In Transit
In Transit
Route 24's Driver’s Ed explains why the transportation concepts in Project 2025 take the U.S. in the wrong direction.
Buckle Up, Passengers!
Route 24 is an independent newsletter for those who feel out of gas with current news cycles and elect stories that drive public trust.
Three times a week new issues park in your inbox.
Stop by Next Exit, Forward Vision, and Express Lane for examples.
Read more about Route 24’s launch this September and consider subscribing however you’re able.
Thank you for coming along for the ride!
Blind Spots
Note: This analysis is specific to roadway transportation policy and its implications. It does not contain assessments of the outlined aviation, railroad, or maritime policies or practices referenced in Project 2025’s chapter on transportation.
In Project 2025's Mandate for Leadership, Chapter 19: Department of Transportation, Diana Furchtgott-Roth presents what would happen to American roadways and the communities most dependent on them should a second Trump term occur. In this version of America, sustainable economics and ethics are loose concepts and contradiction is the only constant. Here’s why.
Running parallel to the Trump-Vance campaign rhetoric to leave critical policy decisions up to the states, Furchtgott-Roth calls for transportation authority to be turned over to state and local officials “to ensure investments are worthwhile.” (p. 621) She interprets “worthwhile” as the privilege of a state or municipality to purchase and/or maintain services it thinks are best. Unless, of course, she doesn’t agree with the policy at play. When a D.C. Council voted in 2022 to institute a no-turn-on-red traffic policy, Furchtgott-Roth argued the decision would threaten pedestrian safety and that the Biden-Harris administration’s Vision Zero initiative to eliminate pedestrian deaths was an excuse to create pedestrian zones over car use. Her spurious claims matched the MAGA Republican-led Congressional efforts to interfere with D.C. traffic laws under local jurisdiction and undermine the self-governance of D.C.’s communities of color.
In fact, Furchtgott-Roth neglects to see a clear use case for policy equity at all, referring to it as “a nebulous concept.” (p. 629). Under such framing, what would become of the Department of Transportation’s Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization or Civil Rights offices should Project 2025 be put into practice? Her treatment of the Build America Bureau, a division dedicated to infrastructure developments, gives some indication, with the suggestive phrasing “should the Build America Bureau continue to exist.” (p.622)
Furchtgott-Roth’s proposed methods for cost-cutting are no less dubious: consolidate federal grants, mandate loan repayments, and push for private sector highway regulation, such as with public-private partnerships (P3s). To bring you up to speed, in P3 models, private sector equity is paid back with interest in the form of higher taxes and toll road prices, making transportation costs less affordable. It also opens the door to potential mismanagement of funds. As even Furchtgott-Roth admits, “a governmental CEO (governor, mayor, head of an authority) can use a P3 to impose unnecessarily high costs on users decades in the future in exchange for upfront cash.” (p.621; p.624)
She further argues that eliminating data collection guardrails and increasing dependency on technological advancements from the private sector cuts costs by removing the need for commercial drivers. This is because “it’s the role of the private sector to determine the winners and losers in technology.” (p.625) In this view, which echoes campaign rhetoric deployed by the Trump-Vance ticket, workers lose. Arguing that “the largest expense in transit operational costs is labor” (p.635) and in stark contrast to the official policy positions of the United Auto Workers, Furchtgott-Roth calls for cutting fringe benefits and federal regulations limiting reduced compensation to offset the high cost of increased private sector dependency.
As another mode of cutting transportation cost, Furchtgott-Roth argues for reduced environmental protections, rolling back Environmental Protection Agency regulations and electric vehicle mandates. Her reason: better traffic safety and less risk from foreign manufacturing. However, a recent report from the Governors Highway Safety Association shows that traffic safety nationwide is actually improving. The Department of Transportation under the Biden-Harris administration has also funded new research projects that prioritize traffic safety, hosting the first Future of Transportation Summit earlier this summer. As NPR’s All Things Considered reported in a recent segment, the Department of Commerce has developed protections to limit vulnerabilities to foreign interference in auto manufacturing and bolster support for U.S. auto manufacturing.
While concluding that the central purpose of the Department of Transportation is “to make travel easier and less expensive” (p. 639), she simultaneously argues that the states should “decide whether mass transit is worth the investment.” (p. 636) She again calls for a push for privatization, suggesting commuters instead pay for rideshare or e-scooter options rather than take municipality-led public transit. For whom exactly would defunding public transportation and appealing to corporate interest “make travel easier and less expensive”? Certainly not for the 7.8 million Americans who commute on public transportation as their primary mode of travel.
Taken together, these facts tell the full story: Project 2025's approach to transportation steers away from the needs of the people and towards the pockets of corporate interest.
Speed Bump
Looking for recommendations? Here’s
’s list of other stacks to stop by:- -
- -
- and -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
However you’re able to support Route 24, thank you for joining us on the road!
Stay the course,
Sam
Are we there yet?!
- needs your help!
With one week to meet our first subscriber deadline, paid subscriptions support presenting Probable Cause to the public this October and educating swing state voters to consider a Harris-Walz ticket. Learn more about the project on Route 24’s About Page.
Need to take the freeway? Share the road by restacking this post or cross posting it on your stack.