The grassroots is continuing to get organized : in Florida to win Recovery Act funds for Tampa-to-Orlando high-speed rail (whose alignment and connectivity as currently planned leaves much to be desired), and in Michigan to save the state’s three Amtrak trains from state budget cuts.
Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) offers an accurate assessment of the predicament of transportation strategies for reducing pollution. It’s clear that the current gas tax-based funding model is ill-suited to the need, but very few lawmakers seem willing to consider anything different. Remember, though, that political will is a renewable resources, and it comes from all of us as active citizens. One sign that such political pressure can be brought to bear: the rapid growth of the Transportation for America coalition, in which NARP is a partner.
Excitement mounts in Idaho over the potential return of the Pioneer. Among those pressing for its revival: US Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID). Grassroots support for the train has always been strong in Idaho, a state not normally thought of as being home to public transportation riders.
Continuing signs of the unsustainable nature of short-haul air service in markets that could be served by high-speed rail. Relatedly, Southwest Airlines’ CEO has dropped his opposition to federal high-speed rail investment, saying he is not worried that better trains will ground short-haul flights. This doesn’t appear to be a very far-sighted outlook for an industry that needs to better prepare for the inevitable end of cheap oil, but with Congress beginning to formulate a fresh approach to the nation’s mobility needs, less voices in opposition to rail is certainly a good thing.
The Transport Politic assesses the composition of the Senate when it comes to support for funding transportation alternatives. Based on ten votes taken since January 2008, chances look good that future legislation funding rail and transit would attract 60 votes. The biggest obstacle, though, lies in bringing such bills to a vote in the first place by putting them on the agendas of the relevant committees.
Bloomberg’s US architecture critic hopes for the best from the poorly-planned projects to bring commuter trains into a deep underground station under 34th Street in Manhattan via new Hudson River tunnels (which received stimulus funding this week), while longing for Penn Station to return to its former grandeur. Along similar lines, our friends at the Midwest High-Speed Rail Association are discussing the importance of great stations to complement fast, frequent, modern trains. While one Midwestern city is looking to restore its downtown depot to a travel hub, another may have to let its grand station go.
Washington-based writer and blogger Ryan Avent offers an excellent rebuff to economist Ed Glaeser’s misinformed critique of rail development.
LCL: Washington State transit advocates herald the opening of the new Vancouver train; our paper urging restoration of the Gulf Coast Connector generates press coverage; the nation’s premier green building certification program is beginning to better incoorporate the fact that location (especially in relation to transportation services) matters at least as much as the resource-conserving design of the building itself; a significant progressive policy shift is afoot in Houston, and a major transit-oriented redevelopment plan takes shape in NARP’s backyard; “Mister Trains” concurs with our view on the use of recent federal money for trains; E: The Environmental Magazine‘s syndicated “Earth Talk” newspaper column touts train travel’s green bona fides; and despite overall drops in ridership nationally, more travelers are—as the slogan says—catching the Texas Eagle wave.
As the U.S. struggles with a series of crippling winter storms, it is important to take time to remind ourselves about the many benefits of a balanced transportation system. One of those benefits is providing passengers with vital alternatives in difficult conditions. Compare the view from a seat on this train to a seat in an airport experiencing similar conditions.
This video is of Amtrak’s state-sponsored train, the Pere Marquette, passing through Fennville, Michigan (which lies between Holland and Bangor).
by NARP Vice Chairman John DeLora, also President of the Michigan Association of Railroad Passengers (MARP)
The back-and-forth fight over a new intermodal transit center in Troy MI has turned up interesting information about the federal High-Speed and Intercity Passenger Rail grant program (part of the 2009 American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, ARRA). It also contains lessons on how to combat Luddites who oppose public transportation.
Architect’s rendering of the soon-to-be-built Troy Intermodal Transportation Center
In 2009, Congress passed the ARRA act, calling for major infrastructure improvements which would lead to high speed rail in the U.S. Shortly after enactment, the Federal Railroad Administration held a series of public conferences to explain the program and what it would do, and what it wouldn’t do. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) conference for the Midwest was held in Kansas City, MO. Key points were:
States which applied for funds had to show a continuing commitment to passenger train service.
Applications would be graded on an objective basis to eliminate charges of political influence.
MARP warned several Michigan legislators that the practice of partial-year state funding for the Amtrak Blue Water and Pere Marquette (which had been done for several years, with supplemental funding when the first tranche was exhausted) would not be acceptable to FRA. The legislature went ahead with partial year funding anyway, and many were stunned to find that FRA had denied all Michigan applications.
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.
