|
|||||||||||||||||||||
|
» Visit the Official NARP Website Lazarus Lives in Troy, MichiganThursday, January 19, 2012by NARP Vice Chairman John DeLora, also President of the Michigan Association of Railroad Passengers (MARP) The back-and-forth fight over a new intermodal transit center in Troy MI has turned up interesting information about the federal High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail grant program (part of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, ARRA). It also contains lessons on how to combat Luddites who oppose public transportation.
In 2009, Congress passed the ARRA act, calling for major infrastructure improvements which would lead to high speed rail in the U.S. Shortly after enactment, the Federal Railroad Administration held a series of public conferences to explain the program and what it would do, and what it wouldn’t do. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) conference for the Midwest was held in Kansas City, MO. Key points were:
MARP warned several Michigan legislators that the practice of partial-year state funding for the Amtrak Blue Water and Pere Marquette (which had been done for several years, with supplemental funding when the first tranche was exhausted) would not be acceptable to FRA. The legislature went ahead with partial year funding anyway, and many were stunned to find that FRA had denied all Michigan applications. Posted by Malcolm KentonTags: amtrak stations, business community, chambers of commerce, high-speed rail program, local politics, michigan, recovery act, transportation investment, troy(1) Comments Amtrak Funding, Amtrak’s CEO, and the National NetworkFriday, January 13, 2012Under the debt ceiling law enacted in August, if the supercommittee failed (which it did), domestic discretionary programs would be cut 7.8% in Fiscal 2013, which starts October 1, 2012. That would mean yet another Amtrak funding reduction, this one exceeding $100 million. Three other wild-card factors could affect the outcome:
Posted by Malcolm KentonTags: amtrak funding, faa, federal transportation spending, joseph boardman, long-distance trains, national debt, sunset limited, union pacific(0) Comments A Field Guide to False Anti-Train ArgumentsThursday, January 12, 2012If you’ve been reading this blog, getting NARP emails, or following the debate surrounding passenger train development, you’ve surely heard the worn-out, cliched barbs that defenders of the status quo repeatedly throw at proposals to ramp up investment in trains. If you’ve sometimes found yourself at a loss for short, effective, fact-based rejoinders, then you’re in luck.
Our partners at the American Public Transportation Association (APTA) have developed a handy document called Inventory of the Criticisms of High-Speed Rail with Suggested Responses and Counterpoints. These can be applied not just to “true” high-speed rail projects like California’s, but also to as-important undertakings to make existing trains faster, more reliable and more frequent. The common theme found throughout the document—one on which NARP and all our partners have been focusing our rhetoric—is that, while rail projects may look costly now, it will cost a lot more to accomplish (or leave unaccomplished) the same mobility and economic development goals later by other means later on. Remember: the purpose of transportation systems is not to be profit centers on their own, but to serve as the the bloodstream that keeps the rest of the economy going. Criticism of passenger train development tends to focus on the fact that it won’t be profitable and will require ongoing subsidies. The returns on investment in modern passenger trains won’t be seen in the form of profits for their operators, but rather in the form of increased economic activity and profits for other businesses in the areas the trains serve—not to mention a cleaner environment, a better quality of life, and easier, safer, more affordable mobility for the people living in those areas. Posted by Malcolm KentonTags: apta, balanced transportation, cost of inaction, economic development, federal transportation investment, high-speed rail, passenger train development, sustainability, train opponents(1) Comments Midwest fast train advocates push for world class Chicago Union StationWednesday, January 11, 2012
The Midwest High-Speed Rail Association has launched a Downtown Airport campaign to Chicago Union Station to make sure that the modernization efforts currently being planned are ambitious enough to accommodate the station’s projected growth:
They’re asking advocates to write Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel to encourage him to back a truly transformative plan to bring Chicago Union Station into the 21st Century. Posted by NARPTags: amtrak, chicago, high-speed rail, midwest high-speed rail association, rahm emanuel, union station(2) Comments The versatility of passenger train investmentTuesday, January 10, 2012Last week, Mollee posed a question on NARP’s Facebook page, asking about the cost-to-benefit ratio of passenger rail:
The thrust of her comment seems to be: in a time of limited revenue, the government should focus on projects that move the country forward on multiple national objectives. NARP agrees with the assessment, and it’s a viewpoint we’ve consistently pushed in our advocacy work. Amtrak is 31.2% more efficient than automobiles, 33.5 % more efficient than personal trucks, and 13.8% more efficient than airplanes (on a Btu per passenger mile basis). Passenger trains decrease U.S. dependency on foreign oil and reduce the emission of harmful pollutants into the air. Intercity rail, properly connected to public transit systems, creates walkable streets and livable neighborhoods. Train travel is far safer than driving; motor vehicle accidents killed more than 32,000 people in 2010, and is the leading cause of death for Americans between the ages of 3 and 33. And constructing a high-speed train network would revitalize the U.S. passenger rail manufacturing industry, which declined in the decades following the construction of the federally-financed Interstate Highway System.
So building passenger rail fulfills not just transportation goals, but environmental, social, safety, and national defense goals as well. Why not invest? The answer seems to be as conceptual, as much as anything. Here’s an excerpt from a piece we posted in November looking at the relative costs of different modes of transportation:
Understanding the ways passenger trains benefit our communities requires work. Understanding the ways over-reliance on roads is hurting the U.S. also takes work. That’s why it’s important for advocates of a smart transportation system do the work, and help others to understand the indirect costs associated with our travel decisions. Only by educating the general public about the real cost of transportation will we get the most bang for our buck. Posted by NARPTags: amtrak, benefits, high-speed rail, indirect costs, national defense, safety(4) Comments With new report, Los Angeles to San Francisco high-speed rail corridor stays on the boilThursday, January 05, 2012The battle over the Los Angeles to San Francisco high-speed rail line continues to boil, with a new report issued by the California High-Speed Rail Peer Review Group which criticizes the projects funding structure, adding heat to the argument. The California High Speed Rail Authority responded immediately with harsh condemnation of the group’s study, questioning their fundamental understanding of how high-speed rail systems are built throughout the world. California Law AB 3034 mandated creation of an eight-member Peer Review Group with a different California official responsible for appointing each member; the group currently has six members, two slots are open. The document’s central criticism seems to be that the California High-Speed Rail Authority (CAHSRA) has failed to secure funds to cover the projects $74.5 billion final cost:
CAHSRA was quick to point out that no large project of any stripe—rail, road, or otherwise—is held to this strict standard. They argued that the plan created by the Authority was in line with best practices for high-speed rail systems built around the world. Roelof van Ark, chief executive of CAHSRA, wrote, “It is unfortunate that the peer review committee has delivered a report to the Legislature that is deeply flawed in its understanding of the authority’s program and the experience around the world in successfully developing high-speed rail. As someone involved in many of the successful high-speed rail programs internationally, I can say that the recommendations of this committee simply do not reflect a real world view of what it takes to bring such projects to fruition.” There was also the implication that this report could be a self-fulfilling prophecy. The more doubt that legislators cast upon their willingness to go forward with the project, the more skittish the U.S. Congress and private investors get about supporting the project. Another peer review committee commissioned by the Authority to review its work—made up of engineers, transportation planners, and economists—had in fact already deemed the ridership model a solid foundation for project planning just this summer, with this to say about CAHSRA’s business plan: “We are satisfied with the documentation presented in Cambridge Systematics, and conclude that it demonstrates that the model produces results that are reasonable and within expected ranges for the current environmental planning and Business Plan applications of the model. We were very pleased with the content, quality and quantity of the information.” As for the political implications of the new peer review group study, Robert Cruickshank has this to say over at the California High Speed Rail Blog:
Mr. Cruikshank may well be right, but we’d be remiss not to come up with a full tally of the opponents lined up and ready to fight this project. You can be certain that when an issue becomes as politicized as high-speed rail has—and when a project is as big as this one is—there will no shortage of willing combatants. None of this is to say the legislature should not be closely involved with the project; overseeing the prudent investment of public funds is one of the highest responsibilities of government officials. But there is an inconsistency in the way the Los Angeles to San Francisco rail corridor is being treated, as compared to other transportation expenditures. And the legislators involved are certainly on the hook to consider the cost of the alternatives: the cost of more congestion, more roads, and more airports and runways. The current estimates put that cost at as much as $171 billion, for an additional 2,300 lane-miles of highways, 4 runways, and 115 airline gates. Posted by NARPTags: cahsra, california, california high-speed rail peer review group, high-speed rail, los angeles, robert cruikshank, san francisco(0) Comments Could the Third Time Be the Charm for Honolulu Rail?Wednesday, January 04, 2012Jim Loomis, Hawaii’s Representative on NARP’s Council, penned the following in response to the New York Times’ coverage yesterday of the controversy surrounding Honolulu’s first rail transit line, whose construction will start this spring:
Posted by Malcolm KentonTags: hawaii, honolulu, new york times, rail controversy, rail transit, transit critics(0) Comments NARP Vice Chair speaks about cuts to transit benefitsTuesday, January 03, 2012NARP’s Vice Chair of Legislative Policy & Strategy, Albert Papp, Jr., appeared on WABC-TV in New York to talk about the failure of the U.S. Congress to extend mass transit benefits at current levels, meaning the transit benefits that employers can provide tax-free will be slashed from $230 to $120 per month. “You’re talking about 13, 14 hundred dollars a year, doldrums that it is,” Papp explained to WABC-TV reporters. You can read more about the cuts on NARP’s Hotline #738. Posted by NARPTags: albert papp, jr., mass transit benefits, new york, public transit, wabc-tv(0) Comments Transit Benefit Cut Defies Evident Trend Away from Car DependenceThursday, December 22, 2011This morning’s Washington Post features a cover story noting that Washington, DC’s population has grown tremendously while most places in the US have seen shrinking numbers of residents. Perhaps most significantly, the Post says “Three in four newcomers [to DC] in recent years have been between the ages of 18 and 34. They have zero interest in the suburbs.”
This reflects a growing and highly evident preference for urban living amongst those of us of the next generation, combined with the increasing prevalence of teenagers waiting longer to get their first driver’s license, once considered a rite of passage into adulthood. “Millennials” such as myself would rather not be tied to needing a car to get everywhere, along with the stress, danger and great expense driving entails. Being able to use electronics or read while traveling, having easy access to a multitude of activities, and being able to enjoy bars and parties without worrying about getting behind the wheel afterwards are all good reasons to live in a place where a car is not a necessity. Combine that with my generation’s increasing awareness of the great social and environmental costs of the automobile’s disproportionate dominance of America’s transportation universe—oil dependence, homogenous suburban sprawl eating away at farms and open spaces, air pollution, etc.—and you have growing demand for human-scaled neighborhoods connected to one another by trains, subways and streetcars. Yet many of our elected leaders aren’t getting the message. Just when more and more professionals are moving into cities and relying on public transportation to get to work, Congress’s lack of action on an extension of provisions in the 2009 Recovery Act means that the maximum pre-tax transit benefit allowed to employees will be cut in half come January 1—while the maximum parking benefit will increase. At the same time, decreased revenues and state and local funding cuts due to the recession are forcing many transit agencies to raise fares. For many Americans, my generation especially, this will be a painful double-whammy. It will encourage some commuters to switch to driving—precisely the wrong message to send when we’re also trying to ease congestion and pollution in our urban areas—but for most transit commuters, it will make the struggle to make ends meet harder and force difficult tradeoffs. It’s up to all of us to maintain pressure on our Senators and Representatives. Remind them that the plethora of public policy goals that are achieved when it is cheaper and easier for people to use transit than drive are worth more than the miniscule additional tax revenue resulting from the reduction in the transit benefit cap. It’s also good to know that our biggest opportunity to tell Congress how we feel is coming in 11 months. —Malcolm Kenton Posted by Malcolm KentonTags: car dependence, commuting, population growth, transit benefits, transportation policy, urban living, us cities, washington dc, washington post(1) Comments Attention: public transit STILL saves you moneyWednesday, December 21, 2011
That extra money will come in handy, because Congress failed to extend the mass-transit benefit on Tuesday. That means that while people who drive to work will see a slight increase in the pre-tax benefits they receive to offset parking costs—from $230 a month to $240, to account for inflation—public transit benefits will be slashed from $230 to $120 per month. While the Senate may take up the issue in February when it comes back into session, America’s workers will still be hurting in the meantime. —Sean Jeans-Gail [APTA] [Streetsblog Capitol Hill] Posted by NARPTags: apta, public transit(0) Comments Riding passenger trains to an economic recoveryTuesday, December 20, 2011John Rosenthal wrote an excellent piece for Bloomberg on the rise and fall of high-speed rail’s bipartisan credentials, and why it is absolutely vital for America’s elected officials to get back on course. “Riding High-Speed Rail to a U.S. Recovery,” published December 18, discusses the near-universal enthusiasm that initially met the unveiling of President Barack Obama’s Vision For High-Speed Rail in America:
Rosenthal traces the first moments of discord to the surge in power of the Tea Party, which sent a host of anti-government-investment legislators to Congress. He also makes a compelling case why this is a terrible move for America’s transportation network and economy:
Rosenthal’s work is definitely worth a full read. You can find the full article here.
Posted by NARPTags: bloomberg, high-speed rail, jeff rosenthal, obama(0) Comments Trains Lead Holiday Travel TweetsMashwork.com produced this fun infographic about holiday travel tweets. 57% of the 13,194 tweets about a mode of travel analyzed were about trains, while only 9% were about air travel (27% were about car rentals and 6% about intercity bus travel). Naturally, Amtrak takes the top spot within the rail category, followed by the nation’s busiest rail transit systems. Not surprisingly, New York and Illinois travelers are discussing trains more than other modes. Both states with well-developed passenger train networks (New York has more train stations than any other state). Air travel dominated in California, which doesn’t yet have a high-speed rail link between its two megalopoli, and bus travel dominated in Pennsylvania, whose two major cities are connected by only one daily train that is not trip-time competitive with highway travel.
From all of us at NARP, happy holidays and best wishes for safe, enjoyable travels. —Malcolm Kenton Posted by Malcolm KentonTags: christmas, hanukkah, holiday travel, mode choice, train travel, twitter(0) Comments New York Times looks at the pleasure of long-distance train travelMonday, December 19, 2011
The New York Times featured a nice piece by Joe Sharkey in the Business Section concerning the lost art of the extended business trip. In his “On a Long Train Trip, Rare Pleasures Return,”, Mr. Sharkey began his trip on Amtrak’s Silver Star with trepidation, wondering whether the 26 hour trip from Tampa, Florida to New York City would be an excursion or an ordeal:
The writer concludes that he will most likely save train travel for business trips under 500 miles—but conceded that time spent sleeping isn’t really time lost, and arriving in downtown Manhattan was a “significant convenience.” Unfortunately, Mr. Sharkey is a little too sanguine about the funding shortfalls facing intercity passenger trains, merely noting that the Congressional budget in the coming year is too tight to allow for any real expansion of service and that the High-Speed & Intercity Passenger Rail Program has become politicized. One would hope that a recent convert to the convenience and comfort of train travel would spend a little more time asking why government spending is a tiny fraction of what is directed to modes like highways and airports. The last sentence almost makes up for this oversight, however, perfectly capturing what is so special about overnight train travel;
Posted by NARPTags: business travel, florida, joe sharkey, long-distance trains, manhattan, new york times, silver star, tampa(0) Comments Amtrak’s eTicketing in actionWednesday, December 14, 2011A while back, NARP talked about the advances eTicketing would bring to Amtrak operations. Well, now we give you an advance look at what the eTicketing device looks like in action. Here’s hoping the roll-out continues to go smoothly, and this becomes a common sight across the national network by the end of Summer 2012.
Posted by NARPTags: downeaster, eticketing(0) Comments Keep commuter rail and transit benefit on equal footing with driving!Tuesday, December 13, 2011[Update: the Washington Post is reporting that “pretax parking benefits would rise from $230 a month to $240 a month because of inflation.” ; last edited December 14] Our partners over at Transportation For America have pointed out something that has slipped by mostly unnoticed in the larger conversation about transportation funding for fiscal year 2012: a transit benefit that provides a tax credit for workers who use mass-transit to commute is set to be nearly halved come this January. Currently, the annual mass-transit benefit is the same as the tax break commuters receive for parking costs, thanks to a provision introduced by the Recovery Act in 2009. This provision was extended last winter, but will expire at the end of December if no action is taken by Congress. From T4A’s website:
This is another example of the double standard that exists when it comes to trains and transit versus roads and highways. Money spent on the former is a “subsidy,” while money spent on the latter is an “investment.” It’s entirely unacceptable for our nation’s leaders to incentivize people to move away from a mode of transportation that saves energy, lowers harmful emissions, reduces commuter congestion, and decreases America’s dependence on foreign oil. T4A is hosting a campaign to tell Senators to support an extension of the worker transit benefit, and NARP encourages you to take a few minutes to support this effort. Already, a bipartisan group of 22 Senators has signed onto a letter calling for the extension to be enacted. “Eliminating the mass-transit credit would take a cut out of the paychecks of hardworking middle-class families trying to get by in an already tough economy,” said Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD), who serves in the Senate Finance Committee. “Promoting the use of mass transit helps our workers but it also helps reduce traffic congestion on our region’s highways and improve air quality by taking thousands of cars off the road.” Posted by NARPTags: ben cardin, commuter rail, mass-transit benefit, t4a, transit(1) Comments ©2010 National Association of Railroad Passengers | » NARP website |
» Recent Entries» Blogroll» Terms of Service for CommentsYou may register to post comments in response to NARP-generated postings on the Blog. By registering you agree 1) that all comments will be relevant to the respective posting and 2) not to post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, or that violate any laws. We reserve the right to permanently block postings from any user who does not abide by the above terms. NARP reserves the right to remove, edit, or move any messages for any reason. » Monthly ArchivesNational Association of Railroad Passengers on Facebook
|
||||||||||||||||||||