NARP

NARP blog

TRAINS: A travel choice Americans want

» Visit the Official NARP Website


Ways Without Means

Thursday, July 02, 2009

Food for thought on one of the busiest travel holidays of the year.

Few would defend America’s current transport policy. Each year congestion costs more than $78 billion in wasted hours and petrol. Washington’s main transport strategy has been not to have one. The Department of Transportation (DoT) runs 108 different programmes. But an integrated system for planning—one that includes passenger rail, freight, highways and mass transport—does not exist. Full analyses of projects’ costs or benefits are rare. —The Economist, June 20-26

As we head into one of the busiest travel holidays of the year, when many will face slow going on the roads and crowded flights, it is a good time to remind ourselves just how much work is needed to make our society as mobile as it could be. Despite a small drop in gas prices, USA Today reports in a cover story that the country is in the midst of “the longest and steepest decline in driving since the invention of the automobile.” Since last November, the drop in vehicle miles traveled on American thoroughfares is akin to “taking between 8 million and 10 million drivers off the road.” Much of this may be due to the state of the economy, which is forcing many to forego travel or adjust their plans, but the article also notes the increasing number of Americans opting for less car-dependent lifestyles. It makes one wonder if we would be better able to weather this recession if we did have a sensible, balanced transportation strategy that provided a plethora of affordable and enjoyable ways to get around, and if we’ll be able to deliver the non-highway transportation choices people are demanding once the storm is over.

Fortunately, the woeful state of American mobility is receiving long-overdue attention in Washington. But, as The Economist notes (and NARP has been pointing out for some time), the main well of money for transportation improvements is about to run dry, and we don’t have a viable plan for replenishing it. A set of worthy goals has been written, but the Obama Administration wants to borrow from the General Fund to pay for them, a desire confirmed in a document released by DOT this week (see Hotline #611, 3rd story). Tapping into the Treasury for such consistent expenditures is highly unsustainable in the long run as it adds to the defecit and relies on the whims of Congressional appropriators. The Administration says it needs more time to figure out a sustainable long-term funding mechanism that will also repay the loans from the General Fund.

Congress has given us ”cash for clunkers,” yet we struggle to find the cash to overhaul our ‘clunker’ of a transportation system. If we don’t get on track (literally and figuratively) to a robust and sustainable system now, all Americans will continue to pay a higher price: as travelers, consumers and taxpayers. It’s up to all of us as citizens and voters to give our leaders the political will to do what needs to be done. We must pay a little more now to build the safe, efficient, multi-modal mobility network we deserve in order to avoid a great deal of pain later.

-- Malcolm Kenton

Posted by NARP

Tags: advocacy, affordable, driving, economy, funding, gasoline, highway trust fund, politics, recession, transportation, travel
(1) Comments

David Johnson: MARC’s Gain, NARP’s Loss

Wednesday, July 01, 2009

A final tribute to NARP’s former Vice President.

Prompted by publication of David R. Johnson’s early-May move to MARC in our latest newsletter, I’d like to share what I said to our Council of Representatives in Washington on April 22:

Since we’ve given out a lot of certificates the past few days, pretend that I’m reading from another certificate, although it’s a little verbose because it’s only a virtual certificate.

The Hard Working Passenger Train Advocacy Award is presented to:

David Johnson

To thank him for five and a half years of tireless work for the members of NARP and for rail passengers in general and to tell the world that MARC Train Service’s gain is NARP’s loss.

David is the ultimate self-starter. I’d be a rich man if I had a dollar for every time I asked him to do something and he responded, “I’m three steps ahead of you. It’s already done.”

He is the energizer bunny. He reviews incredible volumes of incoming e-mail and exercises great judgment about which ones need my attention. He taught himself how to do layout for the newsletters, the posters you see displayed at Board and now Council meetings, the use of Constant Contact the handsome messages that now go to our members, and acquired countless other technical skills that you might not associate with a “Vice President,” but in a small organization everyone pitches in.

Thanks to his outgoing personality he knows and is respected by more front-line railroaders than you could imagine, including the conductors who have known him riding the Newport News line since he was a child. So he has an impressive knowledge of what is actually going on out there.

I always try to think of a silver lining. As a Maryland taxpayer, I’m happy that MARC with David is about to get a pretty big bang for the buck. And we all should be proud of the growing number of passenger train professionals—going back to Dr. Anthony Perl and Amtrak’s Jonathan Hutchison (Government Affairs/West)—who have done part of their learning about the industry while working for NARP.

But I really did not look forward to losing David. David, thank you for all you have done, for your work and your friendship.

Given this 21st Day of April, 2009 at the NARP Council of Representatives Meeting, Washington, DC.

-- Ross B. Capon

Posted by NARP

Tags: dave johnson, marc, narp, office, staff
(0) Comments

Flag Stops: Taking Small, Quick Steps

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

This week’s roundup of news and views in the world of passenger rail and American travel focuses on the need to act quickly, yet deliberately, to do what needs to be done to keep the country moving sustainably.

  • At a Senate Commerce subcommittee hearing last week, Amtrak CEO Joe Boardman and FRA Administrator Joseph Szabo testified that most of the federal high-speed rail money should go towards track and signal improvements that would make existing trains faster and more reliable, and would permit additional frequencies. In a guest op-ed for the Richmond Times-Dispatch, Boardman says boosting existing trains’ top speeds to 110 mph results in an average 40-percent reduction in trip time. Several Amtrak routes, such as the Keystone (Philadelphia-Harrisburg), the St. Louis-Kansas City corridor, and the Downeaster (Boston-Portland, ME) have seen ridership increases even with modest improvements, including higher speeds, more frequencies and better on-time performance. Boardman believes that such small steps are necessary to recreate a train-riding culture in America. NARP concurs, as does Trains for America. Some differ with this approach, though, wanting the funds to be spent instead on one or two major projects involving very fast trains on new lines. Such ventures should be pursued, but not at the expense of current and potential passengers who would benefit greatly from more imminently attainable advancements.

  • Congressional leaders and the executive branch are still debating how long the country can wait before federal surface transportation programs are reauthorized, and hence reformed. As we’ve noted before, the current draft reauthorization bill [PDF] has a good deal of positive language, but still leaves many questions unanswered.  Also, our friends at Transportation for America’s have an informative analysis of the draft legislation.

  • A silver lining to the nation’s economic storm clouds: more punctual Amtrak trains, which is helping to draw people back to the rails. “Perhaps rail aficionados—who favor Amtrak’s relaxing atmosphere and communal spirit over the frenzy and isolation of the airport—have something to teach the engineers of our now-derailed economy,” writes Jason Mark. “Speed, in fact, isn’t everything. Steadiness is more likely to get us where we need to go.” Amtrak’s improved on-time performance can be credited not just to the decline in freight traffic, but also to some railroads’ policy decisions to give Amtrak trains better handling after October 2008 enactment of the law empowering the Surface Transportation Board to assess damages against railroads that routinely delay passenger trains. Performance by Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern in particular improved dramatically in November, long before freight traffic tailed off.

  • In Florida, rail advocates continue to tout high-speed trains as boons to the economy and tourism, while opponents fuss over the up-front cost. Resisting wise rail investments while letting auto and air traffic worsen in a congested place like Florida is like balking at the price of properly insulating your home and opting instead to keep wasting money on heat and air conditioning that escapes through the cracks in the walls. The costs of getting around (both in terms of time and money) will only keep going up if the transportation system isn’t fixed by providing greater mobility and greater choice.

  • Air travel headaches continue: with fewer passengers and fewer flights, planned airport expansion projects are being shelved. While the trend is affecting large and small airports alike, many of the flights being eliminated are shorter-haul routes which could be better served by trains. Unfortunately, the bulk of those routes lack train service adequate to meet the demand.

  • A look at the very real consequences of funding new trains, buses and transit infrastructure without investing enough in actually running them. Luckily, relief is on the way for transit agencies in need of operating cash. Meanwhile, PBS’s Blueprint America breaks down how federal public transit money is spent, yet points to last week’s Metro disaster to suggest that current funds aren’t enough.

  • LCL: An Arkansas paper’s profile of some active volunteers with one of NARP’s affiliate route support teams, the Texas Eagle Marketing and Performance Organization (TEMPO), is an example of the kind of publicity we can get just by being involved and speaking out; a slice of the life of a 63-year-old Amtrak dining car server, one of an increasing number of Americans nearing retirement age who are opting to remain in the workforce; visions of sparkling-new stations along California’s high-speed rail route spur debate on what should be done with historic depots; Iowa’s governor gets on board for better trains (literally); hopes are high in Georgia as the state seeks its share of the forthcoming federal rail largesse; a look at what will soon be a commonplace sight aboard trains as Amtrak moves to paperless e-ticketing; and do spiffy new roads entice unsafe driving?

  • -- Malcolm Kenton

    Posted by NARP

    Tags: airlines, amtrak, congestion, congress, debate, florida, fra, high-speed rail, improvement, on-time, transit, transportation, travel
    (1) Comments

    Flag Stops: Digging a Little Deeper

    Wednesday, June 24, 2009

    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 Courier op-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 Sun evaluates the competing bullet-train proposals);federal rail money turns heads in Atlanta; and an op-ed in New Jersey’s Daily Record echoes NARP’s concerns about the new tunnels under the Hudson River.

  • -- Malcolm Kenton and Ross Capon

    Posted by NARP

    Tags: amtrak, china, congress, corporation, critics, economy, oberstar, passenger rail, profitability, reauthorization
    (0) Comments

    Counting Our Blessings

    Tuesday, June 23, 2009

    Thoughts in light of yesterday’s Washington Metrorail disaster.

    Our thoughts are with the families of those who lost their lives and those who were injured in yesterday’s horrific Metrorail crash in Washington, DC. We are also keeping in mind the Metro employees who received a shocking reminder of just how important their jobs are and the awesome responsibility that is in their hands. That yesterday marked only the second train accident causing passenger fatalities in Metrorail’s 32-year history should remind the traveling public how safe mass trasit is. The National Transportation Safety Board has begun its investigation into the exact cause of the tragedy and, as with all such incidents, what we learn from their findings will make Metro and other transit systems even safer in the future.

    My experience getting home from NARP’s Washington office yesterday, while harrowing, made me count my blessings. My plan was to take the 5:35 PM MARC Brunswick Line commuter train from Union Station. After almost half an hour waiting at the station hearing only that the track ahead was blocked, I learned via my mobile phone of the accident and determined that my train was not going to depart. I informed my fellow passengers and proceeded to find other means of transport. It took me two and a half hours, two bus rides and a lift from a kind stranger, but I made it home. Had I decided to leave only 15 minutes earlier, though, it could have been a lot worse, and I was lucky to be alive and unharmed.

    Yesterday, I saw firsthand just how much a large city relies on its transit network. With a key segment of Metrorail and commuter service out of commission, the number of people forced into buses, cars and taxis, created huge traffic jams. If Metro’s trains and buses did not exist, there is no way the city of Washington would be able to function as it does. The subway network has only been around for three decades, but it literally consitutes the arteries that keep the city’s lifeblood flowing. When one of those arteries gets clogged or fails, the entire body is thrown into disarray.

    This should serve a reminder of how indespensible our work is at NARP and throughout the rail and transit industries. We must continue our work to make trains—intercity, commuter and metro—a reliable, convenient, comfortable, and above all, safe travel method available to all Americans.

    -- Malcolm Kenton

    Posted by NARP

    Tags: commuting, disaster, metro, mobility, railroad, safety, tragedy, transit
    (1) Comments

    Flag Stops: A Time of Great Expectations

    Monday, June 15, 2009

    Congress figures out how to pay for better transportation, ample discussion of the future of American travel and urban geography, and why train travel actually does make sense. All that and more in this week’s roundup of reports, reactions and ruminations on passenger rail and transportation policy.

    Chairman James Oberstar (D-WI) of the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee is set to release his plan for this year’s much-anticipated transportation reauthorization bill on Wednesday. The question now is how, not if, federal surface transportation policy will veer from the status quo. One of the few most effective potential funding sources, however, has seemingly been taken off the table, but there are good reasons not to discount the idea of using the General Fund. Meanwhile, some members of Congress are finally starting to connect the dots between transportation and the climate bill.

    We are still working to gain cosponsors for two bills that set good policy objectives, and you can help!

    * * *

    From Southern Pines, North Carolina’s daily newspaper, The Pilot, comes a sympathetic op-ed on Amtrak from the former editor of Passenger Train Journal, also a former Federal Railroad Administration economist. He explains why the national passenger railroad hasn’t been able to satisfy the expectations of politicians and the public, and why we now have an opportunity to get it right. “Expecting great things from Amtrak,” he aptly observes, “is like expecting a Triple Crown win from a horse that has not been fed,” but “with adequate and intelligent investment,” Amtrak can redeem itself.

    Also advocating the aggressive pursuit of high-speed passenger & freight rail: the man who headed the Federal Railroad Administration under George H.W. Bush. Gilbert E. Carmichael calls the next-generation rail network “Interstate 2.0.” Steps Carmichael would like to see taken first include a 25-percent tax credit for private railroads to build new capacity, state construction or leasing of high-speed track on existing rights-of-way, and upgrading the electric grid in preparation for railroad electrification.

    A detailed, behind-the-scenes report in yesterday’s New York Times Magazine underscores just how much the success of passenger rail in the near future, in the eyes of politicians and much of the traveling public, will ride on the degree to which the Golden State achieves its desired outcomes. The head of Alstom Transport told the autor, “If California is a success, ... I believe it will be the showcase [of next-generation passenger rail in the US]. But if it’s not working well? In the end it could be a failure for many years for this idea in the U.S. So it has to be very carefully done.” Our friends at TFA rightly point out that the author seems uninterested in incrementally improving existing service, essentially asking travelers (like himself) to bear with Amtrak as it is until CAHSR is complete.

    * * *

    A Wisconsin newspaper editorializes against the reestablishment of Amtrak service between Milwaukee and Green Bay. Their objections (and our responses):

    If gas prices tripled and quadrupled, train travel might make sense. (Such increases are almost inevitable, so why not be prepared?)

    If traffic and congestion were stifling, train travel might make sense. (It is in many areas, and will only get worse at the rate we’re going.)

    If we could easily get to wherever we wanted to go after getting off a train, train travel might make sense. (Which is why we are pushing for better transit connections within cities as well. Besides, most Amtrak stations have rental cars and taxi services on call.)

    If trains were fast enough to overcome all their other inconveniences, train travel might make sense. (110 mph train operation is imminently achievable with existing infrastructure, considerably faster than one can safely and legally drive.)

    If we somehow no longer cared about the freedom to drive wherever and whenever we wanted to, train travel might make sense. (Our definition of freedom includes the right to travel to more places without having to drive there or worry about parking. As the population ages, and as more people become interested in reducing their driving for a myriad of good reasons, more people are looking at transportation this way. There’s also the freedom to enjoy the trip and arrive recharged.)

    Finally, once you average out all the expenses of owning, maintaining and insuring a car, plus the costs to society from traffic accidents and tailpipe emissions, it becomes difficult to say that driving is “easy, convenient and cheap.”

    * * *

    Richard Florida, a writer on economic geography warns that the current economic crisis means “the end of a whole way of life.” He argues that the United States’ ability to maintain its economic prowess in the years to come will depend on the ability of its urban megaregions to attract a “creative class” of professionals doing high value-added work that cannot be outsourced or done by machines, who “generate and transport ideas” instead of goods. “Positioning the economy to grow strongly in the coming decades will require not just fiscal stimulus or industrial reform; it will require a new kind of geography as well, a new spatial fix for the next chapter of American economic history.” This new geography will be built off of an efficient transportation system that will allow these megaregions to provide a high quality of life for large numbers of people. Building and operating the rail and transit networks that will drive the new economy will mean even more jobs to be had.

    Today, we need to begin making smarter use of both our urban spaces and the suburban rings that surround them—packing in more people, more affordably, while at the same time improving their quality of life. That means liberal zoning and building codes within cities to allow more residential development, more mixed-use development in suburbs and cities alike, the in-filling of suburban cores near rail links, new investment in rail, and congestion pricing for travel on our roads.

    One traffic-clogged American boomburg is looking towards a more livable future, staking its hopes for manageable growth on a soon-to-come subway line. On the other side of the Atlantic, new rail lines anchor French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s vision for a more integrated, sustainable Paris metro area.

    * * *

    George Will is at it again. This time, he is citing Amtrak’s red ink as a reason why the government would be a poor manager for bankrupt General Motors. Let’see. Amtrak’s federal grant last year was $1.3 billion, of which roughly 2/3 was capital investment and debt service. Last year, GM alone lost $31 billion—that’s the subsidy from shareholders. Then there’s the various government subsidies to auto makers and users, ongoing and emergency, and to highways and aviation. The total federal grant to Amtrak buys (on average) about 10 miles of highway. Furthermore, Will’s assertion that “Legislators treat [Amtrak] as their toy train set?” is an insult to those of us who actually use those “toy” trains to get to real places.

    * * *

    LCL: A Canadian economic development forum touts intercity rail as a solution to traffic woes and a “more civilized” way to travel, yet also “a tall political order;” despite some setbacks, the taxpayer money invested in Orlando-area commuter rail has not been wasted, as critics claim; city leaders in Dubuque, Iowa, get a can-do attitude towards Amtrak service to Chicago, which seems to be only a few years away; and Oklahoma hopes to get its piece of the Obama high-speed rail pie.

    -- Malcolm Kenton

    Posted by NARP

    Tags: amtrak, congress, editorial, funding, high-speed rail, opinion, smart growth, train travel, transportation, urban geography
    (1) Comments

    Flag Stops: Signs of Change

    Tuesday, June 09, 2009

    Highway Trust Fund woes, models for industry nationalization, lessons from Europe, and more in this week’s roundup of rail-related reports and ruminations.

  • As worries mount that Highway Trust Fund, the main source of federal outlays for road and transit construction & maintenance, is on pace to run out of cash this summer, lawmakers are scrambling to find other ways to plug the hole, running into political obstacles at every turn. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood rejects the idea of increasing the gas tax, or introducing any new system of charging highway users (such as a vehicle miles traveled tax) during the recession. LaHood is concerned about the impact of such taxes on low-income populations, despite that some of the revenue can be used to give rebates to those most impacted.
  • Meanwhile, the Congressional Democratic leadership’s push for increased transit use and to reduce miles traveled by car (endorsed by NARP) has a key highway lobby worried. Balanced transportation advocates counter by pointing out that there isn’t, nor should there be, an either-or choice between improved roads and world-class rail and transit networks. Existing roads need to be kept in shape, but decisions about building new roads or adding lanes ought to be judged in the context of the greater public expense they necessitate in the long run, both in terms of maintenance and in terms of the impacts of increased congestion, pollution, sprawl, etc. Highway users should certainly be included in the discussion as we chart a future of improved mobility for all, but they shouldn’t expect to maintain their position in the center of the transportation universe.
  • From Burlington, Iowa’s daily newspaper, The Hawk Eye, comes a forceful pro-passenger rail op-ed. Mike Sweet writes, “At a minimum, the mere idea of exploring possibilities like fast, efficient and environmentally sound train travel is provoking what America badly needs—a lasting economic, political and intellectual renaissance.” That’s the kind of thinking NARP is working to encourage: thinking that generates an image of an America renewed by greater mobility at a low cost to the planet and our quality of life.
  • As Americans wonder what impending nationalization of banks and auto companies may mean for their future, some are pointing to Amtrak as an example of a once-private operation that has endured after major government intervention. While Congress’s historically poor treatment of Amtrak makes it an unlikely model for future nationalizations, it has resulted in the continued provision of an essential service upon which more and more Americans are depending, despite that it is not profitable (and should not be expected to be). The government-led reorganization of the freight railroads in the 1970s is also instructive, as it resulted in the return of the freight business to the private sector and to profitability. In that same vein, a New York Times piece warns of the pitfalls of privatizing transportation infrastructure.
  • The recession has slowed new car sales, following the pattern that most retail sectors are experiencing. While some expect sales to bounce back when the economy rebounds, many observers say the decline in auto sales could be a lasting trend as people rethink their lifestyles and transportation needs. Greater numbers of Americans are downsizing, moving closer to city centers, and trading multiple cars for shared rides and public transit. As we commented last week, shouldn’t the Administration pay attention to these shifts when debating further giveaways to auto companies? (Thanks to NARP Vice Chair Jim Churchill for the tip)
  • You’ve read our report on Secretary LaHood’s trip to Europe and his roundtable discussion with Vice President Biden and several governors and state DOT heads (Hotline #607); now you can get it straight from the horse’s mouth. On his blog, LaHood shares his reflections on riding France and Spain’s high-speed systems and enumerates the public benefits of rail and transit. Meanwhile, The Transport Politic questions Biden’s analogy of Obama’s HSR vision to Eisenhower’s jumpstarting the Interstate Highway System. Inaccurate as it may be, the comparison is still a useful rhetorical tool to describe the kind of commitment that is needed, if not the actual policy as it is. Remember, it’s only a down payment.
  • LCL: Michigan’s Governor talks of converting auto plants to makers of rail equipment (thanks to former NARP Communications Director Matt Melzer for the tip); our partners at Transportation for America gear up to push national Complete Streets legislation; a policy analyst says in order to promote economic development, government should invest in strategic transportation planning instead of subsidizing automakers; advocates push for experimental Amtrak route Chicago to Green Bay, Wis.; the Union of Concerned Scientists claims buses are the greenest travel mode, with trains being a close second (without factoring in rail’s unparalleled ability to foster condensed, walkable development around stations); the world’s largest public transportation organization convenes in Vienna to take advantage of the moment; the US editor at-large of a major British newspaper reflects [VIDEO] on the fact that the Beatles got to Washington from New York in 1964 faster than the Acela makes the same trip today (thanks to Michigan NARP member Dietrich Bergmann for the tip); and Disney is set to launch 6-month national train tour to promote a new 3D movie version of A Christmas Carol.

  • -- Malcolm Kenton

    Posted by NARP

    Tags: auto industry, europe, green, highways, mobility, nationalization, rail, taxes, transit, transportation, urban development
    (0) Comments

    Lessons from GM’s Bankruptcy on the Consequences of a Fly-Drive Transportation System

    Thursday, June 04, 2009

    For decades, NARP has argued that America’s “fly-drive” system, that is, a transportation system over-reliant on highways and aviation and neglecting trains, was bad policy. We focused heavily on the importance of giving citizens more choices, on environmental impact and—as the opportunity opened—on energy supply issues. We also argued that highways and aviation enjoyed significant public subsidies even as many politicians kept telling themselves and the public that such subsidies did not exist, mistakenly believing that user-funded trust funds completely supported those systems. The fly-drive mentality also contributed to the nation’s overall economic problems, to the extent that the housing bubble encouraged construction and purchase of exurban homes in pedestrian-unfriendly surroundings—actions that would not have taken place if people had known where the price of oil was headed. Finally, we said one of the biggest subsidies in transportation was from airline shareholders to passengers enjoying cheap, non-compensatory fares.

    Now, the stories of General Motors and Chrysler have made clear fly-drive’s financial unsustainability. Government subsidies and loans to GM and Chrysler now total over $50 billion, including loans which GM and Chrysler may not repay, and the forms government aid has taken have been varied.

    Even today, some still say NARP should apologize for the fact that Amtrak requires government funding. Would airlines be profitable if governments did not maintain airports and air-traffic-control systems? Would bus companies be profitable and driving be affordable if government did not maintain the roads? Would the making of the very vehicles that carry the bulk of American travelers have been profitable without repeated help from Uncle Sam? The transportation system upon which our economy is built requires public funding and is one of the best investments we make as a society. The impact of these investments would be maximized if we had a proper balance between the modes to achieve the most efficient outcomes.

    The billions that the government is ready to spend to bail out bankrupt GM are only the latest in a series of large public subsidies to automakers. GM has already received $13.4 billion in taxpayer funds, with Chrysler getting another $4 billion, and both companies’ suppliers got a total of $5 billion. The government guarantees manufacturers’ warranties for GM & Chrysler cars, and the Recovery Act provided a tax credit of $49,500 to consumers who purchase new autos. Furthermore, the climate change bill recently passed by the House Energy & Commerce Committee includes a “cash for clunkers” program, which offers tax credits encouraging drivers to trade in existing cars for more fuel-efficient models. This latter program—which, though sold as promoting energy efficiency, does not take into account the energy costs associated with prematurely scrapping useful cars—has been described as a subsidy to manufacturers, their workers and car buyers.

    Some incentives for the production and consumption of more fuel-efficient vehicles are necessary to address our energy problems as long as most Americans continue to live in communities planned in such a way as to make driving a virtual necessity. It is also important for the government to help struggling communities that are dependent on auto manufacturing to get back on their feet. But we need strong efforts to minimize the worsening consequences of increased congestion and urban sprawl. More attention should be paid to the goals set forth in S. 1036, the Federal Surface Transportation Policy and Planning Act of 2009—increased use of freight and passenger trains and mass transit and reduced, and reductions in national per capita motor vehicle miles traveled on an annual basis, in national motor vehicle-related fatalities (50 percent by 2030), in national surface transportation-generated carbon dioxide levels (40 percent by 2030) and in national surface transportation delays per capita.

    We need a stronger focus on investing in the infrastructure that support those goals and would give Americans more travel choices. Many forward-thinking commentators have envisioned Midwestern factories retooled to produce wind turbines and solar panels. To that list we should add locomotives, railcars, light-rail vehicles, streetcars, subways, and other rail infrastructure. Surely federal investments to correct transportation priorities are at least as worthy as efforts to maintain specific automobile companies. The “priority-correction efforts” would support more quickly achieving President Obama’s vision of an enhanced role for trains in our mobility network. Such spending would yield dividends for years to come, perpetually benefiting people, our economy, and the environment.

    -- Ross B. Capon and Malcolm Kenton

    Posted by NARP

    Tags: auto industry, bankruptcy, chrysler, congress, detroit, energy, gm, highways, mobility, oil, transportation
    (1) Comments

    Flag Stops: Making Tracks (June 1)

    Monday, June 01, 2009

    This week: Experts discuss the downsides of sprawl, chatter about potential service expansions at all levels, and top US policymakers ride the European rails.

  • More helpful articles for connecting transportation decisions with the layout of our communities:
    1. As these maps illustrate, urban areas have small carbon footprints thanks mainly to reduced automobile dependence and convenient transit. It also goes to show that not all suburbs are created equal: many “satellite” towns are well-served by transit, and developers are becoming increasingly alert to marketplace demand for pedestrian- and transit-friendly development.
    2. An urban studies professor discusses how federal transportation and housing policies subsidized the suburbs, plus a look at how transportation costs affect the affordability of housing.
    3. Pediatricians say sprawl isn’t good for kids’ health.
    4. How much freedom does the car actually give you?

  • Amtrak President Joe Boardman reiterated his preference for an incremental approach to service improvements in speeches in Richmond and Ashland, Virginia, last week. BNSF CEO Matt Rose takes a different tack, saying the federal high-speed rail funds shouldn’t be spread too thin. Other private railroads are receptive to more passenger trains on their tracks, with top speeds up to 90 mph.  Union Pacific has agreed to 110 mph on parts of the Chicago-St. Louis line, where freight traffic is relatively light.  As a general rule, however, the railroad industry views speeds above 90 mph on shared tracks as problematic.

  • Many newspapers and blogs around the country have been discussing the potential for new passenger trains in various locales this week. USA Today reports on prospects for reintroducing Amtrak’s North Coast Hiawatha, the Illinois state legislature has approved capital funding to return Amtrak to Dubuque, IA, via northwest Illinois, and clamor is growing for service along the 3-C (Cincinnati-Columbus-Cleveland) Corridor in Ohio. Meanwhile, as more cities around the world add rail connections from downtown to the airport, Trains4America explains why airlines should see high-speed trains as a complement, not competition.

  • More and more local leaders around the country are seeking to improve rail transit service in their communities, including Jacksonville, Fla., Michigan, Denver, Nashville, and New Orleans.

  • Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood and recently-confirmed Federal Railroad Administrator Joe Szabo visited Europe last week to meet with representatives of rail equipment manufacturers eager to enter the emerging US market. Trains4America has more, and The Overhead Wire has a great photo.

  • Couldn’t resist another great countercharge to George Will.

  • LCL: China infuses wads of cash into its budding high-speed rail system; Wisconsin college students take to the streets for high-speed trains and a CBS Evening News correspondent editorializes on the subject; Amtrak is leasing space atop Baltimore’s Penn Station for a hotel; on-board WiFi is coming to Amtrak’s Capitol Corridor in north-central California; the Motor City could become a hub for rail manufacturing; debate continues on future of Amtrak service in Vermont, a compilation of Tweets from train riders; and a guy who can’t get enough of sitting in traffic.

  • -- Malcolm Kenton

    Posted by NARP

    Tags:
    (1) Comments

    Flag Stops: Counterarguments Edition

    Tuesday, May 26, 2009

  • It seems some commentators are thinking along similar lines as I am about how the new fuel economy standards fit into the larger transportation picture. Ryan Avent and former Labor Secretary Robert Reich both have prescriptive analyses in The American Prospect, and the Financial Times’ Lex column concurs with my analysis.
  • The entire alternative transportation community has been busy rebuffing George Will’s casting of us as a bunch of elitists who want to ram our preferences down people’s throats, whereas the American “free market” (i.e. federal policy) has done little but limit our transportation choices for quite some time. “Americans by the scores of millions have been happily trading distance for space, living farther from their jobs in order to enjoy ample backyards and other aspects of low-density living,” Will writes. Happily? I’m sure many automobile commuters who sit in traffic every day would beg to differ. Here are a few good rebuttals.
  • George Will hasn’t been the only target of sustainable mobility advocates’ ire this week. Trains for America asks the questions that the Gwinnett Gazette’s Benita Dodd should have asked, and Streetsblog takes aim at the Heritage Foundation’s resident car-hugger Alan Pisarski.
  • Another loyal rail critic, Cato’s Randal O’Toole, presents more misinformation about passenger trains in a USA Today op-ed. “Amtrak charges a minimum of $99 for its high-speed Acela from New York to Washington,” he says, “but only $72 for its conventional train. Fares for unsubsidized buses on this route start as low as $20 (including free Wi-Fi), while airfares start at $99.” First, everyone who pays gasoline taxes to maintain highways is subsidizing intercity buses, and second, by the time most people are ready to book a flight, the fare has risen sharply above the base rate. O’Toole also repeats the false canard that Interstate highways pay for themselves, when in fact every mode of travel is made affordable by government spending. Plus, I wouldn’t call 736 fewer BTUs per passenger mile “marginally” more fuel-efficient.
  • Longtime transportation observer Tom Vanderbilt wonders why passenger trains are practically the only example of a technology that regressed over the course of the 20th century. The main culprits: a decline in rail capacity (thanks to underinvestment from government) combined with ballooning freight rail traffic, generating a system designed for slower, heavier trains. He concludes:

    Obama’s bold vision obscures a simple fact: 220 mph would be phenomenal, but we would also do well to simply get trains back up to the speeds they traveled at during the Harding administration.

  • LCL: Streetsblog maps out the legislative machinery this year’s surface transportation reform bill will be cranked through; what the results of Tuesday’s vote mean for California HSR; China invests just shy of $300 billion in trains, iStockAnalyst endorses an incremental approach to improving passenger rail; AASHTO’s new chairman beats the drum for faster trains; NARP Council member Jim Loomis on a passenger rail success and a failure overseas; Maryland scraps road widening & funds light rail instead; and what if more sports teams went “on the road” by train?

  • -- Malcolm Kenton

    Posted by NARP

    Tags:
    (0) Comments

    Connecting the Dots for Sustainable Transportation

    Friday, May 22, 2009

    Tuesday’s much-anticipated presidential announcement of higher nationwide fuel economy standards for automobiles was nearly universally praised by auto manufacturers, organized labor, environmentalists and consumer groups, and is indeed a step in the right direction. However, the new rules may have unintended negative consequences, particularly for those interested in a future where Americans are less reliant on the car, and these should not be overlooked.

    Safe Climate Campaign director Daniel Becker pointed out on NPR’s Diane Rehm Show Wednesday morning that the new standards apply to cars that are actually bought, not just to those that are in showrooms. Therefore, in order to comply with the law, the auto industry must sell more new cars, potentially with help from a provision in the climate bill that would give consumers incentives to trade in their current vehicles.  Becker also noted (as does USA Today’s Open Road blog) that the laws of economics generally dictate that when the cost of an activity goes down, people tend to do marginally more of it. Therefore, by making it cheaper to drive on a per-mile basis, a gas-sipping auto fleet may lead to an increase in driving, which, while it may not have the same impact on carbon emissions, would certainly worsen the many other consequences of auto dependence: congestion, sprawl, and parking problems, to name a few.  Plus, the new line of fuel-efficient cars may actually be less safe, and when people buy less gas, the key source of revenue for highway maintenance (and some rail and transit services) is further depleted.

    Higher gas prices (which will inevitably return) and greater awareness about global warming have led not only to increased demand for fuel-efficient vehicles, but also for more travel alternatives.  If public policy were to promote one without simultaneously addressing the other, it would be a step in the opposite direction from one that would lead to an energy-secure and livable future. Luckily, federal leaders have taken steps towards improving the automobile alternatives for which Americans are clamoring, but a guaranteed long-term source of funding for these projects is still missing. Congress will eventually have to either increase the gas tax (a move that is sure to be resisted mightily) or find other sources of funding for our transportation infrastructure.

    Continued after the jump.

    -- Malcolm Kenton

    » read more...

    Posted by NARP

    Tags: auto industry, climate, congress, highways, narp, obama, transit
    (0) Comments

    “Miracle in Rockville” a teachable moment wasted

    Friday, May 15, 2009

    On Friday, May 8, around 4:50 PM, a car was stopped in traffic at the Randolph Road crossing in Rockville, Maryland.  A MARC train (the first one after Amtrak’s Capitol Limited) hit the car, forcing it into a crossing gate which impaled the car through the rear and front windows, coming within inches of the pregnant driver’s head (see link below for dramatic photo).  Media attention apparently focused exclusively on the fact that the driver was miraculously unhurt (except for minor air-bag-related injuries):

    She didn’t think to jump out of the car—although, if she had, she might have been hit by the train, Valencia said.  It all happened in a matter of seconds, and when she opened her eyes after the collision, the gate arm was touching her head.

    Here was an opportunity to avoid future accidents by imploring viewers not to enter a railroad crossing until the next vehicle ahead if far enough to let you clear the tracks quickly.

    Motorists who fail to use common sense in this regard risk their own lives and their passengers’ lives.  Such accidents also traumatize the engineer (incorrectly referred to here by NBC Channel 4 as a “conductor”) and wreak havoc on the schedules of (in this case) 3,000 MARC train commuters, many of whom have day care pick-ups and other commitments, as well as any motorists whose normal route takes them across this crossing.

    It is wonderful that the woman and her unborn child were so lucky. But the fact that her driving error caused the accident, and that it is an all-too-common error, obligates the media to make use of this teachable moment rather than to focus exclusively on one lucky motorist.

    -- Ross Capon, NARP President

    Posted by NARP

    Tags: crossing, marc, narp, safety
    (2) Comments

    Flag Stops, May 14th Edition

    Thursday, May 14, 2009

    Flag Stops: Full Speed Ahead

  • Transportation for America (T4America), a broad national coalition of which NARP is a member, last week released ”The Route to Reform,” which it calls a blueprint for how to achieve the goals outlined in its platform through public policy, specifically in the next surface transportation reauthorization bill.  The document calls for a new national transportation project on a scale similar to the Interstate Highway System that increases the efficiency and multimodal connectivity of the network, keeps existing infrastructure in good repair, promotes energy conservation and environmental protection, and enhances social equity and the quality of life in local communities.

    Specifically, T4America seeks to reduce per-capita vehicle miles traveled by 16% in 20 years, triple the percentage of Americans who walk, bike and use transit, cut transportation-generated CO2 emissions by 40%, move 20% of the nation’s freight traffic to rail and intermodal services, and increase by 50% the number of essential destinations accessible to the average American without a car.  To pay for it all, T4America seeks to create a Unified Transportation Trust Fund and to double the current federal investment in transportation, as long as the new spending achieves the desired outcomes.  NARP welcomes these efforts and will continue to work alongside T4America to see that passenger trains and rail transit get a substantial boost from the next surface transportation bill.



  • Much ado is being made over Amtrak President Joseph Boardman’s remarks to a committee of the Illinois State House of Representatives on Monday. Boardman echoed an observation that NARP has known to be true for some time: travel time matters more to an intercity traveler than top speed when choosing between car, plane, bus and train.  The “fastest way” from A to

    » read more...

    Posted by NARP

    Tags:
    (0) Comments

    Railroading’s Human Resource Crisis and Shortage of Women

    Wednesday, May 13, 2009

    On Friday morning, May 8, I was interviewed (again) by Jeff Santos of Boston’s WWZN (“The Zone” sports and progressive talk radio).

    This was a special Friday.  Normally Santos devotes part of Thursday morning to transportation with heavy emphasis on passenger trains and our concerns including the North Station-South Station Rail Link and the ARC tunnels under the Hudson.  As I told Jeff on the air Friday, it would be terrific if he could be cloned so that every major city would have a program like this.

    Santos is streamed online; podcasts include Secretary LaHood, who also was interviewed Friday.  John Businger (the former state rep. and George Falcon Golden Spike Award winner who has worked hard to keep Jeff on the air) and Gov. Dukakis are also frequent guests.

    Since Patricia Quinn (Maine’s respected manager of the Amtrak-operated Downeaster) was to follow me, I commented on the human resources crisis facing the rail industry, the need for more woman in the industry, and the serendipitous experience the NARP Board had of simultaneously having Quinn as speaker and the Crawfordsville, IN high-school students as collective award winners.  I said it was wonderful for the Crawfordsville girls to see, in Quinn, a great example of a woman as a high-ranking railroad official.  I suggested that our transportation system would be better if more women were involved in its design and execution.  I might have added that one indication of this is that the majority of Amtrak passengers are women.  Also, women as primary child care providers and chauffeurs, are arguably most sensitive to the importance of transportation alternatives to our children.

    Railroading’s human resources crisis refers to large numbers of retirees in the next few years and the resulting challenge just to maintain the industry at its existing size, let alone responsibly spend $8 billion on HSR.  Chris Barkan, who heads the railroad civil engineering program at University of Illinois, wrote an excellent article on this for TRB last year.  Railroad research and training is just as much a step-child as railroad funding in general.  From Barkan’s article (bolding added):

    “In the first half of the 20th century, railroad transportation and engineering were well represented on college and university campuses… But after World War II… railroads were perceived as obsolete… Railroad programs, research, and classes disappeared as professors retired and were replaced by faculty interested in the newer modes.  In academic circles, institutional knowledge of rail transport vanished almost completely.

    “As faculty lost sight of the role of rail transport, transportation engineering classes evolved into classes in highway engineering, often without a change in the course title.  Students consequently associated the discipline with the mode...”

    One NARP Council member told me: “This is already a problem in rail transportation, especially among the ranks of people who are designing, building, operating and maintaining.  Ironically, Recovery Act funds for rail are creating or accelerating work for people who, by and large, were already fairly busy.  Hopefully, one beneficial result of the ‘stimulus’ will be to attract more talented and capable people to the industry while they can still learn from the people who will be retiring or semi-retiring over the next 10 years (assuming they can afford to).”

    --Ross Capon, NARP President

    Posted by NARP

    Tags:
    (0) Comments

    Flag Stops, National Train Day Edition

    Monday, May 11, 2009

  • The Cato Institute (no fans of smart transportation investments) is trying to generate shock value by pricing Obama’s high-speed rail vision at half a trillion dollars and denigrating its potential benefits. Trains for America and The Business Insider offer good rebuttals. To put it in perspective, the federal government spent almost four-fifths of that amount on highways in 2008. Cato’s contention that “interstates pay for themselves” is highly misleading.
  • In an article making the rounds in the blogosphere this week, author and business management expert Richard Florida credits the disparity in economic fortunes between the Northeast and Midwest on the presence of fast, frequent train service on the Northeast Corridor and the absence of similar service in the nation’s midsection. The characteristics of the urban megaregions that will define the United States in the early 21st century lend themselves to high-speed rail as the most sensible way to link them, he says, and parts of the country that don’t get on board (pun intended) will be left behind. Our friends at the CAHSR blog discuss the implications of Florida’s findings for California. We would add that good train service promotes exactly the kind of car-free urban lifestyle sought by members of the up-and-coming “creative class” that Florida touts.
  • It seems that large rail-oriented transportation projects are popping up all over the place—unfortunately, mostly outside the US. Paris is planning a new elevated metro system linking it to satellite towns, Saudi Arabia will lay track for several new freight and passenger lines, a regional railway and connecting metro lines are in the works for Abu Dhabi (capital of the United Arab Emirates). Ironically, Americans are financing a significant portion of the latter two projects in oil-rich countries at the gasoline pump. If we had a more responsible level of taxation on petroleum use, we could afford more projects like these at home.
  • Two pieces of recommended reading for those interested in the connection between transportation policies and our lifestyle choices: The American Prospect offers a side-by-side comparison of a sprawling car-oriented suburb and one that is compact, pedestrian-oriented and (surprise!) transit-accessible; and Streetsblog wonders if life might be better for children if their parents weren’t wedded to their cars.
  • LCL: Scientists warn that “even the most drastic emissions cuts currently being discussed stand little chance of limiting global warming to safe levels;” with demand for automobiles tanking, investors are taking a second look at transit; Amtrak celebrated its 38th birthday May 1; funding is the only remaining obstacle to Amtrak service from Chicago to the Quad Cities; an additional Cascades frequency will offset its costs with new tourism spending; a new documentary explores how sprawl came to be; Bostonians hold a bake sale for their ailing transit system; New York City’s transportation czar calls for the return of streetcars to Brooklyn; and one of America’s best-known forecasters says that this year’s decrease in miles driven defies his prediction and may be the start of a new trend.

  • We hope that NARP members and all rail advocates took Saturday’s National Train Day as a time to celebrate the fruits of our labors (the trains we already
    have) and the bright future ahead for passenger rail. If a Train Day event took place near you, we hope you used the opportunity to spread the word about NARP and tell people how they can get involved in our work. The day provides a good moment to reflect on the many benefits of train travel—both its oft-cited boons to economic development and environmental sustainability, and the less quantifiable ways that good trains enhance our quality of life—and remember what inspires us to stay active in the cause. If you have any photos of the festivities you attended, please email them to us and we’ll consider posting them here.

    -- Malcolm Kenton

    Posted by NARP

    Tags: amtrak, funding, narp, national train day, streetcars, transit
    (1) Comments

    ©2006 National Association of Railroad Passengers | » NARP website

    » Recent Entries

    » Blogroll

    » Terms of Service for Comments

    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.

    » Monthly Archives


    RSS 1.0 | RSS 2.0 | Atom
    What is RSS?

    Add to Technorati Favorites