The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981

The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981

Julia Quiñones

     The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981 amended the Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1978, the Federal Aid Highway Act of 1956, and the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1978 (H.R. 3210). While the 1978 act was intended to sustain highway funding through 1982, there was a shortage of funds by 1981. There was also a shift in policy preferences during this time. The Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1982 was an important part of shifting power over highways from the federal government to state governments. Unlike former acts, the 1981 act was incredibly detailed regarding which government offices can allocate funds to and oversee which projects. In fact, some projects were mentioned by name in the act. For instance, the Woodrow Wilson Memorial Bridge was expressly put under the Secretary's control (with input from Maryland, Virginia, and the District of Columbia). Most projects and goals were given specific minimums and maximums for funding, even if discretion was given to a certain government position. The Secretary was authorized to cover up to 75% of California's highway maintenance and construction costs, but was not obliged to meet this maximum (H.R. 3210). This push and pull between regulation and freedom is thematic to the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981. This reflects the controversial nature of federal versus state control during this time (Highway History).

     The 1981 Act was a short-term solution to long-term goals. As a document, it directed the Secretary of Transportation in decision-making. (H.R. 3210) It was built around the 3 R's: resurfacing, restoration, and rehabilitation. This became even more comprehensive when reconstruction was added to the long-term vision. Considering how broad these goals were, a year is certainly not enough time to accomplish them. The reason this act was restricted to a single year was mainly because there was not an agreed-upon way to apply the 4 R's. Instead of taking a hard line on either federal or state control of highways, the 1981 act was designed to balance the two approaches. While the composers of the act did not believe it to be a lasting solution, incorporating both federal and state measures was intended to ease the transition into a completely new, future approach. Changing the philosophy of governmental control requires major adjustments in infrastructure, including taxation and administrative delegation processes. It also requires delicate consideration of public opinion. By creating legislation that moves forward progress without taking a hard stance on controversial issues, the government was able to stay neutral (Highway History).      

     There was no easy solution to ideological diversity in 1981, and that unfortunately remains true for current times. Both federal and state governments are involved in highway construction and maintenance, but they must also be involved in determining long-term goals for transportation needs and wants. Both entities have valuable insight into these needs and wants, although they also have vastly difference perspectives. While state governments are more attuned to local geography and demography, federal governments have the power and resources to affect real change. Mediating between the two, while difficult, is not only rewarding, but necessary.
   

References

H.R. 3210 (97th): Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1981. (n.d.). Retrieved November 08, 2017, from       https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/97/hr3210/summary

Highway History. (n.d.). Retrieved November 08, 2017, from https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/restructure.cfm