25 minutes -- and 40 minutes in the New York area. All the more time to read the paper on the subway.

(Photo (cc) by Flickr user .Timbo)

High speed rail got a last minute reprieve today, with a vote by a Senate committee to restore $100 million in spending on the program, a day after a subcommittee had zeroed out funding for bullet train projects.

But even with the Senate vote, future funding of America's high speed rail program remains in doubt as Congress shaves all government spending closer and closer to the bone.

It is a precipitous decline in fortunes for the high speed rail program, once a signature initiative of President Barack Obama. As recently as January -- just eight months ago -- the President expressed his intention to connect 80 percent of Americans to high speed rail by 2036.

Beginning in 2008, under the Passenger Rail Investment Act, or PRIA, Congress spent about $2 billion a year on the high speed rail program. But last year, Congress stopped appropriating money for high speed rail. It looked like a repeat was in the works this year after both the House of Representatives and a Senate Subcommittee, which appropriates  the US DOT's budget, voted to spend nothing on the program in the fiscal year beginning October 1.

The spending at issue doesn't include $8 billion in grants from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, aka the stimulus bill.

The amendment to restore $100 million in  funding, sponsored by Senators Richard Durbin (D-IL), Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ),  Mary Landrieu, (D-LA)and Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), passed by voice vote Wednesday.

"This is a rail-unfriendly congress," said Petra Todorovich, of America 2050. "Inserting $100 million, that's just a gesture to keep the program alive -- which is good."

And Senator Frank Lautenberg, who had expressed pessimism after Tuesday's subcommittee vote, put a happy face on the full Senate's committee's voice vote to restore funding. “These high speed rail grants will help the United States create a 21st century transportation system," Lautenberg said in a statement. "We must make smart investments to expand high-speed rail in New Jersey and throughout the nation."

But Kerry O'Hare, Policy Director of the group Building America's Future, was less sanguine. "In my opinion, this could mean the end of the program."  She added, "it's just the slow chipping away of funding."

President Barack Obama also inserted $4 billion for high speed rail into the American Jobs Act. He's been stumping in swing counties for the bill, but there's no evidence yet Congress will pass the legislation, and in fact, it seems inclined to keep cutting away at programs like U.S. high speed rail.

Several governors, including the governors of Florida, Wisconsin, and Ohio, sent back their high speed rail-related stimulus grants, causing the U.S. DOT to redistribute much of that money to other projects, including a Northeast corridor high-speed rail project.

The stimulus money already in the pipeline will still be spent.

The full senate now votes on transportation spending for 2012, including high speed rail. After that, it goes to a conference committee, where it could still be eliminated entirely.

What are you used to seeing in car ads? The beautiful Pacific Coast Highway. Relieved parents driving minivans while their kids are safe, and entertained. The desert.

To this list,  Audi adds dystopia.

To the backdrop of a dilapidated ribbon of highway, a scrunched-up guardrail, and a broken-up bridge, an announcer intones over a Philip Glass-esque soundtrack: "The road is not exactly a place of intelligence.  Highway maintenance is underfunded, costing drivers $65 billion a year, and countless tires, which drivers never actually check, because they're busy, checking email.

This is why we engineered a car that makes 2,000 decisions every second..."

The ad ran during the high-profile broadcast of the Emmy awards.

The bike lane on the Brooklyn Bridge. (Photo (cc) by Flickr user Rikomatic)

A new study finds more pedestrians are injured by cyclists than previously thought. According to research by Hunter College Professors Peter Tuckel and William Milczarski there have been about 1,000 injuries per year of pedestrians in New York State caused by cyclists.  Milczarski says previous estimates, put the figure at about 1,000 a year nationwide.

The study analyzed hospital data from all New York hospitals, which code their injuries.   About half the injuries were within the five boroughs of New York City. Residents of East Harlem and Bedford Stuyvestant were treated the most often by hospitals.  The study did not look at injuries caused to bicyclists by motor vehicles, or injuries to cyclists caused during bike-pedestrian crashes.

The study was supported by the Stuart  C. Gruskin foundation, set up by Nancy Gruskin after her husband, Stuart, was killed by bicylist.

New York City's Department of Transportation has said that overall, traffic injuries are down, and it says as cycling goes up, injuries and fatalities do not.

The Hunter study found a decline in injuries as well, from 1,097 in 2007 to 927 in 2010.

Milczarski says his study is not meant to be anti-cyclist; he tells Transportation Nation he himself is in favor of the city's planned bike-share program.