A major transportation bill charts new territory, Chinese rail investment attracts major corporations, two passenger rail critics miss the point, and more on this week’s roundup of reactions and ruminations related to rail.
Last week, Chaiman James Oberstar (D-WI) of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee unveiled his much-anticipated draft of the Surface Transportation Reauthorization Act. Transportation for America has the executive summary and full text (90 pages), and a discussion of how it would affect states and locales seeking money for new transit systems. The Transport Politic and Streetsblog DC also have commentary worth reading. NARP is encouraged that a rail title was included, representing a change from initial plans and a first for a major surface transportation bill. However, to our knowledge, the $50 billion authorized for the new high-speed rail program over five years still lacks a funding source.
China’s $87.9-billion rail investment is generating a lot of economic activity, and not just in China. IBM and General Electric are joining other multinational companies in producing the technology and infrastructure that could soon make China the world leader in rail volume and sophistication. Ramped-up rail investment on the home front would make a similar impact, generating a sizeable number of both blue- and white-collar jobs.
Bill Farley’s Charleston (SC) Post and Courierop-ed calling for an Amtrak shutdown shows that hostility to passenger trains is alive and well among the usual suspects. Distances between many U.S. cities are comparable to those in Europe. The key to the success of intercity trains there is that pedestrian- and transit-friendly urban development patterns enhance their accessibility and proximity to final destinations. but many depend on Amtrak even in less populated areas. The main reason why some foreign intercity passenger rail lines seem profitable is that their balance sheets do not account for the massive public investments that went into their construction nor the urban and suburban transit lines that feed into them, which nobody expects to be profitable. The U.S. is making progress on this score—consider Dallas whose train station is the hub of light rail and commuter rail services, and St. Louis where the new multimodal terminal has linked Amtrak to the highly successful light rail service and Lambert Airport. Farley also whined, “There are vast areas of this country where nobody lives and/or nobody wants to go.” But many depend on Amtrak even in less populated areas, not just in Montana, North Dakota and East Texas but in many of the other smaller cities that Amtrak serves. More and more Americans are taking trains, and with the proper investment and guidance, they can once again become “a major mover of people.”
A known critic of rail investment and smart growth policies once again focuses on the non-issue of passenger rail’s profitability. Why doesn’t anyone ever ask why highway construction and maintenance isn’t profitable, or why the air traffic control system doesn’t make money? Because that’s not the point. We invest in transportation infrastructure because society and the economy benefit from the dividends, and because almost all other profitable enterprises depend on efficient mobility.
LCL: Secretary LaHood talks up DOT’s guidance for high-speed and intercity passenger rail proposals; rail industry leaders discuss electrification in the US, Canada & Britain; Switzerland and Italy are working on the world’s longest railroad tunnel (35 miles Zurich to Milan); Michiganders hear a dubious proposal for a privately-financed hydrogen-powered maglev line while their cash-strapped state threatens to cut its operating grant for Amtrak and potentially terminate a route in the state; Michigan’s top transportation official defends high-speed rail; dramatic on-time performance gains draw riders back to the rails in Missouri; Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) wisely shelves maglev support in favor of the more acheivable Desert XPress proposal (meanwhile, the Las Vegas Sunevaluates the competing bullet-train proposals);federal rail money turns heads in Atlanta; and an op-ed in New Jersey’s Daily Recordechoes NARP’s concerns about the new tunnels under the Hudson River.
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.
» Please login or register for an account to post a comment.