Department of Transportation in the U.S - Essay Example

Department of Transportation in the U.S 1st, January, Department of Transportation in the U.S Introduction The US has avast transport system that has modern transport infrastructures that include roads, railways, and ports. Road transport accounts for 75% of goods and passengers that are transported across United States. The Department of Transportation (DOT) was established in 1966 under a Congress Act to oversee issues related to public and private transport in the country. DOT offices are located in New Jersey Ave, SE Washington District Of Columbia (DOT, 2012). This paper investigates the department of transportation on issues related to regulations and policy development. The paper also analyzes challenges and opportunities that define DOT operations. Purpose of the Agency The agency seeks to promote safety, efficiency, and convenience in transportation, in order to meet the interests of the Americans. Moreover, the agency promotes implementation of policies that concerns transport infrastructures and safety. The agency’s establishment was based on an economic agenda that sought to revitalize the US economy. According to Pucher, & Lewis (2000), the agency is an instrumental force in restructuring other economic factors such as land planning, energy conservation, utilization of scarce resources and urban planning. The agency also maintains equality in distribution of national resources, which characterize a free economy. In addition, DOT helps to create equal opportunity for all Americans through efficient transport system. The safety aspect enlisted in the agencies agenda also promotes economic prosperity. This is because the agency’s core agenda is to eliminate inconveniences associated with transport that often leads to losses (Bookman, 2010). According to Bookman (2010), the agency is consumer oriented. This is because the agency sought to promote the interests of ordinary Americans by promoting free flow of consumer goods. Evidently, the agency also has key interest energy and environmental conservation. The aim of the agency was to promote economic development through the creation of efficient transport infrastructures. These agendas are bound to misuse by businesses and individuals who are concerned with profits and gains. This created the need for regulations, which is the basis of the agency’s operations. Indeed, the private sector views the agency as arm of the government established to oversees or promote transport regulations. DOT has various regulation options that were established to impose sanity in the transport sector. Regulation options promoted by the agency include driver regulations, vehicle regulations, company regulations, and alcohol and drug regulations (Bookman, 2010). Driver’s regulations ensure that drivers and the staff driving on American roads meet technical requirements. The regulations concerns licensing of drivers based on their qualification. The regulations also stipulate conditions under which a driver’s license may be revoked. On the other hand, vehicles regulatory options stipulates standard of vehicles used on American roads. Moreover, the regulations coincide with environmental conservation policies stipulated in DOT’s agenda. The alcohol and drug regulation outlines substance that should not be used by drivers. Alcohol and drug regulations promote compliance to drugs and substance regulations among drivers. The choice of these regulations is subject to review and amendment by the senate. DOT reviews the regulations to ensure that they meet the economic and social needs of the country. DOT’s executive board seems to have selected the most efficient regulations. This is because the regulations target road users and vehicles used American roads. Such regulations avoid redundancy and ensure accountability among road users. The regulations also utilize available resources in the sense that they consider drivers and vehicles as the basis for regulations policies. Although these regulations have been successful in maintaining sanity in our roads, they are subject to federal agencies. This is because the agency depends on the federal for policy development and prosecution of offenders. Thus, the agency cannot approve policies without consulting the federal government. This is of particular concern since the department cannot develop regulations in isolation. Principal Statutes The department develops legislations on behalf of the ministry of Roads, public transport and the Ports authority (Bookman, 2010). Each state has its own set of statutes and regulations that are meant to regulate transport and transport related activities in the state. Thus, the state’s authority acts as the custodian of the principal statutes of DOT. In particular, each state emphasizes on statues that define its economic activities and transport needs. In most cases, the statutes are designed to cater for the economic needs of each state. States that rely on tourism as their main source of revenue such as Victoria have their regulations inclined towards safety and development of the tourism industry. Moreover, the local authorities are also custodians of DOT statutes. The DOT statutes authorize various government agencies that are involved or concerned in the transport sector. In particular, the agency develops policies and legislations for other related agencies such as the ministry of transport, ministry of roads and the ports authority. The department of transport aims at creating a sustainable transport system through development of efficient and safe transport systems. However, the economic agenda surpasses alternative objectives of the department, thus most of the statutes were developed with the aims of enhancing economic status of each of these administrative units. Moreover, the statutes authorize each arm of the government or local authority in response to the country’s economic needs. The statutes also promote environmental conservation and economical use of resources. Statutes concerned with environmental conservation and economical use of resources are more recent than others are. Moreover, these statutes characterize the modern economy, which is highly dependent on conservation and effective use of resources. Principal Regulations The federal motor carrier safety administration (FMCSA) is the chief custodian of the of DOT legislations. FMCSA was established in 1999 to enhance motor carrier safety through the implementation of Motor Carrier Act of 1999. The body was established to enhance safety in public transport by ensuring that commercial motor vehicle adhere to transport regulations and polices laid down by the federal government. The administration works with federal, states, and local authorities to enforce safety regulations developed for commercial motor vehicles and drivers. The agency is not discriminative in its service delivery, but rather it concentrates its activities on the commercial sector due to the nature of involved risks. DOT has both legislative and interpretive legislations. Legislative regulations are formulated by administrative agencies in collaboration with legal experts while interpretative regulations are developed to interpret or reinforce existing laws (Pucher, & Lewis 2000). Indeed the agency has more interpretive than legislative regulations. This is because the transport sector adopted inherent laws established in the country’s constitution. More over most of these regulations are meant to enforce existing laws that have either been developed by the federal or local governments. Interpretative laws neither create new laws nor modify existing laws but they are meant to clarify or explain existing regulations and statutes (Pucher, & Lewis 2000). Moreover, interpretive regulations create enforceable rights by reminding concerned parties about their civil liberties. This is of particular interest in the transport, which has eroded policies and rights. Interpretive policies create equity on legal matters. Moreover, the regulations offer guidance to the administrative agencies on matters related to duty performance. For example, a typical interpretive regulation on maximum speed will stipulate conditions under which a vehicle may be considered to be over speeding. In particular, the regulation would state the maximum speed for different vehicles such as school buses and commercial vehicles. Consequently, these regulations can indicate speed limits that drivers are expected to observe in certain locations (Bookman, 2010). For instance, the regulation may have different speed allocations for highways, residential and urban centers. In either situation, the regulations are meant to avoid misinterpretations of laws concerning transport by eliminating ambiguity. Alternatively, interpretive regulations eliminate confusions or disagreements over interpretations of certain statutes or laws. This is of particular interest in enhancing adoption of technical laws and statutes. This is significant in the process of law enhancement since the public is not conversant with technical terminology applied in the development of these statutes. For example, regulations indicating the maximum weights might be confusing to truck drivers and traffic police. In this case, interpretive regulations provide guidelines concerning type of vehicles and the appropriate load. Transportation of harmful materials is also a significant aspect of the regulations and policies. Definition of harmful materials might also be ambiguous. The FMCSA recognizes certificates issued by the Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) concerning transportation of harmful substances. FMCSA also collaborates with other government agencies to interpret regulations concerning harmful substances transported through American roads. Thus, congressional guidance is meant to provide guidance in interpretations and implementation of regulations (Bookman, 2010). Congressional guidance is also instrumental in enhancing equity among all road users. This is because the guidance offers equity in the implementation of transport related laws. DOT Leadership Management of the agency is vital in the implementations of its objectives and social responsibilities. DOT has a well-developed management structure that constitutes top officials who supervise or oversee operation of nearly 60,000 employees (DOT, 2012). The agency has a delegate system of administration, which is based on civic administration boundaries. In particular, each state and local authority has its form of operation that depends on the need of the people. The 60,000 employees are assigned duties in different administration bureaus and in the office of the secretary of transportation. Each of these bureaus has its own management and organization structure that defines DOT leadership. The Secretary Of Transportation heads the US department of transportation. Transportation secretary is the chief advisor to the government/ president on matters related to federal transportation. The deputy secretary who oversees drafting of transportation policies assists the secretary. The office of the secretary oversees development of key transportation policies that are meant to enhance sustainability of the transport sector. The secretary is also expected to oversee negotiation with key stakeholders in the transport sector. The president through a close consultation with the House of Representatives nominates the secretary. Ray LaHood is the current secretary of transportation department having received his nomination in January 2009. OST secretary oversees appointments in subsidiary arms of the agency which include; Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Maritime Administration (MARAD), Office of Inspector General (OIG), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (SLSDC), Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) (DOT, 2012). The president has authority to appoint and fire principal executives in the agency. However, such decisions are made in consultation with the members of the House of Representatives. The agency is faced with several issues that concerns implementation of transport and safety regulations. Firstly, the agency is faced with the issue of traffic congestion, which has become key issue in the 21st century. Traffic congestion is a major problem particularly in urban areas due to existence of increased activities. Traffic congestion has promoted laxity in the implementation of certain policies that concerns commercial transport. More over traffic congestion has led to a compromise in implementation of key policies developed by the agency. For instance, the agency’s main policies are concerned with efficiency and economic use of resources particularly fuel. Traffic congestion works against the implementation of such policies since it deters efficiency in the transport sector. Strategies to ease traffic congestion are key research issues for the agency. The agency develops and enforces policies in the transport sector. However, the agency does not have the necessary infrastructure to ensure that the policies are adhered. For instance, the agency does not have law enforcers to arrest and prosecute offenders. Moreover, the agency does not have the mandate to pass bill or proposals into laws. In the later case, the agency depends on the senate for enactment of its policies. This implies that the agency lacks sufficient power to conducts its operations. In addition, the agency is dependent on the free will of the people on certain issues particularly those related to peoples safety. For instance, the agency or its policies cannot force people to use safety belts while driving. Moreover, the agency is not capable of identifying all drunk drivers on our roads. This indicates that the agency is highly dependent on people’s free will. Lastly the agency has insufficient budgetary allocation in relation to other related agencies or those that have equivalent mandate. For instance, the agency requested $74 billion for the fiscal year 2013. These funds cover a six-year comprehensive plan aimed at modernizing the US transport system. However, the agency might not receive the total amount as stipulated in the proposal. Moreover, agency might encounter financial difficulties while implementing the plan considering the length of the project. These issues are inherent with the agency and might be solved through effective research and governance. References Bookman, J. (2010). Opinion: Toll roads, taxes and why voters distrust leaders. Atlanta, Georgia: Atlanta Journal-Constitution, 3(1) 122. DOT, (2012). Our Administrations. Department of transportation. Retrieved January 1, 2012 from http://www.dot.gov/administrations DOT, (2012). Regulations. Department of transportation. Retrieved January 1, 2012 from http://www.dot.gov/regulations Pucher, J., & Lewis, D. (2000). Making Walking and Cycling Safer: Lessons from Europe (PDF). Transportation Quarterly. Transportation Alternatives. Read More