NARP Blog

Thursday, March 04, 2010

This morning, the Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development of the US Senate Appropriations Committee heard from Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood on the President’s fiscal 2011 budget for his agency [PDF], as the committee begins work on determining spending levels for the year to begin October 1, 2010. During the question and answer period, Sen. Christopher Bond (R-MO) engaged LaHood in a heated discussion surrounding DOT’s high-speed intercity passenger rail grant program. Even when Bond tried to steer the discussion towards other transportation topics, LaHood remained focused on promoting the high-speed rail program.

Here is a sample of their back-and-forth. Note that this is a rough and incomplete transcription resulting from hurried note-taking. Exact quotes are marked by quotation marks.

Senator Bond: How do you measure [livability]? We [Congress] develop locally-based community plans for neighborhood stabilization and economic development. I support access to [alternative] transportation. The BRT [bus rapid transit] program in Kansas City has been very important. But ... livability means having a decent highway for many of my rural constituents. We lose three people a day [in accidents] on Missouri’s highways. At least one third of those deaths are due to poor highway conditions. It’s a question of staying alive. If we want all these dollars “to go in and build urban livability sections,” there need to be broader criteria.

Secretary LaHood: [To use] an example from your home state: Kansas City’s $50 million [TIGER grant] is for some of the most simple things we take for granted, like making sure people have a sidewalk to walk on. That may sound silly to you, but I took a tour and found an abandoned neighborhood where people can’t even drive down the street. We [DOT] worked with [the Department of Housing and Urban Development] to build affordable housing so people could stay in the neighborhood. That’s what livable communities [means].

Bond: When did it become DOT’s responsiblity to build sidewalks?

LaHood: You all [Congress] did it. I was part of it as a member of Congress.

Bond: I question how much money is spent on sidewalks when we need highways and bridges.

LaHood: [DOT is] just working with the priorities Congress set.

Bond: We could have used a whole lot more for highways and bridges. Every dollar we’re spending is going on the deficit. [...] The Wall Street Journal had an article by Wendell Cox on January 31st called “The Runaway Subsidy Train.” [Read our response here.] Did you see it? [LaHood: No]. I’ll give you a copy of it. [Cox says] only two [high-speed rail] segments have broken even. If you want to make it profitable, there must be high fares. What’s going to be the total cost of high-speed rail? California estimates [their system will cost] $40 to $60 billion, all taxpayer money, while the airlines flying there aren’t being subsidized by the taxpayer. [Highway users] are helping subsidize high-speed rail. What is the justification? [...] Missouri’s $30 million [in HSIPR funds] will provide extra sidings so trains can pull off & others can pass. What are the ridership projections? Can we justify that cost to the nation’s taxpayers?

LaHood: I’ll answer your question for the record. When Eisenhower signed the Interstate [Highway] bill, nobody knew how we were going to pay for it. I know this: Americans want high speed passenger rail. So many around America want good passenger rail transportation. It will connect opportunities for people. If you build it, they will come. The Interstate system is an example of that. European and Asian governments have made big investments and these lines have been huge economic engines. I can cite examples chapter and verse: if you build it, they will come. The contractos will invest a lot of private money in it.

Bond: As Governor of Missouri, I supproted and started subsidizing Amtrak. Have riders come in large numbers? No. Few people ride it. I’m not willing to spend billions more simply on the thought that they will come.

LaHood: But as Governor and Senator, you were willing to build a [highway] bridge [across the Mississippi River] on the promise that people [would] use it. “The same principle is true for high-speed intercity passenger rail.”

You 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.

NARP blog

LaHood: If you build it, they will come.

Thursday, March 04, 2010

Posted by Malcolm Kenton

©2010 National Association of Railroad Passengers | » NARP website

» Recent Entries

» Blogroll

» Terms of Service for Comments

» Monthly Archives