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.

The Transport Politic sizes up the implications of the results of last Tuesday’s elections in New Jersey, Virginia, Cincinnati, Chicago’s Indiana suburbs, Atlanta, Charlotte, Miami, New York City and Seattle on rail and transit interests.

The Midwest High Speed Rail Blog highlights two ways that passenger railroads are, and should be, generating more interest in train travel: by transporting popular sports teams and taking advantage of movie tie-ins.