Department of Labor and Related Agencies

Rebuttal of Department of Transportation
by: Diana Furchgott-Roth

Rebuttal to Project 2025: Department of Transportation by Diana Furchtgott-Roth

Diana Furchtgott-Roth’s Project 2025 vision for the Department of Transportation (DOT) advocates for widespread deregulation and privatization of transportation infrastructure, framed as a way to promote efficiency, reduce costs, and spur economic growth. However, her proposals prioritize corporate profits and short-term gains at the expense of public safety, environmental sustainability, and equitable access to transportation. By weakening federal oversight and reducing investments in critical infrastructure, Furchtgott-Roth’s vision threatens to undermine the long-term viability of the nation’s transportation system and leave vulnerable communities further behind.

Her approach also disregards the critical role that transportation policy plays in addressing climate change, reducing pollution, and promoting social equity. Transportation is one of the largest sources of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., and the DOT has a crucial role to play in advancing clean energy solutions, reducing emissions, and ensuring that transportation infrastructure benefits all Americans, not just the wealthy or corporate interests. Furchtgott-Roth’s vision fails to prioritize these objectives and risks exacerbating existing inequalities in the transportation system.

Deregulation: Undermining Public Safety and Accountability

A central tenet of Furchtgott-Roth’s vision is deregulation, which she argues would reduce costs and foster innovation in the transportation sector. However, deregulation poses significant risks to public safety and accountability. Transportation infrastructure, including roads, bridges, railways, and airports, is critical to the safety and well-being of millions of Americans. Strong federal regulations ensure that transportation systems are built, maintained, and operated to high safety standards, preventing accidents, reducing fatalities, and protecting public health.

Furchtgott-Roth’s call for deregulation would weaken safety standards for vehicles, highways, aviation, and public transit systems. For instance, reducing oversight of vehicle safety regulations could lead to more accidents, injuries, and fatalities on the nation’s roads. Similarly, cutting back on federal regulations for the airline industry would reduce oversight of airline safety practices, increasing the risk of accidents in an industry where public safety is paramount.

One of the most alarming aspects of Furchtgott-Roth’s deregulation agenda is its potential impact on rail safety. The U.S. has already experienced significant rail disasters, such as the 2013 Lac-Mégantic derailment in Canada and the 2015 Amtrak derailment in Philadelphia, both of which highlight the critical importance of maintaining stringent safety standards. Reducing federal oversight of rail safety, including regulations that govern track maintenance, operator fatigue, and hazardous material transportation, would increase the risk of catastrophic accidents. This could disproportionately impact communities located near rail lines, many of which are lower-income or communities of color that already face elevated environmental and health risks.

In addition to undermining safety, Furchtgott-Roth’s push for deregulation would reduce accountability for transportation companies. Federal regulations help ensure that corporations operate responsibly, protect workers, and prioritize public safety. Without adequate oversight, private transportation companies may cut corners on maintenance, safety protocols, and worker protections, all in the name of boosting profits. This shift would place the public at greater risk while insulating corporations from accountability when safety standards are compromised.

Privatization: Prioritizing Profits Over Public Good

Another key element of Furchtgott-Roth’s vision is the privatization of transportation infrastructure, which she argues would improve efficiency and reduce the need for government spending. However, privatization often leads to the prioritization of profits over the public good, with negative consequences for infrastructure quality, access, and equity.

Privatizing public infrastructure—such as highways, toll roads, bridges, and airports—would likely result in higher costs for users, particularly in the form of tolls and fees. This could disproportionately harm low-income individuals and communities who rely on affordable transportation options for commuting, accessing healthcare, and participating in the economy. Public infrastructure is intended to serve all Americans, but privatization risks turning essential transportation networks into profit-generating ventures that benefit wealthy corporations at the expense of working families.

For example, toll roads that are operated by private companies often charge high fees, making them less accessible to lower-income individuals who may already struggle with the rising costs of living. Privatization can also lead to underinvestment in rural areas or less profitable regions, as private companies focus on more lucrative markets. This could exacerbate existing disparities in transportation access, leaving rural, low-income, and minority communities with inadequate infrastructure, further isolating them from economic opportunities and essential services.

Moreover, Furchtgott-Roth’s emphasis on privatization ignores the vital role of public investment in infrastructure. Publicly funded transportation projects, such as highways, mass transit systems, and airports, are critical to economic growth, job creation, and improving quality of life. Public investments help create transportation networks that are accessible to everyone, not just those who can afford to pay for privatized services. Privatizing these systems risks leaving behind communities that rely on affordable and equitable access to transportation.

Failure to Address Climate Change and Environmental Sustainability

One of the most glaring omissions in Furchtgott-Roth’s vision for the Department of Transportation is her failure to adequately address climate change and the environmental impacts of transportation. Transportation accounts for nearly 30% of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, making it the largest contributor to climate change. Reducing emissions from the transportation sector is critical to meeting national and global climate goals and avoiding the worst impacts of climate change.

Rather than prioritizing clean energy solutions, sustainable infrastructure, and the reduction of transportation emissions, Furchtgott-Roth’s Project 2025 vision emphasizes deregulation and the expansion of fossil fuel-based transportation options. This approach is a step backward at a time when urgent action is needed to transition to cleaner, more sustainable modes of transportation.

Furchtgott-Roth’s failure to promote investment in public transit is particularly concerning. Public transit systems, such as buses, subways, and trains, offer an environmentally friendly alternative to single-occupancy vehicle use, helping to reduce traffic congestion, lower emissions, and improve air quality. However, Furchtgott-Roth’s vision focuses on expanding highway infrastructure and reducing investments in public transit, which would lead to more cars on the road, increased pollution, and greater reliance on fossil fuels.

In contrast, the Department of Transportation should be investing in sustainable transportation solutions that reduce emissions, promote renewable energy, and mitigate the environmental impacts of transportation. Expanding electric vehicle infrastructure, increasing investments in public transit, and supporting clean energy technologies are critical steps toward building a transportation system that is resilient, sustainable, and equitable.

Neglecting Transportation Equity

Furchtgott-Roth’s vision also neglects the issue of transportation equity—ensuring that all Americans, regardless of income, race, or geographic location, have access to reliable, affordable, and safe transportation options. Transportation is a critical determinant of economic mobility, connecting people to jobs, education, healthcare, and other essential services. However, inequities in the transportation system disproportionately affect low-income individuals, people of color, and rural communities, who often face barriers to accessing reliable and affordable transportation.

By prioritizing deregulation and privatization, Furchtgott-Roth’s vision would likely exacerbate these existing inequities. Privatization, in particular, could reduce access to affordable transportation for low-income and minority communities, who may already struggle to afford the rising costs of transportation. Additionally, her focus on highway expansion and reduced investments in public transit would disproportionately harm urban residents and people of color, who are more likely to rely on public transportation to meet their daily needs.

Transportation equity requires public investment in infrastructure that serves all communities, including those that are historically underserved. This includes expanding and improving public transit systems, building safe and accessible pedestrian and bike infrastructure, and ensuring that transportation projects consider the needs of low-income and minority populations. Furchtgott-Roth’s vision, which focuses on privatization and market-driven solutions, risks leaving behind the very communities that most need access to affordable and reliable transportation.

Conclusion: A Vision That Sacrifices Public Good for Private Profit

Diana Furchtgott-Roth’s Project 2025 vision for the Department of Transportation prioritizes deregulation and privatization, placing corporate profits above public safety, environmental sustainability, and transportation equity. By reducing federal oversight, weakening safety regulations, and promoting the privatization of public infrastructure, her proposals would undermine the long-term viability of the nation’s transportation system and leave vulnerable communities further behind.

Furchtgott-Roth’s failure to address the critical issues of climate change and transportation equity is particularly troubling. At a time when the U.S. should be investing in sustainable transportation solutions, reducing emissions, and ensuring that all Americans have access to reliable and affordable transportation, her vision takes the country in the opposite direction—toward more pollution, greater inequality, and a transportation system that prioritizes profits over people.

Rather than pursuing a deregulation agenda that sacrifices public safety and accountability, the Department of Transportation should be focused on building a transportation system that is safe, sustainable, and equitable. This requires public investment in clean energy, public transit, and infrastructure projects that serve all Americans, not just the wealthiest or most profitable sectors of society. Furchtgott-Roth’s vision is out of step with the challenges of the 21st century and should be rejected in favor of policies that prioritize the public good over private profit.