Over the next two years, Chicago plans to introduce a pilothigh-speed bus program, complete with dedicated lanes and permanentboarding kiosks, as well as a downtown congestion pricing plan forthose who still drive – all paid for with a $153 million federal grantthe city received.

It`s the sort of federal incentive that someurban experts would like to see more of: designed to help spurlarge-scale, creative thinking about a metropolitan area`sinfrastructure or economic development without dictating the form itshould take.

Craftinga new federal role for metropolitan America – one that recognizes theimportance not just of cities but entire metropolitan areas, togetherwith the idiosyncrasies and differing strengths of each region – is atthe heart of a major report the Brookings Institution released Thursdayat a summit of mayors, county officials, and business and civic leadersin Washington.

Ultimately, its goal is to revolutionize the way the US views its metropolises.

"Ifyou`re going to get serious about the economy, then you`ve got to getspecific about how you`re going to leverage metropolitan economies,"says Bruce Katz, director of the metropolitan policy program atBrookings.

Even though America`s 100 largest citiesgenerate two-thirds of US jobs and three-quarters of domestic economicoutput, much of the policy coming from Washington – and from thepresidential candidates – is still rooted in a Jeffersonian ideal ofhamlets and small towns, Mr. Katz says.

"There`s a lag between the political class recognizing what our major firms already know: that the geographic economy has been radically altered by globalization," he says.

One key problem: While metro areas function practically as an economic unit, politically they`re divided into hundreds of smaller governments, agencies, and municipalities, often viewing themselves as in competition.

It`snot helped by a federal grantmaking structure in which, for instance,all public housing agencies are local, not regional, and there`s noincentive for collaboration among agencies, or among connected areaslike housing, transit, and economic development.

"Air quality and water quality and marketplacesand employment treat the region as an integrated whole, and yet thepolitical reality is that there are 1,300 units of local government inmetropolitan Chicago," says Frank Beal, executive director ofMetropolis 2020, a civic organization created to promote big-picture,regional solutions for the metro area. "The governance structure isn`tadapted to the reality of what`s here."

Still, Chicago, more than many areas, is alreadytaking some steps toward cohesion. A Metropolitan Mayors Caucus meetsregularly to discuss issues that affect both the city and suburbs. Theregion has consolidated some of its transit and planning organizationsand it`s starting to demand more coordination among the city transitsystem, the commuter rail system, and the suburban bus system.

But Mr. Beal says much more could be done, andhe agrees that there`s a role for the federal government in helping tochange the way metro areas are viewed – offering a grant premium toregions that coordinate their local housing authorities, for instance,or finding other incentives for collaboration.

Katz at Brookings sees a few existing examplesas prime prototypes of how the federal government could be a positiveforce in metro regions. He cites the Labor Department`s "Wired"program, for instance, which offers regions money to do skills trainingand other development around a growing economic activity. Or the USDepartment of Transportation`s grants for anticongestion programs,which we
www.csmonitor.com/2008/0613/p03s01-usgn.html