National Association of Railroad Passengers: www.narprail.org

Hotline #605

Hotline #605
May 21, 2009


Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood yesterday became the first Obama cabinet member to address the National Press Club.  He took George Will to task for criticizing the Administration’s “livable communities” initiative.  Asked how he would respond to conservative claims that the initiative is interfering in people’s lives, he responded, to laughter, “about everything we do around here is interfering in people’s lives.”  LaHood was asked about potential impact of HSR on airlines and whether it would be considered in choosing corridors.  He said, “It’ll take us a couple of decades to get where we want to be on high speed rail. I don’t think creating competition is going to be a problem for the airlines.”  The talk, which was mostly question-and-answer with LaHood often giving businesslike answers shorter than the questions, was broadcast by C-Span and may be rebroadcast this weekend.


While legislators are back in their districts, tell them you want passenger train and transit revenue provisions in any climate change bill (see below) and a rail provision in the surface transportation reauthorization that the House Transportation and Commerce Committee is working on.


Texas state legislators made a decisive move May 19 towards fixing Fort Worth’s notoriously congested Tower 55 rail intersection, endorsing a transfer of $182 million into the currently-empty fund to relocate and improve rail lines.

This move by House-Senate budget conferees, spearheaded by the Tarrant County delegation (includes Fort Worth) would revitalize this important program, created in a 2005 constitutional amendment, with two $91 million injections over the next two years.

This investment comes at a particularly important time, with BNSF and Union Pacific currently working with Texas DOT to secure $70 million in federal funds to construct a third, north-south rail line at Tower 55.  The allocation contains $30 million as an insurance policy if the federal funds fall through.

“Tower 55 is like the central nervous system of a body,” Rep. Lon Burnam (D-Fort Worth), co-chairman of the Tarrant County delegation, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.  “It’s not functioning properly and this money is needed for it.”

The funds are contingent on passage of the state spending plan for 2010-11; Senate and House conferees on the budget need to finish working out their differences after which the bill will go to Governor Rick Perry for his approval.


The House Energy & Commerce Committee late yesterday voted 33-25 for H.R. 2454, the 946-page American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, also known as the Waxman/Markey bill, after Chairman Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA), who chairs the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment.  Rep. Mary Bono Mack (R-CA) was the sole Republican yes vote, while four Democrats voted no, one indication of the tough road ahead for the bill. 

AP said the bill “requires factories, refineries and power plants to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and six other greenhouse gases by roughly 80% by mid-century and hasten the nation’s energy shift away from fossil fuels by putting a price on carbon dioxide releases.”

Unfortunately, transportation in general and public transportation and trains in particular are ignored even though they should play a critical role in any successful effort to limit carbon emissions and thus should be beneficiaries of some of the bill’s revenues.  No House member played the transportation role that Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) did in last year’s Warner-Lieberman bill. 

Moreover, the bill has a “cash for clunkers” provision which, though better than its European counterparts, is counterproductive in encouraging premature scrapping of automobiles, and may disproportionately hurt lower income people by driving up costs of used cars and their parts.

Washington Post business columnist Steven Pearlstein wrote today, “Now that we know what a climate-change bill looks like when it is jury-rigged to accommodate all the special interests, maybe American will be willing to reconsider one of the cleaner, simpler approaches – a carbon tax with all the revenue rebated to households, for example, or a cap-and-trade system that generates enough revenue to erase the national debt, or even a tough new regulatory regime requiring businesses to produce more fuel-efficient cars, buildings and appliances.” 

Pearlstein says that Waxman/Markey uses bits of “all three approaches.  The result is an unwieldy compromise with lots of belt-and-suspenders redundancy…It is so broad in its reach and complex in its details that it would be difficult to implement even in Sweden, let alone in a diverse and contentious country like the United States.”


The President released his national fuel efficiency policy this Tuesday.  The standards, which cover car model years 2012-2016, will require a 35.5 miles per gallon standard by 2016—going further than the current 35 mpg by 2020 CAFE law passed by Congress.  It will also provide a unified regulatory standard which automakers have sought, eliminating the “threat” of a separate California standard. 

“In the past, an agreement such as this would have been considered impossible,” said President Obama in a prepared statement.  “…It represents not only a change in policy in Washington, but the harbinger of a change in the way business is done in Washington. As a result of this agreement, we will save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold in the next five years.”

The move was applauded by car makers, workers, and environmental groups.  But some have suggested that this move could potentially encourage the manufacture of more cars—in a market where there is already a glut—and ultimately encourage more driving. 

The Financial Times’ May 20 Lex column laments America’s failure to raise “the lowest gasoline taxes in the developed world,” and cites a “study at Stanford University [which] calculates that direct taxes can achieve an equivalent reduction [in miles driven] to CAFÉ at one-sixth the cost…Higher CAFÉ standards could add $1,300 to the cost of a vehicle, incentivizing consumers to keep older, inefficient ones.  By contrast, raising pump prices would have an immediate impact on miles driven and make gas guzzlers unattractive.  But Washington is run by politicians, not economists.”

[For more analysis, see the NARP Blog]


The Illinois Legislature approved $300 million for the Chicago Region Environmental and Transportation Efficiency (CREATE) Program as part of a $28 billion State Capital Bill on Thursday.  CREATE involves major improvements to the Chicago area railroad network that would benefit passenger and freight trains as well as motorists.  The bill is expected to be held up by Governor Pat Quinn until the legislature passes a patch for the $11 billion gap in the state’s operating budget.  State Rep. Frank Mautino told the LaSalle, Illinois, NewsTribune it would be the state’s first capital investment bill in 10 years.

The funds will be paid out over the five to six-year life of the bill, and is funded by increased fees for car and license registrations, legalizing and taxing video gambling, increasing the tax on beer, wine and liquor, and other sources.

Details of the budget remain uncertain; the Illinois legislature generally doesn’t provide for publication of major legislation as it is being worked on.  However, some sources have reported that there will be $3.5 billion in discretionary funds for road and transit projects, and $1.8 billion for Chicago-area mass transit projects.


The House of Representatives yesterday passed a reauthorization for the Federal Aviation Administration to the tune of just over $50 billion through 2012 (the original cost was $70 billion, but an amendment cut out $20 billion in funding intended for fiscal year 2009 which has been superseded).

The bill passed 277-136, and was criticized by a block of Republicans, for three provisions in particular, including a requirement for FAA inspection of certain overseas aircraft repair facilities, and a provision which, unless renewed, would eliminate anti-trust exemptions for certain airline partnerships.  Critics argued this would cost American airline workers jobs in an industry that is already suffering.  Democrats who supported the bill said the scenarios presented were extremely unlikely.

Another point of contention was the provision that would send the FAA and air-traffic controllers back to the bargaining table.  The previous Administration clashed with the controllers’ union, and conflicts have yet to be resolved.  Rep. John Mica (R-FL) said the Obama Administration has already appointed a task force to resolve these issues, but Transportation & Infrastructure Chairman James Oberstar (D-MN) argued this would ensure that a solution was reached.

Service to the John Murtha Johnstown-Cambria Airport will continue to enjoy a subsidy under the Essential Air Services program despite Republican efforts to end the service.  EAS supports airline service to rural areas which would otherwise not be profitable to operate.  Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) has used his considerable clout as Chairman of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee to direct $150 million to the airport in his district, which runs six flights a day, all to the District of Columbia.

“Should a practically empty airport that has all of six flights per day receive millions in federal funds just to stay open?” asked John Campbell (R-CA) from the floor.

“If by legislative fiat you can say no to funding this community, no to the people in rural America who want access to greater America, then we’re all at risk. This is wrong, this is mean-spirited, vote it down,” Oberstar responded.

The Senate yesterday confirmed the nomination of J. Randolph Babbitt to head the FAA.  Babbitt is a former president and chief executive officer of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA).  It is hoped that appointing a former union member will ease tensions that escalated during the Bush Administration between the FAA and the National Air Traffic Controller’s Association.


In the face of a continued drop in ridership on the Northeast Corridor, Amtrak will extend discounts for its high-speed Acela line, and further discount fares on coach service, reports the Washington Business Journal.

The line had been seeing record ridership numbers as recently as this fall, but the collapse of the economy—and the resulting crash in oil prices—has seen fewer people and businesses needing to travel.  There has 2.3% drop in ridership nationwide in April, compared with the same time last year.

Amtrak will cut coach fares on the Boston-New York-Washington Regionals route by 25% starting June 2, while extending the current lower Acela fares.  Washington-New York in coach class will be as low as $49.  Discounts are good until September 3, and will also apply on the Newport News line, Keystone trains between New York and Philadelphia, and Vermonter between Springfield MA and Washington DC.  Reservations must be booked 14 days before travel.


Canada’s leaders have responded to President Obama’s vision for high-speed rail in the U.S. by investigating the possibility of a multi-billion dollar system of their own.

“Obviously, President Obama has made it a priority and so we’re certainly at risk of losing ground to them if we don’t take a good hard look ourselves and make some decisions over the next few years,” said Cliff Mackay, president and chief executive officer of the Railway Association of Canada, before a hearing held by the Canadian Parliament.

Officials said that Transport Canada’s (equivalent to U.S. DOT) feasibility and impact study for a line between Ontario and Quebec should be done by 2010.  “There is certainly great interest within our committee to determine, one, if it’s viable, (and) two, if we can do it, and what the stakes and what the costs would be,” said Merv Tweed, a Conservative MP from Manitoba who chairs the House of Commons Committee on Transportation.
A 1995 study put the cost of an Ontario-Quebec line at $18 billion; that number is sure to have gone up.  But politicians are pointing not just to the benefits that would come with decreased congestion and reduced CO2 emissions, but the economic boon that the investment would be to Canada’s struggling construction and steel industries.


The Colorado Rail Passenger Association, or ColoRail, is filing suit in a federal court to halt further development of Denver’s Union Station.  The group alleges that current plans do not conform to what was agreed upon earlier, which stressed connectivity among modes and capacity for future expansion.  The stated goal for the station was “multi-modal transit hub of international significance,” reports the Denver Examiner.  ColoRail cites the relocation of the light rail passenger train terminal a quarter-mile from the station itself, and the subterranean intercity bus bays that will prohibit future capacity increases and will be costly to maintain.

The capacity issue is of particular concern for passenger rail advocates, since it could adversely affect the proposed revival of the Pioneer Amtrak route from Denver to Seattle (rail advocates and elected officials, including Boulder’s Mayor Matthew Appelbaum, have initiated a route study), and regional rail along the local I-25 and I-70 corridors.


The June 2009 issue of NARP News has been uploaded to the members’ section of our web site.  Click on “Login” above, just below “E-mail Signup” to access the newsletter, or click “Register” if you have not yet signed up for members’ access.  Be sure to include your membership number when registering.