INTRODUCTION: THE INTERSTATE HIGHWAY SYSTEM IN CONTEXT
America is a nation on wheels --- they benefit from a freedom of mobility that is unrivaled
anywhere in the world. A substantial portion of that mobility is attributable to the Dwight D.
Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways, which celebrates its 40th anniversary in
1996. The interstate highway system, the largest public works program in history, has had an
enormous impact on the nation. The interstate highway system has positively influenced economic
growth, reduced traffic deaths and injuries, provided substantial benefits to users, and been a
crucial factor in the nation's defense.
Background
Early Planning: As automobiles began to democratize mobility in America in the 1920s and
1930s, it became increasingly clear that greatly improved highways would be needed to
accommodate the demand. "Super-highways,"
NOTE: The term "super-highway" is used to denote a controlled access (grade separated) roadway with at least four lanes of traffic separated by
direction. Super-highways may be toll roads or free (freeways). In most nations, including the United States, "free" super-highways are not
really free, in that their construction, maintenance and patrolling costs are paid by highway user fees. grade separated roadways with four lanes of
direction-separated traffic, first appeared in the New York City area parkways that opened in the
1920s.
By the early 1940s, the success of early super-highways, especially the Pennsylvania
Turnpike, sparked considerable interest in developing a national toll road system. But, the advent
of World War II and the policy priorities of the immediate post war years prevented substantial
progress until much later.
The interstate highway system was first approved by Congress in 1944, but it was not until 1956
that a comprehensive program was enacted to build the system. By this time, it had become
apparent that post-war affluence had produced a huge increase in highway demand and that
rapidly expanding highway freight movements required a much improved system. Further, in the
volatile Cold War era, national defense provided a primary justification for developing a super-highway system to accommodate the quick and efficient movement of military equipment and
personnel.
Authorization of the Interstate Highway System: On June 29, 1956, President Eisenhower
signed the Federal Aid-Highway Act of 1956, which authorized the interstate highway system
(later formally named the Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways).
The Act authorized 41,000 miles of high quality highways that were to tie the nation together.
Later, congressional action increased the length to 42,500 miles and required super-highway
standards for all interstate highways.
The system was to be completed by 1975. It was conceived as a "pay as you go" system that
would rely primarily on federally imposed user fees on motor fuels --- the federal user fee per
gallon of gasoline was increased by one cent. The federal user fees would provide 90 percent of
the cost of construction with the balance provided primarily by state user fees. The interstate
highway system would incorporate approximately 2,000 miles of already completed toll roads.
High standards were adopted for the interstate highway system. Access to all interstates was to be
fully controlled. There would be no intersections or traffic signals. All traffic and railroad
crossings would be grade separated, requiring the construction of more than 55,000 bridges.
Interstates were to be divided and have at least four wide traffic lanes (two in each direction) and
adequate shoulders. Curves were to be engineered for safe negotiation at high speed, while grades
were to be moderated, eliminating blind hills. Rest areas were to be conveniently spaced. Each
interstate was to be designed to handle traffic loads expected 20 years after completion.
The states were soon underway with construction. As time passed, it became clear that the goal of
system completion by 1975 would not be achieved. But by 1960, more than 10,000 miles were
opened. By 1965, 20,000 miles were opened, and by 1970, 30,000 miles were open to traffic. And
by 1980, 40,000 miles were complete. While some segments remain to be completed, more than
42,700 miles of interstate highways are now opened to traffic.
The interstate highway system serves virtually all of the nation's large urban areas and serves 49
states (all but Alaska). Despite this broad expanse, the interstate highway system represents just
over one percent of the nation's road network.
NOTE: Much of the information in this section ("Background") is from Richard F. Weingroff, "A Partnership that Makes a Difference," Public Roads (Washington
DC: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Summer 1996) and "Development of the Interstate
Program," in America's Highways: 1776-1976 (Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, 1976).
NOTE: There have been additions to the system beyond the 42,500 authorization.
NOTE: Some highways in Alaska have been eligible for receipt of federal interstate funding, but Alaska contains no highways that are formally
designated as a part of the interstate standard system.).
Performance of the Interstate Highway System
There have been tremendous changes in America since authorization of the interstate highway
system in 1956. Population has increased by 70 percent, but employment has increased by more
than 100 percent. The percentage of the nation's population that is employed has increased by
nearly one-third in 40 years, reflecting a far higher rate of female participation in the work force.
Household size has declined significantly. These factors combined to increase travel demand at a
far greater rate than had been expected. And much of this increased travel has been on the
interstate highway system.
The interstate highway system is the "work horse" of the nation's highway system. Representing
just over one percent of the nation's highway system
mileage, the interstate highway system
carries nearly one quarter (23 percent) of all roadway traffic,
--- more than 20 times its one
percent share measured in mileage (1), and more than 60 times as many person miles
as all
passenger rail services (Amtrak and urban rail) (2).
NOTE: Unless otherwise noted, "highway system"
refers to the system of all urban roadways in the United States (urban, intercity, and rural).
NOTE: A person mile is one person traveling a mile. For example, a car with a driver and no passengers produces one person mile per each vehicle
mile traveled. A car with a driver and two passengers produces three person miles for each vehicle mile traveled.
NOTE 1: Calculated from data in 1994 Highway Statistics (Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, 1995).
NOTE 2: Calculated from data in National Transportation Statistics 1996 (Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation, Bureau
of Transportation Statistics, 1996), 1994 Highway Statistics and National Transit Database 1994 (Washington, DC: United States
Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration, 1996)..
Surface Transport Share: 1994
In Person Miles and Route Mileage
|
Transport System
| Market
Share
| Mileage
Share |
Interstate
| 23.0%
| 1.1% |
All Other Roads
| 76.4%
| 98.2% |
Passenger Rail
| 0.6%
| 0.7% |
The interstate highway system has a much higher density of use than other components of the
nation's surface transportation system. The interstate highway system carries nearly 60,000 daily
person miles per route mile, 26 times as many person miles per route mile as all other roads
(including low usage rural roads), and 22 times as many person miles per route mile as intercity
rail (Amtrak) and urban rail combined.
Each year, nearly one trillion person miles are carried on the interstate highway system --- a figure
equal to providing trips around the world for 37 million people --- more people than live in
Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Ohio combined. In its 40 years, more than 17 trillion person miles have
been traveled over the interstate highway system.
NOTE:
Assumes vehicle occupancy on the interstates equals that of the entire highway system. This is the equivalent of:
- Nearly three trips around the world for each American.
- A trip to the moon for all of the people living in California, New York, Texas, and New
Jersey --- nearly 75 million people.
- Three light years of travel through space --- nearly three-quarters of the distance to the
nearest star outside the solar system (Alpha Centauri).
The interstates highway system in intercity and rural travel: The value of the interstate
highway system may be most obvious in rural and intercity travel. For the most part, rural and
intercity interstate travel is uncongested, permitting highly efficient traffic movement. Rural and
intercity interstates provide a large measure of mobility, representing nearly 24 percent of all
surface rural and intercity transportation --- 60 times that of passenger rail (Amtrak).
NOTE: Calculated from data in National Transportation Statistics 1996 (Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation, Bureau
of Transportation Statistics, 1996) and 1994 Highway Statistics.
Intercity & Rural Market Share: 1994
In Person Miles
|
Interstate
| 23.7% |
Other Highway
| 75.9% |
Passenger Rail
| 0.4% |
Rural and intercity interstates also play a crucial role in freight transportation. It has been
estimated that 45 percent of the nation's large truck (tractor-trailer) operations are on the
interstate highway system.
NOTE: Benefits of Interstate Highways (Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1983).
Interstate highways have generally reduced travel times by 20 percent or more between cities. For
example:
NOTE: Travel time comparisons from analysis of "United States Mileage Chart" and "Driving Distances and Driving Times" in American
Automobile Association maps of the United States (Heathrow, FL: American Automobile Association: 1954, 1955 and 1996).
- Travel time between Seattle and Portland, Oregon has declined by nearly 25 percent.
- Travel time between Cleveland and New York City has declined by a third.
- Travel time between Atlanta and Birmingham has declined by nearly 40 percent.
- Travel time between Chicago and Minneapolis has declined by nearly 25 percent.
The time advantage of the interstates remains clear even today, when interstate and non-interstate
corridors are compared.
- The average speed from Harrisburg to Albany, which is served by interstates, is more than
20 percent greater than from Harrisburg to Buffalo, which is not served by an interstate highway.
NOTE: Travel time comparisons from analysis of "Highway and Driving Times Map," Rand McNally 1996 Road Atlas (Skokie, IL: Rand
McNally Company, 1996).
- Travel time from Sacramento to Salt Lake City, served by an interstate, is 1.5 hours less
than virtually the same distance from Phoenix to Salt Lake City, which includes a major
gap without an interstate.
- Average travel time from Springfield, Missouri to Alexandria, Louisiana, which is not
served by an interstate, is more than 40 percent longer than Springfield to Dallas, which is
served by an interstate.
The interstate highway system in urban travel: The positive role of the interstates in the
nation's urban areas is often overlooked or even discounted. In the early stages of interstate
planning (1940s and early 1950s), proposed programs omitted cities from the system, limiting the
role of the interstates to intercity transportation. The urban interstates were added to the system
at the insistence of urban interests.
The interstate highway system provides crucial mobility in urban areas. The interstate highways
provide a backbone transportation system that expedites urban trips for automobiles, buses, and
trucks, while reducing traffic congestion on non-interstate arterials.
Even in New York City, which relies on non-highway (urban rail) transportation to a far greater
extent than any other U.S. metropolitan area, the interstate highway market share (measured in
person trips) is nearly double that of the region's sprawling rail system.
In other urban areas, the
interstate highway system is even more important, with interstate market share exceeding that of
rail transit by more than thirty times.
NOTE: Estimated from data in 1995 Highway Statistics and National Transit Database 1994. Average urban interstate vehicle occupancy is
estimated at 1.65, based upon analysis of data in the 1990 National Personal Transportation Survey and 1994 Highway Statistics.
Each lane of urban interstate is capable of moving between 2,500 and 4,000 persons per hour.
This huge volume of traffic qualifies interstates as among the most effective urban mass
transportation systems. The average urban interstate lane carries more people on a daily basis
than the most successful of the nation's new light rail systems (1),
and many interstate lanes carry
more people than rail lines during their peak travel hours (2).
Interstates are capable of carrying far more people where they include high-occupancy vehicle
lanes that expedite trips for buses and car pools. The most successful high occupancy vehicle lane
carries up to seven times the volume of general purpose lanes,
and more people during peak
hour than any of the nation's urban rail lines outside New York City. Interstate high occupancy
vehicle lanes provide a form of mass transportation that cannot be provided by conventional mass
transit services, providing commuters with door-to-door convenience, and faster and more
efficient access to the entire metropolitan region, not just the downtown markets to which
efficient mass transit services are necessarily limited. This vastly increases potential destinations in
the mass transportation market beyond the downtown areas, which comprise, on average, only
one-tenth to one-thirtieth of employment in urban areas.
Urban residents use the interstates primarily because of the time that they save. In urban corridors,
time savings of up to 60 percent have been observed.
And while traffic congestion is increasing, the urban interstate highway system has continued to
perform effectively, despite the fact that the 20 year capacity growth for which they were
designed has long since passed in most cases. As employment and residences have spread, and as
the number of work trips has increased, work trip travel times have declined, and average work
trip distances have increased.
The urban interstates are the high capacity component of what has developed as the world's most
democratic, extensive, highly used, inexpensive, and flexible system of urban mass transportation --- the urban highway system.
- The interstate highway system made less expensive land more accessible to the nation's
transportation system and encouraged development.
- The travel time reliability of shipment by interstate highway has made "just in time"
delivery more feasible, reducing warehousing costs and adding to manufacturing
efficiency.
- By broadening the geographical range and options of shoppers, the interstate highway
system has increased retail competition, resulting in larger selections and lower consumer
prices.
- By improving inter-regional access, the interstate highway system has helped to create a
genuinely national domestic market with companies able to supply their products to much
larger geographical areas, and less expensively.
Each of these cost reducing impacts have made both labor and capital more efficient and this has
encouraged business expansion, new investment, and job creation.
Through the years, various estimates have been made of the contribution of the interstate highway
system to the economy, generally finding that the interstate highway system has more than paid
for itself in improved commercial productivity.
NOTE: See for example, Benefits of Interstate Highways (Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration, 1970) and Benefits of Interstate Highways (Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation, Federal
Highway Administration, 1983).
A recent study indicated that with respect to
non-local roads (arterial highways, especially the National Highway System, which includes the
interstate highway system), each dollar of investment in highways produces an annual reduction in
product costs of 23.4 cents, with larger cost reductions in the early years and smaller reductions in
more recent years.
NOTE: M. Ishaq Nadiri and Theofanis P. Mamuneas, Contribution of Highway Capital to Industry and National Productivity Growth
(Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1996).
While an interstate specific estimate is not available, it is likely that this most
productive sector of non-local roads contributes even more per invested dollar than the non-local
road system.
Using the results of this research, it is estimated that the interstate highway system is now
producing approximately $14 billion.
NOTE: In 1996 dollars, based upon year of construction expenditure. Throughout the balance of the report all financial data is in 1996 dollars,
unless otherwise noted. in annual producer cost reductions.
This annual economic
benefit is estimated to have peaked in 1970 at approximately $38 billion. Over the 40 year period,
it is estimated that gross producer cost reductions have exceeded $1 trillion (1) --- more than three
times the gross original investment in the interstate highway system (2This represents a substantial
economic benefit, which is likely to have created employment and reduced consumer prices ) ---
permitting the financial resources of consumers to be stretched to purchase more than would be
otherwise possible.
NOTE 1: Estimated based upon data in Nadiri and Mamuneas. A production cost decrease factor was estimated for each year from 1957 to 1996 by
using their time series rates of change for the social rate of return for the non-local highway system (the 1970s to 1980s rate of change was
used for years after 1989). Yearly interstate construction costs developed above are used, and a 60 year depreciation schedule is assumed
(consistent with the assumptions in Fixed Reproducible Tangible Wealth in the United States, 1925-89 [Washington, DC: United States
Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of Economic Analysis: 1993]). The resulting figure should be
considered a general approximation, since additional research is underway to more reliably isolate the benefits of the highway contribution
from other potential contributing factors (such as other infrastructure). Moreover, the Nadiri and Mamuneas data on which this estimate is
based are aggregate figures for the economy. The production cost impacts vary substantially by industry.
NOTE 2: $1 trillion divided by $329 billion.
NOTE: Based upon the competitiveness of the U.S. economy,
it is assumed that virtually all of the lower product costs resulted in consumer benefit
through lower consumer prices and higher profits that, in turn, increased business investment
and thereby created new jobs.
The same report also found that highways have contributed substantially to national productivity
growth. From 1950 to 1989, approximately one-quarter of the nation's productivity increase is
attributable to increased investment in the highway system.
NOTE: Nadiri and Mamuneas.
Again, while a separate estimate for
the interstate highway system is not available, the superiority and efficiency of the interstate
highway system leads to a reasonable presumption of substantial contribution.
Share of the economy: The interstate highway system is also a direct generator of jobs. As it was
being built, it provided thousands of construction and related jobs. It has spawned a large number
of new roadside businesses. While the direct impact of the interstates is not known, employment
in dining establishments has increased more than seven times the rate of population growth, and
employment in lodging establishments has increased at twice the national population growth rate
(1958-199).
NOTE: Calculated from data in Statistical Abstract of
the United States (multiple annual editions).
Highway transportation, and directly related industries
is 7.5 million, more than
one-sixth of total employment, while personal expenditures on highway transport represent
one-ninth of total personal expenditures.
NOTE: Calculated from data in National
Transportation Statistics 1996.This figure does not include employment in related businesses outside
the transport sector, such as road side business.
NOTE: Calculated from National Income and Product Accounts, 1994, Survey of Current Business (Washington, DC: United States Department
of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Bureau of Economic Analysis,
January-February 1996).
Interstate highways, which carry nearly one-quarter of the
nation's surface passenger transport and 45 percent of motor freight transport, accounts for a
considerable portion of this employment and economic activity.
International Competitiveness and the Interstates: Super-highways got their start with the
construction of German autobahns in the 1930s. Indeed, General Dwight D. Eisenhower's
fascination with the German system provided major impetus to the vision of the interstates in the
United States. Following the Second World War, super-highway construction resumed. When it
was completed in the 1950s, Canada's MacDonald-Cartier Freeway from Montreal through
Toronto and toward Windsor was the longest super-highway in North America at more than 500
miles. Since then, Canada has built less than 1,500 miles, while the United States has built more
than 50,000 miles (including super-highways that are not a part of the interstate highway system).
It was not long before the U.S. took unprecedented leadership in developing super-highways
through the interstate highway program.
The United States now leads the world by a considerable margin in super-highways. U.S.
mileage is nearly 10 times that of the former West Germany, 12 times that of France, 20 times that
of Japan and nearly 30 times that of the United Kingdom. In fact, seven states have more at least
as much mileage as the entire United Kingdom (California, Florida, Illinois, New York,
Pennsylvania and Texas).
NOTE: Calculated from Book of Vital Statistics
(London, UK: The Economist Books, 1990).
Even when adjusted to account for geographic size and population,
the United States has a far more extensive network of super-highways than other developed
nations --- 2.4 times the former west Germany, 2.9 times France, 6.5 times the United Kingdom
and 9.7 times Japan.
NOTE: Based upon a ratio of super-highway mileage per 1,000 square miles to population per square mile. Calculated from data in Book of Vital
Statistics.
Virtually all major urban areas in the United States are connected to one another by the interstate
highway network. This is not so in many developed nations. Super-highway networks contain
major gaps or have barely been developed at all. For example:
- Four of the United Kingdom's largest urban areas ---Glasgow, Edinburgh, Aberdeen and
Newcastle-on-Tyne --- remain unconnected to the rest of the nation by super-highways.
- Five western European national capitals --- Lisbon, Madrid, Oslo, Stockholm and Helsinki
--- are not connected to the European network.
NOTE: This will remain the case even after completion of the Oresund link across the strait between Denmark and Sweden. A major gap remains between Paris and
the closest large urban area in Italy, Turin.
- There is no direct connection between Canada's largest urban area --- Toronto --- and the
federal capital of Ottawa despite a distance that is little more than from America's largest
urban area (New York) to the federal capital (Washington, DC). The major ports of
Vancouver and Halifax, together with Winnipeg, are connected to no other major
Canadian urban areas.
NOTE: Vancouver is, however, connected to the U.S. interstate highway system.
- Gaps remain in the link between Australia's largest urban area, Sydney, its federal capital,
Canberra, and its second largest urban area, Melbourne --- a distance similar to the Denver
to El Paso Interstate 25 corridor, which is considerably less densely populated. No major
urban area in either Australia or New Zealand is connected to any other major urban area
by super-highways.
While traffic congestion in urban areas is not unusual in the United States, rural traffic congestion
is rare. By contrast, rural traffic delays are far more frequent and serious in Europe.
But the U.S. advantage in super-highways could be challenged by planned improvements. The
European Union will spend nearly $100 billion over the next decade to build 9,000 miles of new
super-highways and is upgrading an additional 3,000 miles.
NOTE: Commission of the European Communities, Trans-European Networks: Towards a Master Plan for the Road Network (Brussels,
Belgium: Commission of the European Communities, Director-General for Transport, December 1992).
This investment is likely to improve
the competitiveness of this already formidable trading block. And there is a rush to build super-highways in a number of nations, especially in the emerging economies of Asia.
The U.S. advantage in super-highways and the significance of the estimated 25 percent highway
contribution to productivity
is illustrated by the fact that U.S. gross domestic product per capita
leads the next most affluent nation, Switzerland, by only 5 percent, Japan by 17 percent and
Canada by 20 percent.
NOTE: Only Luxembourg, a highly specialized nation, slightly larger in area than the city of Jacksonville, Florida, with 40 percent fewer people
(400,000, compares to Jacksonville's 640,000) has a higher gross domestic product per capita than
the United States (based upon
purchasing power parities).
Purchasing Power Parities and Real Expenditures: EKS Results, Volume I 1993 (Paris, France: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1995).
A nation's international competitiveness depends on a variety of factors such as its labor force,
capital investment, natural resources, and infrastructure. With respect to infrastructure, and in
particular, the comprehensive and efficient interstate highway system, the United States holds
considerable comparative advantage over its international competitors.
The interstate highway
system reduces manufacturing and distribution costs in the large domestic market, which, in turn,
makes U.S. products more competitive in world markets. This increases employment
and, by
making the U.S. a lower cost economy, allows its citizens to purchase more with their earnings.
NOTE: For a discussion of comparative advantage in international economics, see Michael E. Porter, The Comparative Advantage of Nations
(New York, NY: The Free Press, 1990).
NOTE: U.S. unemployment
rates have been considerably below that of European nations for a decade.
The highway system has been very important in maintaining the superiority of U.S. productivity.
While estimates for the interstate highway system alone are not available, the efficiency and
substantial role of the interstates leads to a reasonable presumption of their important contribution
to international competitiveness.
In terms of population, the greatest reduction in estimated fatalities occurred in Wyoming (4.72
per 1,000 population New Mexico (3.17), Montana (2.27), Nevada (2.13), and Utah (2.10).
Each of these states were more than double the national rate of 0.86.
In 1995, interstate usage averted more than an estimated 20,000 injuries in Texas (68,200),
California (46,100), Ohio (24,800) and Illinois (20,900). Large numbers of injuries have been
avoided over the last forty years
(Table A-3).
The fatalities and injuries averted produced an estimated economic savings of more than half a
billion dollars in 1994 alone in Texas, California, Illinois, Florida, Ohio, New York and Virginia
(Table A-4). Quality of life gains exceeded one billion dollars in 17 states.
The greatest economic gains per capita Calculated using average population 1957-1996. were in Wyoming ($6,000), New Mexico ($4,200),
Nevada ($3,500), Texas ($3,400), Utah ($3,300) and Colorado ($3,000), all nearly double or
more than national average of $1,700.
The direct user benefits have been at least equal to the $329 billion user fee investment. But
direct user benefits may have been even greater. If it is conservatively assumed that the interstates
provide a time savings of 20 to 30 percent,
then total time savings for non-commercial interstate
use have been between 75 billion and 125 billion hours --- the equivalent of seven to 12 weeks for
all 260 million Americans. The value of time saved for non-commercial users was between $45
billion and $77 billion in 1994 and $650 billion and $1.1 trillion over 40 years.
NOTE: The discussion estimates interstate highway system intercity time savings relative to other roadways at 20 percent and urban time
savings at up to 60 percent.
NOTE: Based upon Texas Transportation Institute
1992 valuation of time at $10.50 per hour, with the value of time discounted based upon real
gross domestic product size for other years as contained in Texas Transportation Institute,
Urban Roadway Congestion-1982 to 1992,
Volume 1: Annual Report (College Station, TX: Texas A&M University, 1995).
Users have also benefitted from lower vehicles operating costs, through reduced maintenance
requirements, improved tire wear, lower oil consumption, and lower depreciation costs, which
have more than offset the higher fuel costs attributable to higher speeds. Operating cost savings
are estimated at $2 billion in 1996 and $41 billion over 40 years.
NOTE: Operating cost savings for automobiles, light trucks, and vans of 3.14 percent. Calculated from data in Benefits of Interstate Highways
(Washington, DC: United States Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1983). Actual operating costs from
consumer operating expenditures for user operated transportation from the gross domestic product accounts. Interstate operating
expenditures estimated based upon annual 1957 to 1996 percentage of total consumer vehicle
operation on the interstates.
Other Benefits: The interstate highway system has improved the quality of life for Americans in a
number of dimensions that are not readily quantifiable. Nonetheless, each of these benefits has
contributed in a material way to maintaining and improving the standard of living.
- Time savings translate into additional time for preferred activities. Travel, especially day to
day travel, is generally not an end in itself, it is a means to an end. People travel to get to
work, to reach shopping locations, or to keep medical, dental or social appointments,
which are primary activities. If people are able to spend less time traveling, they are able to
spend more time pursuing preferred activities.
- Expanded mobility allows people to choose from a wider range of options and activities.
Faster travel on an interstate can bring more jobs within reach of employees and make it
possible for shoppers to take advantage of lower prices or larger selections that may be
available at more remote locations.
Additional time and expanded mobility are both products of the interstate highway system. Where
mobility improves, opportunity is expanded. Greater employment mobility serves not only the
employee, but also the employer and the economy. With a broader geographical range of jobs to
choose from, employees are better matched to their employment, improving labor efficiency and
productivity. All of this increases economic activity, and translates into a higher quality of life.
This is so not only for Americans, but also people in other developed nations, where a close
relationship has developed between expanded personal mobility and increasing affluence (1).
Personal mobility is both an economic and social asset.
NOTE 1: Especially western European nations..
Democratization of mobility: The interstate highway system has facilitated an
unprecedented expansion of mobility and in a democratic manner --- no nation on earth
can equal the mobility that is available to the overwhelming majority of Americans. More
than 90 percent of the nation's households have access to automobiles, and by extension
to the nations' highway system. More than any component of that system, the interstate
highway system has expanded the options of people to travel within and between their
communities. The interstate highway system provides the crucial express links that make it
possible for people to reach virtually any point in their communities for employment or
shopping, at whatever time they desire.
Expanded employment freedom: The interstate highway system has made it possible for
people to pursue employment across far larger areas than before. People in previously
isolated rural areas are now able to use the interstates to reach employment centers.
Within urban areas, where interstate highways have reduced travel times up to 60 percent,
the interstates make it possible for workers to travel relatively quickly to virtually any
location for employment.
Expanded residential freedom: The interstate highway system has played a significant
role in producing the American dream of the single family house in the suburbs. As the
interstate highway system reduced travel time, people had broader options in residential
location. At the same time, lower land prices and increasing affluence made larger
dwellings possible, and the size of the average new house has increased by 40 percent over
the last quarter century.
NOTE: Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1995 (Washington, DC: United States Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics
Administration, Bureau of the Census, 1995).
Multi-purpose trips: The improved mobility provided by the interstates has supported a
significant increase in multi-purpose trips, especially with respect to work trips. People
regularly combine child care, shopping, and other trips with work trips, making valuable
time available for preferred activities. Indeed, without the interstate highway system, the
barriers to mobility would prevent some people from earning a living, and require others
to accept less lucrative employment.
Empowerment of the poor: The combination of market priced (lower priced) gasoline
and the interstate highway system have truly democratized mobility in the United States.
The large majority of households, including households below the poverty line, have
automobiles available and are thus able to access a broader range of employment,
shopping, and other opportunities. Indeed, the poor in America generally have greater
personal mobility by virtue of the automobile and the interstate highway system than many
middle income households in developed nations where quality roadways are less extensive.
NOTE: Among developed nations, gasoline prices are
closest to market prices in the United States. Most developed nations impose heavy taxes on
gasoline, raising prices per gallon to double, triple or more the price of production.
Lower retail prices: America's democratized mobility has lowered retail prices, thus
benefitting consumers. As freedom of movement has expanded, people have been able to
travel further to shop. At the same time, large discount retailers have been established,
placing further competitive pressure on prices. To compete, smaller local retailers have
had to become more efficient. One of the most important reasons that people get more for
their retail dollar today is that they have more options --- they are able to travel wherever
they like for bargains or larger selections that would not be available if they were
restricted to shopping opportunities in their own immediate areas. And, because they rely
on their own personal transportation, they are able to shop at whatever time they desire.
This has encouraged longer store hours, more efficient utilization of retail facilities, and
created additional jobs. The interstate highway system has been a major contributor to this
advance.
Improved access to health care: The interstate highway system has improved the quality
of health care. By making it possible to transport those in need of acute care to hospitals
much more quickly and over greater distances, the interstates have reduced mortality. The
interstate highway system also improves access to specialists and specialized medical
equipment for chronic care patients.
Improved Air Quality: Interstate highways contribute materially to the reduction of air
pollution and, thereby, to improved health by permitting more consistent speeds and
smoother traffic flows.
NOTE: Committee for the Study of Impacts of
Highway Capacity Improvements on Air Quality and Energy Consumption, Transportation
Research Board, National Research Council (Washington: National Academy Press, 1995).
The "stop and go" traffic typical of non-interstate roadways,
increases air pollution by up to three times that of smoothly operating traffic, which is
typical of most interstate highways.
NOTE: Steve Nadis and James J. MacKenzie,
Car Trouble (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 1993).
Security: There is considerable concern about personal security in the United States.
During the period that the interstate highway system was constructed, violent crime rates
increased by more than five times. People tend to feel safe from crime in their automobiles,
and the interstate highway system has permitted people, especially women, to confidently
travel longer distances at virtually any time of the day.
Leisure activities and vacations: The broadened mobility provided by the interstate
highway system has made it possible for people to take longer trips on weekends and
during vacations. This, in turn, has generated a significant increase in highway related
businesses, such as lodging establishments, restaurants, service stations, etc.
The percentage of urban interstate lane miles operating at above 80 percent of capacity at
peak hour has nearly doubled since 1975.
NOTE: 1994 Highway Statistics.
And, rural interstate congestion, though minimal compared to that of urban areas, continues to
grow.
At the same time, the physical structure of the system is in need of attention.
Approximately 60 percent of interstate pavements are rated from fair to poor.
NOTE: Clifford M. Comeau, "Condition and Performance
of the Interstate System - After 40 Years," Public Roads (Washington, United States
Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Summer 1996).
Six percent of interstate bridges are structurally deficient.
NOTE: Calculated from 1995 Status of the Nation's Surface Transportation System: Conditions and Performance (Washington, DC: United
States Department of Transportation, 1995),
Structural deficiency can result
in catastrophic bridge failure and loss of life (within the past 15 years, there have been two
well publicized bridge collapses claiming 13 lives.
NOTE: Mianus River Bridge on I-95 in Connecticut (1983)
and Schoharie Creek Bridge on I-95 in New York (1987).).
The Imperative for Interstate Investment: Expensive as they might appear, improvements are
necessary. According to reports prepared for the Federal Highway Administration, the pace of
super-highway lane construction in urban areas over one million would have to be increased
substantially to stop the growth of traffic congestion. Yet, the annual cost of such would be only
$3 billion
--- a fraction of the peak annual construction costs incurred during the 1960s and
1970s, and a 2.5 percent increase in the nation's annual surface transportation budget.
NOTE: Lane mile data from Texas Transportation
Institute, 1995. Per lane mile cost calculated from data in 1995 Status of the Nation's Surface
Transportation System: Conditions and Performance adjusted to reflect 1996 prices.
NOTE: 1994 surface transportation expenditures were
approximately $120 billion (1996$), $95 billion for highways and $25 billion for transit.
The
safety impacts alone would justify such expenditures. Each new ten mile segment of urban
interstate could be expected to save, on average, two lives and 250 injuries annually. Over a ten
year period, this urban interstate improvement rate could save 1,950 lives and avert 240,000
injuries.
NOTE: Based upon improved lower fatality and injury rate
of the interstate highway system relative to the balance of the federal aid primary
system. Average urban interstate assumed to be six lanes. 10 year projection assumes
that 1,104 lane miles of urban interstates would be
built per year over the period.
The economic impacts of improved safety would exceed the cost of the new roadway in
less than 15 years.
NOTE: Conversion from lane miles to roadway
assumes an average of six traffic lanes. Lives and injuries avoided based upon comparison of rates
between interstates and the federal aid-primary system. Construction costs based on data in 1995 Status of the Nation's Surface
Transportation System: Conditions and Performance converted to 1996$.
Each new 10 mile segment of rural interstate could be expected to save one
life and 40 injuries per year.
The increase in traffic congestion takes an additional economic toll in terms of excess fuel
consumption and the costs of delay. In 1992, these urban "congestion costs" were $34 billion and
were increasing at an annual rate of approximately $2.1 billion.
--- nearly two thirds of the annual
cost of required capacity expansion ($3.0 billion, above). Urban super-highway (largely interstate)
congestion increases motor vehicle related pollution by consuming more than 14 billion excess
gallons of fuel annually --- 58 gallons of fuel per household. This is enough fuel to transport the
average household 1,250 miles by automobile (equal to trips from New York to Minneapolis,
Seattle to San Diego, Milwaukee to Orlando or Denver to New Orleans).
NOTE: In 1996 dollars.
Super-highway congestion costs estimated using relationship of freeway delay hours to total
system delay hours.
Calculated using data for 50 large urban areas in
Urban Roadway Congestion - 1982 to 1992.
A report on 1989 conditions indicated that free traffic flow could be achieved through super-highway
(largely interstate) expansions in even the most congested urban areas.
NOTE: 1989 Roadway Congestion Estimate and
Trends (College Station, Texas: Texas Transportation Institute, July 1992).
By far the highest cost --- $8 billion --- would be required in Los Angeles
---
considerably less than that urban area is spending to build urban rail systems that are
unlikely to significantly improve traffic flow.
NOTE: In 1996$, based upon costs calculated from
1995 Status of the Nation's Surface Transportation System: Conditions and Performance.
$1 billion would be required in Washington, D.C. Again, while this is a considerable
figure, it represents a relatively small investment compared to other non-highway
transportation investments that have failed to reduce the area's traffic congestion.
There has been considerable opposition to expansion of urban interstates, much of it based upon
the presumption that expanded interstate capacity is quickly consumed by new traffic. Yet, traffic
congestion has declined in two of the nation's fastest growing urban areas (between 1982 and
1992).
NOTE: Urban Roadway Congestion - 1982 to 1992.
In Phoenix, traffic congestion declined by six percent from 1982 to 1992, while population
increased by 40 percent (1980-1990).
In Houston, traffic congestion declined by four percent from 1982 to 1992, while
population increased by 20 percent (1980-1990).
A major component of the improved traffic conditions in these two urban areas has been a
substantial program to build and expand super-highways. By contrast, the average large urban
area experienced a 20 percent increase in traffic congestion, while population increased by
approximately 10 percent.
Nationally, improvement of interstate highways and other super-highways to support anticipated
rates of economic growth would require an annual increase in capital expenditures of
approximately $3.5 to $4.5 billion --- $24 billion from 1997 through 2002.
NOTE: Calculated from data for the "Economic Efficiency"
scenario in 1995 Status of the Nation's Surface Transportation System: Conditions
and Performance.
Recent analysis by
the Congressional Budget Office indicated that federal highway expenditures could be increased
by nearly $28 billion from 1997 through 2002 --- more than enough to pay for the required
investment, through use of existing and anticipated Highway Trust Fund resources.
NOTE: Calculated from data in Statement of Robert A. Sunshine, Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis, Congressional Budget Office, on
The Highway Trust Fund, before the Subcommittee on Surface Transportation, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, United
States House of Representatives, May 16, 1996.
Further,
even after 2002, highway user fees will continue to produce more revenue than is spent on
building, maintaining, and patrolling the nation's highways --- considerably more than would be
required to fund the investments required to preserve the positive economic contribution of the
interstate highway system to the national economy.
The economic imperative: The nation's continued economic growth depends, in part, on an
interstate highway system that grows along with the nation. Population growth will continue. All
demographic trends indicate overwhelmingly that people will continue to pursue the "American
Dream" of the house in the suburbs and a high degree of personal mobility. But the challenges to
U.S. economic growth are substantial. International competitors are becoming stronger, while
total compensation per U.S. employee is increasing at lower rates that before. If traffic congestion
is permitted to worsen, then American consumers will pay a heavy toll, in higher prices due to
higher shipping costs, jobs lost due to foreign competition, reduced employment opportunities,
and less leisure time.
America's Future Depends on the Interstates
It has been a momentous 40 years. Interstate highways have contributed to the economic growth
and quality of life in America. Indeed, the interstate highway system has been a major factor in
making the United States the homogeneous nation that it has become.
The interstate highway system, and other super-highways, will continue to make a positive
contribution to the nation's economy and quality of life. This requires that investments be made to
preserve and expand the mobility that has helped to make Americans the world's most prosperous
people, America the world's premier economic power, and provided an international model for
expanding freedom of mobility for virtually everyone. In important dimensions, the future of the
nation depends upon the interstate highway system.
The American Highway Users Alliance
The American Highway Users Alliance traces its roots to 1932, when it was chartered by General Motors President Alfred Sloan to "get the farmers out of the mud." The Highway Users (knows as the Highway Users Federation from 1970 to 1995) serves the long-term interests of business and industry in transportation. Many industries are dependent on highways to be successful, including automotive, travel and shipping. Almost 80 percent of all U.S. Expenditures for passenger and freight transportation --- $800 billion annually --- are highway related. Highway passengers spend over $350 billion per year on their travel --- about 12 percent of the nation's GDP. And freight movement over highways counts for 80 percent of all shipping.
The Highway Users works for better, safer highway transportation through public policy analysis, public information and education, and legislative and regulatory advocacy. It believes that good highways are essential to a strong economy and the costs of improving highway transportation should be borne by the users.
Led by President William D. Fay, the Highway Users has over 500 individual and 100 corporate/association members and affiliates in 18 states.
The Authors
Wendell Cox and Jean Love are public policy consultants with the Wendell Cox Consultancy.
Both have worked on projects in the United States, Canada, Australia, Africa, Europe, and New
Zealand. They have recently established an Internet public policy journal, The Public Purpose.
Mr. Cox was appointed to three terms (1977-85) on the Los Angeles County Transportation
Commission by Mayor Tom Bradley and has chaired national committees on energy conservation
and urban transit planning. He also serves on the steering committee of the bi-ennial International
Conference on Competition and Ownership in Surface Passenger Transport. He holds an MBA
from Pepperdine University in Los Angeles.
Ms. Love has performed research in a variety of fields, and edited three editions of a
comprehensive public policy manual (Legislative Issue Briefs). She organized the Third
International Conference on Competition and Ownership in Surface Passenger Transport, held in
Toronto in 1993. She earned a Masters degree from Southern Illinois University in Edwardsville.
They are co-authors of many books and papers, including Moving America Competitively, The
Livable American City and People, Markets, and Government: A State Legislator's Guide to
Economics. Their practice is based in the St. Louis area.
APPENDICES