A new public health-care option — smarter transportation planning

AS we watch the political drama unfold over a national health-care bill, it has become clear that we've missed the train on one of the key aspects of such needed reform: health.

While the proposals address important aspects of affordability and coverage, the discussion has focused on risk and treatment. This is not surprising, given the condition we're in. We have never been heavier or more sedentary — and late-adulthood diseases once rarely seen in young people, like diabetes, are now routinely affecting young children. But if the discouraging statistics do anything, they should prompt us to shift our current focus on reacting to poor health to taking action to achieve good health.

How we best do this within the scope of health-care reform requires rigorous policy, psychology and marketing synergies. However, we also need to step outside that frame to realize the prescription we need centers on the nexus of land-use and transportation planning. We need a new kind of public option — one that allows us to live the healthy lifestyles we aspire to by designing our region with health in mind. We all want to live, work and play in safe places with easy access to transportation options, parks and open spaces and the markets, schools and amenities we all use.

We are, for now, literally stuck in traffic. A prominent study in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine demonstrates that the more time we spend in our cars, the more we weigh. And the average Puget Sound resident spends nearly one 40-hour workweek a year simply stuck in traffic — so that's a lot of weight.

Some call for funding more lanes of highway; while such investments may temporarily ease congestion, they end up exacerbating the problem by driving people toward more and longer car trips and eventually back to even greater congestion — not to mention the increase in crash rates and incidence of disease caused by toxic air pollutants.

As the Puget Sound Regional Council considers our region's 30-year transportation plan — a draft was released last week for comment — it's time to ask the real pertinent questions. In planning for our region, can we reconcile economic growth with positive health outcomes for all residents? Is such a plan economically viable to implement? And will the public support it?

Research shows that the answer to all three questions is a resounding yes.

Luckily for us, there are other bonuses. Choosing health means also choosing fiscal responsibility and putting money back into each of our pockets. We spend far fewer public dollars on infrastructure if we're planning for transportation choices like walking, bicycling and transit. We also reduce the related health costs from air pollution, sedentary lifestyles and traffic-related injuries and fatalities. All the while, we build moderate physical activity into our daily lives and increase safety for all residents. And well-designed places bring people together, building strong, vibrant and diverse communities.

So while the U.S. House and the Senate struggle to reconcile a health-care bill for President Obama's signature, there's some reconciling to be done here at home to ensure we do not miss another opportunity to catch the train for our region's 30-year vision.

The PSRC's draft vision should try harder to adequately reconcile our region's transportation needs with our health needs — like more bicycle, pedestrian and transit investment and health-based standards for prioritizing funding. Look for yourself at www.psrc.org and help expand this vision by adding your comments on the transportation plan.

Let's adopt a regional plan that's visionary in building compact, well-connected and vibrant communities with transportation options.

Chuck Ayers is the executive director of the Cascade Bicycle Club. James Hereford is the executive vice president, Group Practice Division, at Group Health Cooperative. Anne Vernez Moudon is a professor in the College of Built Environments at the University of Washington.