America Fast Forward

America Fast Forward
Name	America Fast Forward
Formation	2010s
Type	Public-private initiative
Headquarters	Washington, D.C.
Region served	United States
Leader title	Executive Director

America Fast Forward

America Fast Forward is a public-private initiative focused on accelerating infrastructure, transportation, and workforce projects across the United States. The initiative engages federal, state, and local actors as well as private investors to streamline project delivery, promote technological adoption, and mobilize capital for large-scale construction and modernization efforts. Operating at the intersection of policy, finance, and implementation, it seeks to coordinate programs, pilot innovations, and influence legislative and regulatory pathways to shorten timelines for major projects.

Overview

America Fast Forward positions itself as a catalyst for accelerating major infrastructure projects by convening stakeholders from the executive branch, congressional committees, municipal authorities, and multinational firms. It frames objectives around project delivery, permitting reform, and public-private investment models, engaging entities such as the United States Department of Transportation, the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the Federal Highway Administration, and the Federal Transit Administration. The initiative interacts with state transportation agencies, metropolitan planning organizations like the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (New York), and regional bodies such as the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments. It also links to major corporations and institutions including Bechtel Corporation, Siemens, General Electric, Fluor Corporation, and financial institutions like the World Bank and the Federal Reserve through advisory forums and pilot programs.

History and Development

America Fast Forward emerged in the aftermath of high-profile infrastructure debates and legislative efforts tied to landmark measures such as the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 and later infrastructure bills debated in the 116th United States Congress and 117th United States Congress. Early allies included advocacy coalitions that had formed around Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act debates and stakeholders from the National Association of Counties, United States Conference of Mayors, and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. The initiative evolved through partnerships with think tanks and research centers including the Brookings Institution, Urban Institute, and RAND Corporation, and coordinated pilot efforts alongside universities like Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of California, Berkeley, and Georgia Institute of Technology to test permitting and project delivery reforms. High-profile milestones included roundtables with members of the United States Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works and the United States House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.

Programs and Initiatives

Programmatic efforts have ranged from expedited permitting pilots tied to specific corridors and transit projects to technical assistance offerings for municipal bond structuring and public-private partnership design. Signature initiatives referenced best practices from projects such as the Big Dig, the Central Artery/Tunnel Project, and transit investments like the Washington Metro expansions, while adopting procurement models used by Crossrail and the California High-Speed Rail Authority. Workforce and training initiatives partnered with labor organizations including the AFL–CIO and training centers in collaboration with Community College Consortium networks and apprenticeship programs tied to the Department of Labor. Technology pilots drew on standards and vendors associated with Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers technical committees and firms like Autodesk and Oracle Corporation. Financing pilots explored instruments similar to those used by the Export-Import Bank of the United States and models seen in projects backed by the European Investment Bank.

Funding and Partnerships

Funding streams have combined federal appropriations, state match funds, municipal bonds, private equity, and philanthropic grants, engaging entities such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Ford Foundation for research grants and demonstration projects. Partnerships included major corporate sponsors, infrastructure contractors, and financial intermediaries like Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, and Bank of America. Collaboration extended to regulatory agencies including the Environmental Protection Agency on environmental permitting and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for cultural resource coordination. International knowledge exchange involved agencies such as Transport for London and multilateral institutions like the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank for comparative studies.

Impact and Criticism

Proponents cite accelerated completion times, reduced permitting backlogs, and increased private investment as measurable outcomes, with cited case examples drawing from expedited corridor projects similar in scope to improvements under the Interstate Highway System era and major urban transit upgrades comparable to the Second Avenue Subway. Critics, including advocacy groups from environmental organizations like Sierra Club and preservationists linked to National Trust for Historic Preservation, argue that expedited processes risk weakening environmental review and public input, pointing to controversies observed in projects like Keystone Pipeline debates and disputes over eminent domain in cases reminiscent of Kelo v. City of New London. Labor unions and community groups have also raised concerns about labor standards, wage enforcement, and equitable distribution of benefits, invoking debates seen in discussions around the Davis–Bacon Act and transit equity litigation in cities such as Los Angeles and Chicago.

Governance and Administration

Governance structures have typically involved an executive secretariat, advisory boards composed of transportation chiefs and private-sector executives, and working groups aligned with federal agency liaisons. The initiative coordinated with oversight entities such as the Government Accountability Office and engaged legal counsel experienced in statutory reform associated with the National Environmental Policy Act and permitting statutes administered by the Council on Environmental Quality. Administrative functions relied on program management offices modeled after those within large infrastructure programs like Tennessee Valley Authority and major federal programs overseen by the Office of Management and Budget.

Category:United States infrastructure