 | NARP blogTRAINS: A travel choice Americans want |
» Visit the Official NARP Website
Will US Transport Priorities Change?
Tuesday, June 10, 2008
A major reason why mobility for Americans is so much more at risk than for Europeans is that federal, state, and many local governments have been making the wrong transportation investment—and land use—choices so much of the time for such a long time.
The pendulum may be starting to swing. On Sunday, The Washington Post, which in recent decades has endorsed just about every local superhighway proposal in sight, ran an editorial under these headlines: “Screeching to a Halt; On mass transit, the nation is falling perilously behind”. Here is the last paragraph:
“Last year, a bipartisan commission recommended sharply higher levels of funding for transportation of all kinds, including mass transit. The panel’s recommendations included raising the gas tax. Although Transportation Secretary Mary Peters was on the commission, she declined to endorse its findings. Her head-in-the-sand posture neatly captured the administration’s abdication of responsibility.”
So, we believe, does the Bush Administration’s threat to veto the House’s Amtrak bill.
And the lead story in today’s Washington Post is headlined “Fuel Prices Challenge Cars’ Reign; $4 Gas Transforms Buying Habits, Affecting Everything From Vacations to Pizza Orders”.
Of course, the Commission advocates spending big bucks on all forms of transportation, which implies that no tough choices need to be made. However, that is not necessarily true, since both Presidential candidates are sounding like fiscal hawks on government spending. From our perspective, a key test of public policy is the ability to tilt towards energy-efficient transportation—trains, bicycles, walking—regardless of whether overall transportation spending increases significantly or at all. Energy efficiency and sustainability should be a crucial determinant of our transportation spending priorities. Period.
—Ross Capon
Posted by NARP
Tags: funding, news media, transit,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, national train day, streetcars, transit,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,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 had a smart transportation strategy, one that provided real choices and made getting around safer and more affordable, accessible and enjoyable for all. Motor vehicles alone will not be able to provide the mobility people are demanding in a way that enhances our quality of life.
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,In Florida, The Fourth Time Could Be the Charm
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Reasons to hope for speedy improvements to make rail travel more convenient in the Sunshine State.
Hundreds were in attendance at the Florida Department of Transportation’s rail forum on December 2nd in Orlando, including every manufacturer of railroad vehicles in the world and many other industry professionals. The conference came in advance of the Florida legislature’s historic vote to invest in a new commuter line in the Orlando area and make a down-payment towards Orlando-Tampa-Miami high-speed rail. This is the fourth time that Florida has tried to jumpstart construction of a new system of fast trains, but the momentum seems to have built to a crescendo this go-round.
DOT officials speaking at the forum emphasized that these investments are only a first step. The state is looking eventually to buy new trainsets capable of 220-mph operation, though speeds on the initial line segment (Orlando-Tampa) will be limited to 168 mph. Though the DOT is currently operating under a less-than-desirable framework of running this segment down the median of Interstate 4, precluding downtown-to-downtown service to existing stations between Orlando and Tampa, the final routing will largely be determined by the contractor that makes the best bid.
Beyond the initial start-up, the state plans not to contribute a penny towards the service. The DOT wants future capital funding to come from federal grants, while the private sector covers the operating costs. It remains to be seen whether this scheme will prove viable once work begins.
Here’s hoping that the encouraging news out of the Sunshine State this month will lead to real results. Florida still lags far behind many states that have made serious strides in passenger rail over the past two decades, but its involvement is better late than never. While many aspects of the plan still need to be worked out, rail advocates cannot afford to make the perfect the enemy of the good. If this first phase is successful, we should begin to see incremental progress towards fast, frequent service connecting all the peninsula’s population centers that will begin to chip away at the state’s worsening traffic and suburban sprawl.
—Malcolm Kenton
Posted by Malcolm Kenton
Tags: fast, florida, florida dot, frequent, funding, high-speed rail, improvements, rail, results, sunrail, trains, travel,Unleashed TIGER Forges a New Path
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Just three weeks after history-making intercity passenger train grants were announced, the Obama Administration unveiled $1.5 billion in Recovery Act grants under a revolutionary framework in which rail and transit figure prominently. The program, dubbed Transportation Investments Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER), marks the first time that the US Department of Transportation has awarded money across the institutional barriers that have historically held back funding for railroads and transit—and infrastructure that connects these with the rest of the transportation network.
As with the High-Speed Intercity Passenger Rail “pot,” states’ applications greatly exceeded the available funds—$56 requested for every $1 awarded. Determining what percentage of TIGER funds went to each mode of travel is (happily) difficult since many of the projects benefit multiple modes. Grants benefitting passenger rail (including rail transit) total $574.1 million (about 38% of the total), while those aiding freight rail add up to $408.8 billion (about 27%). Transit improvement ventures (subway, light rail, streetcar and bus) got $699 million (about 47%), with highways getting almost 30%, and bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure about 10%.
TIGER’s innovative, merit-based funding mechanism should become the mold in which most future federal transportation financing is cut. Including more funding for TIGER or a similar program in the Jobs Bill (currently before the Senate) would be an ideal way for Congress to signal its commitment to meaningful reform that will give Americans better mobility choices. NARP and our partners in the OneRail Coalition [link to come] will continue to sound the call for strong, balanced transportation investments that put rail in its rightful place as a key component in how America moves.
Read on for an overview of how the awards are distributed, or go here for complete descriptions of each funded project.
—Malcolm Kenton
Posted by Malcolm Kenton
Tags: congress, department of transportation, federal government, funding, grants, infrastructure, investment, job creation, jobs, light rail, passenger trains, railroads, recovery act, stimulus, streetcar, tiger, transit, transportation,©2009 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
