NARP Blog

I had the privilege of attending the The Carmichael Conference On The Future of American Transportation For North American Transportation Advocates and Leaders this past Monday and Tuesday in St. Louis. The event, sponsored by the National Corridors Initiative, was named in honor of former FRA Administrator Gilbert Carmichael, who continues to this day to advocate for a strong, balanced transportation system that includes intercity passenger rail.

The main objective of the meeting was to “develop a unified Transportation Advocates’ Statement on the Future of American Transportation for presentation to all of the Candidates for the Presidency of the United States.” I’ll share that with you as soon as it is finalized. You’ll see that NARP was one of the sponsors of the conference and advocates’ statement.

One of the consistent themes of speakers and participants--including myself--was that the Presidential candidates have not given any attention to transportation in their campaigns. The group came to consensus that this was a) not a partisan issue as neither party has spoken out and b) there are two main reasons why.

First, transportation is neither an emotional nor a “sexy” issue. It doesn’t grab headlines. If anything, Americans have become complacent with the problems we have and while they may complain, they just accept it “cause that’s the way it is.”

Second, fixing the transportation mess we have will take money. A lot of money. It will almost certainly require raising the gas tax. How many politicians do you know that have run on a platform of raising taxes and had a successful campaign? If anything, the candidates have to compete to see who can go the lowest on tax cut promises. That doesn’t mean that there aren’t problems to solve. But, the bottom line is that it is incredibly difficult to drum up support for something that’s going to cost a lot of money in the context of a political campaign.

NARP has reached out to the Presidential candidates and, along the lines of my discussion above, have received no response. But rest assured we will keep putting the message out there. It’s quite possible that issues will become more focused and refined as the field shrinks to two viable candidates in each party and in the near future to one.

Posted by NARP | (4) Comments

Comments

Good points Dave. History of the rail has shown us that the government has continually passed the buck on the transportation crisis. Talk about fuel efficiency???!!! I would love to see the cost each candidate has spent on the road and in the air. Then compare that to how much they would have spent if they had traveled by rail.

E.Eaton
Brand new NARP member....
ready to get America back “on track”

Comment by Eric Eaton on 02/01 at 04:40 PM

Welcome to NARP! You make an excellent point. Not only the monetary cost--since they all seem to have plenty of funds!--but more importantly cost to our environment.

I’ve posted the advocates statement to the blog page; go to the blog homepage (today’s entry) to read it.

-Dave Johnson

Comment by NARP on 02/02 at 12:30 PM

"Second, fixing the transportation mess we have will take money. A lot of money. It will almost certainly require raising the gas tax. How many politicians do you know that have run on a platform of raising taxes and had a successful campaign?” (from Dave Johnson’s original post)

I was recently at a conference on getting funding for more rail transit in the Los Angeles area (http://www.subwaytothesea.org) called “It’s Time to Move L.A.”

Some pollsters and campaign consultants at the event pointed out that certain ways of raising public revenue are more palatable to voters than others. Gas taxes are notoriously disliked. However, they suggested that some type of fee or tax directed at high carbon emitting uses, a “Carbon Impact Fee” or a “Congestion Impact Fee” that would specifically target greenhouse gases and auto-dependant development may be more effective.

It the public sees that there is a direct nexus between the now widely recognized problem of climate change problem and the solution, they might be willing finance solutions like passenger rail.

Dennis Lytton

Comment by Alva Dennis Lytton on 02/02 at 06:21 PM

There is plenty of money to go around. I would argue that we don’t need to raise taxes or fees. By dipping into the highway fund we can improve the national rail network. Operating trains is much cheaper than operating highways. In the long run we would save money.

Comment by Jason A Sanford on 02/05 at 02:40 PM

» Please login or register for an account to post a comment.

NARP blog

NCI Conference Explores Outreach to Presidential Candidates

Friday, February 01, 2008

Posted by NARP | (4) Comments

Comments

Comment by Eric Eaton on 02/01 at 04:40 PM

Comment by NARP on 02/02 at 12:30 PM

Comment by Alva Dennis Lytton on 02/02 at 06:21 PM

Comment by Jason A Sanford on 02/05 at 02:40 PM

©2005 National Association of Railroad Passengers | » NARP website

» Recent Entries

» Blogroll

» Terms of Service for Comments

» Monthly Archives